Hexagrammic Wards (40K-minor Ravenor Rogue spoilers)

[Imperial Overlord]

I finished off Armour of Contempt last night and read the teaser chapter of Ravenor Rogue at the back and in it was an unusual bit with hexagrammic Wards.

In it, the first confrontation between Ravenor and Molotch occurs, back when Ravenor was Eisenhorn's interrogator. Having evaded most of his pursuit, Molotch finds his escape blocked by Ravenor. Molotch has hexagrammic wards tatooed on his scalp, under the hairline.

They struggle briefly (half a page or so), with Ravenor striking out psychicly as well as physically. Molotch's wards begin to collapse. The relevant passage is:

"His scalp began to smoulder. The oppressive weight of psychic power ws burning out the tatooed wards, turning them into bloody welts. In another few seconds, they would be gone and he would be open to the man's mind."

At this point in his life Ravenor is a delta level psycher. We learn a few things here:

1) At least one version of hexagrammic wards can be tatooed on. This isn't too strange, as it has already been long established that the Imperium can implant sophisticated technological devices in a tattoo like form (electoos) so this doesn't tell us much about the nature of hexagrammic wards.

2) The tattoo version (we don't know if its any stronger or weaker than other versions) of hexagrammic wards will briefly hold off a delta level psycher before being destroyed.

[Setzer]

There are varying strengths for wards, but it's dependent on where they are drawn. A rune tattooed on skin may simply have given out because of the comparative weakness of flesh, compared to the wards on Barbarisater, which held off a daemonhost.

[Imperial Overlord]

There are varying strengths for wards, but it's dependent on where they are drawn. A rune tattooed on skin may simply have given out because of the comparative weakness of flesh, compared to the wards on Barbarisater, which held off a daemonhost.

1) Is that purely supposition on your part or do you have supporting evidence?

2) Barbarisater had pentagrammic wards. Anti-daemon not anti-psyker and they didn't hold off a daemonhost (which come in varying strengths) but was able to destroy the hos and seemed to neutralize some of the powers of a daemon weapon containing a daemon prince (Kharnagar the Deadly, wielded by Quixos).

[Karza]

There are varying strengths for wards, but it's dependent on where they are drawn. A rune tattooed on skin may simply have given out because of the comparative weakness of flesh, compared to the wards on Barbarisater, which held off a daemonhost.

1) Is that purely supposition on your part or do you have supporting evidence?

2) Barbarisater had pentagrammic wards. Anti-daemon not anti-psyker and they didn't hold off a daemonhost (which come in varying strengths) but was able to destroy the hos and seemed to neutralize some of the powers of a daemon weapon containing a daemon prince (Kharnagar the Deadly, wielded by Quixos).

In Malleus, Eisenhorn made some pentagrammic wards on a simple shortsword, and was able to hold off Prophaniti (Quixos's other daemonhost) for a while thanks to them. Eventually the weapon was destroyed however, and Prophaniti mentioned that pentagrammic wards work against daemons, but can only be as strong as the weapon they're crafted on (page 403 of Eisenhorn omnibus: "The wards... hurt... but they are no... stronger... than the weapon... you should learn to... make your weapons sounder... next time..."). Hence the simple shortsword with them eventually failing, and Eisenhorn deciding to get those wards to Barbarisater.

If hexagrammic wards work similarly to pentagrammic ones, that limitation could apply to both, though as far as I know, such a thing hasn't been explicitly mentioned anywhere. Wouldn't consider it too far fetched though.

[Stormbringer]

1) Is that purely supposition on your part or do you have supporting evidence?

2) Barbarisater had pentagrammic wards.

The functional difference seems to be insignificant. Five versus six if you want to be specific.

But seriously though, the wards which protect the Grey Knights despite being specifically anti-daemon are also effective against psykers. So I think it's rather safe to say that the difference between pentagrammatic and hexagrammatic wards may just be in the form, not the effect. If that the case then the information supplied in Malleus regarding the wards on Eisenhorn's swords is applicable to both types.

I'd also point out that the Grey Knights wards encompass everything from wards in their armor, wards as seperate from their armor, and wards tattooed on them and even in some cases applied directly to their skeleton. It would seem to emphasise that a defense in depth offers more protection, or at least buys the warded party more time, than a single set of wards.

[Imperial Overlord]

1) Is that purely supposition on your part or do you have supporting evidence?

2) Barbarisater had pentagrammic wards.

The functional difference seems to be insignificant. Five versus six if you want to be specific.

But seriously though, the wards which protect the Grey Knights despite being specifically anti-daemon are also effective against psykers. So I think it's rather safe to say that the difference between pentagrammatic and hexagrammatic wards may just be in the form, not the effect. If that the case then the information supplied in Malleus regarding the wards on Eisenhorn's swords is applicable to both types.

I'd also point out that the Grey Knights wards encompass everything from wards in their armor, wards as seperate from their armor, and wards tattooed on them and even in some cases applied directly to their skeleton. It would seem to emphasise that a defense in depth offers more protection, or at least buys the warded party more time, than a single set of wards.

Since Grey Knights specifically have anti-psyker defences as well as anti-daemon ones, I find your arguement that pentagrammic and hexagrammic wards are the same thing unconvincing, especially in the light of Inquisitor fluff saying they aren't. The point about the strength of the item they are enscrscribed on and the value of defence in depth is well made. Hexagrammic wards, as written, should provide some protection from daemonic powers and warp sorcery so their inclusion in Grey Knight defences would be of additional value

[Ford Prefect]

The only other event involving wards of some kind (at least off the top of my head) is when Inquistor Tyrus effortlessly shrugged off a psychic attack made by the Daemonhost Ghaustos. However, Tyrus has both pentagrammic and hexagrammic wards, which wouldh ave to have contributed.

[Stormbringer]

Since Grey Knights specifically have anti-psyker defences as well as anti-daemon ones, I find your arguement that pentagrammic and hexagrammic wards are the same thing unconvincing, especially in the light of Inquisitor fluff saying they aren't.

Which conflicts directly with Codex: Daemonhunter which describes the Grey Knights' anti-daemonic wardings as being hexagrammic; there is no mention of pentagrammic wards. The wardings in question are explicitly the anti-daemonic wardings, yet the same material makes it clear that they also convery a resistance to psyker powers. This is included under the Aegis special rule heading which specifically deals with psyker powers.

What ever the Inquisitor fluff say, GW's Codex says differently.

I think this is quite sufficient to prove that hexdagrammic and pentagrammic are not exclusive, and may well be effectively the same thing. There is quite likely a high degree of over lap in function and nature at any rate, if there is indeed any significant difference at all. Therefor, it should be accepted that the workings of pentagrammic wards, as conveyed in Malleus, should at least provisionally be considered valid for hexagrammic wards.

The point about the strength of the item they are enscrscribed on and the value of defence in depth is well made. Hexagrammic wards, as written, should provide some protection from daemonic powers and warp sorcery so their inclusion in Grey Knight defences would be of additional value

I'd also point out that most daemons are effectively psykers. And psykers are subject to daemonic possession specifically because they serve as conduits for warp energy, the very same stuff of which daemons are born. There for the functional difference between the two is not necessarily great.

[Imperial Overlord]

Since Grey Knights specifically have anti-psyker defences as well as anti-daemon ones, I find your arguement that pentagrammic and hexagrammic wards are the same thing unconvincing, especially in the light of Inquisitor fluff saying they aren't.

Which conflicts directly with Codex: Daemonhunter which describes the Grey Knights' anti-daemonic wardings as being hexagrammic; there is no mention of pentagrammic wards. The wardings in question are explicitly the anti-daemonic wardings, yet the same material makes it clear that they also convery a resistance to psyker powers. This is included under the Aegis special rule heading which specifically deals with psyker powers.

What ever the Inquisitor fluff say, GW's Codex says differently.

I think this is quite sufficient to prove that hexdagrammic and pentagrammic are not exclusive, and may well be effectively the same thing. There is quite likely a high degree of over lap in function and nature at any rate, if there is indeed any significant difference at all. Therefor, it should be accepted that the workings of pentagrammic wards, as conveyed in Malleus, should at least provisionally be considered valid for hexagrammic wards.

After double checking with the Inquisitor rules, you are correct and Grey Knights don't carry pentagrammic wards.

Don't buy the equivilency, sorry. Aegis hoods are old fluff and spefically resistant to psychic and warp powers. Hexagrammic wards will repell daemonic warp attacks. Pentagrammic wards will repell daemonic presences which the Grey Knights don't want to do because Grey Knights get up close and kill them with Nemesis weapons. So unless you can produce material that Grey Knights repell daemons without using their powers, your argument falls apart. Since even you admit the fluff defines thems as two seperate kind of wards, though obviously related since they both affect warp phenomena, I don't know why you are trying to argue this. Inquisito goes into much more detail over the differences between related types of equipment and it distinguishes between Aegis Hoods, pentagrammic wards, and hexagrammic wards. I don't believe we should throw out a more precise source in favor of the less accurate one.

[Stormbringer]

Don't buy the equivilency, sorry. Aegis hoods are old fluff and spefically resistant to psychic and warp powers. Hexagrammic wards will repell daemonic warp attacks. Pentagrammic wards will repell daemonic presences which the Grey Knights don't want to do because Grey Knights get up close and kill them with Nemesis weapons. So unless you can produce material that Grey Knights repell daemons without using their powers, your argument falls apart.

I think you're setting up a false dichotomy here.

The wards on Grey Knight armor are not meant to kill daemons, they are meant to keep daemonic taint out and protect the Grey Knights themselves. Again referring to the C:DH, the Grey Knights armor is indeed meant, along with blessings and ritual in battle, are indeed meant to repel daemonic presence (again referring to the special rules section). The idea is not simply to walk up and stab them with a Nemesis Force Weapon. If you read much of the actual material on the Grey Knights you'll realise that it's much more complex than that. I think the best description of what the Grey Knights do would be that they are engaged in prying a demons grip on reality loose. As such, there's no reason that wards to help repel daemons are a bad thing.

Since even you admit the fluff defines thems as two seperate kind of wards, though obviously related since they both affect warp phenomena, I don't know why you are trying to argue this.

I do indeed think they're related phenomena. I just believe that based on the current fluff there is actually reason to believe more than that, they are actually more or less the same thing.

Inquisito goes into much more detail over the differences between related types of equipment and it distinguishes between Aegis Hoods, pentagrammic wards, and hexagrammic wards. I don't believe we should throw out a more precise source in favor of the less accurate one.

I am reluctant to accept the Inquisitor fluff because it's not GW. It doesn't help at all that GW essentially told the Specialist Games guys at the split "See ya. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out." I don't believe that it should be totally disregarded or thrown out. But it's a double edged sword as is any of the materials from the subsidiary publishers.

[Imperial Overlord]

I think you're setting up a false dichotomy here.

I'm not. Hexagrammic wards repell psychic influences, including daemons. Obviously Grey Knights don't pack pentagrammic ones or it would say so. Pentagrammic wards only work in extremely close proximity to a daemon, i.e. stabbing distance. If you want to keep out taint, they won't do jack.

[/quote]
The wards on Grey Knight armor are not meant to kill daemons, they are meant to keep daemonic taint out and protect the Grey Knights themselves. Again referring to the C:DH, the Grey Knights armor is indeed meant, along with blessings and ritual in battle, are indeed meant to repel daemonic presence (again referring to the special rules section). The idea is not simply to walk up and stab them with a Nemesis Force Weapon. If you read much of the actual material on the Grey Knights you'll realise that it's much more complex than that. I think the best description of what the Grey Knights do would be that they are engaged in prying a demons grip on reality loose. As such, there's no reason that wards to help repel daemons are a bad thing. [/quote]

Yes, I'm quite familiar with them. See above about why hexagrammic wards are a better choice.

I am reluctant to accept the Inquisitor fluff because it's not GW. It doesn't help at all that GW essentially told the Specialist Games guys at the split "See ya. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out." I don't believe that it should be totally disregarded or thrown out. But it's a double edged sword as is any of the materials from the subsidiary publishers.

What the fuck are you talking about? It was written by GW's people, mainly Gav Thorpe, and has "A Games Workshop product" right on the inside. What happens latter to the company doesn't decanonize GW's own product.

[Stormbringer]

I'm not. Hexagrammic wards repell psychic influences, including daemons. Obviously Grey Knights don't pack pentagrammic ones or it would say so. Pentagrammic wards only work in extremely close proximity to a daemon, i.e. stabbing distance. If you want to keep out taint, they won't do jack.

Have we established that hexagrammic and pentagrammic wards share a similar nature? That the underlying principles for one can be considered true for the other? Because that's the big issue in this discussion. Not the rest of the tangled mess.

What the fuck are you talking abut? It was written by GW's people, mainly Gav Thorpe, and has "A Games Workshop product" right on the inside. What happens latter to the company doesn't decanonize GW's own product.

Are you talking about the current fluff or the old stuff?

The pre-split Inquisitor stuff was indeed GW Games Development. However that suffers from being older material and they may simply have altered things accordingly. At the very least the fact that both games have under gone new editions and a fair amount of revision since then makes them less likely to be accurate in regards to modern material.

Since the split, they might as well be two seperate entities. The fact is that ex-employees have basically said that GW dumped the games and the staff with no intention of really revisiting the product. The cooperation is bare minimum, at best, and often actively obstructive. Both Forgeworld and Black Library recieve far more help and cooperation from the parent entity than Specialist Games did at the best of times. Only Sabertooth Games has gotten less help.

[Imperial Overlord]

Have we established that hexagrammic and pentagrammic wards share a similar nature? That the underlying principles for one can be considered true for the other? Because that's the big issue in this discussion. Not the rest of the tangled mess.

Agreed. Similar, but not identical. The fluff routinely mentions other protections against daemonic and warp phenomena (icons, purity seals, blessed silver talismans), but they don't give rules for most of them. There's probably a whole family of protection ranging from placebo type effects (which isn't necessary useless since we are talking about the warp) to very potent.

Are you talking about the current fluff or the old stuff?

The pre-split Inquisitor stuff was indeed GW Games Development. However that suffers from being older material and they may simply have altered things accordingly. At the very least the fact that both games have under gone new editions and a fair amount of revision since then makes them less likely to be accurate in regards to modern material.

Since the split, they might as well be two seperate entities.

It's in the original book and, I should mention, used in that manner by Abnett in his Eisenhorn and Ravenor books. I haven't seen anything to contradict it.

That being said, this is GW, the king of retcon, but that caveat applies to all GW discussion.

[Stormbringer]

Agreed. Similar, but not identical. The fluff routinely mentions other protections against daemonic and warp phenomena (icons, purity seals, blessed silver talismans), but they don't give rules for most of them. There's probably a whole family of protection ranging from placebo type effects (which isn't necessary useless since we are talking about the warp) to very potent.

Then that pretty much settles the point of that discussion.

It's in the original book and, I should mention, used in that manner by Abnett in his Eisenhorn and Ravenor books. I haven't seen anything to contradict it.

I'm familiar with Dan Abnett's role in creating Inquisitor fluff and what he's done with it since. However, I'm not at all sure what that has to do with the validity of Inquisitor material as canon.

That being said, this is GW, the king of retcon, but that caveat applies to all GW discussion.

And with the lack of a clear cut canon policy, there is of course the difficulty of determining what material is considered still valid and what has priority.

And I think the fact that GW clearly jettisoned these games and cut off development support says a lot about where they stand.

[Imperial Overlord]

It's in the original book and, I should mention, used in that manner by Abnett in his Eisenhorn and Ravenor books. I haven't seen anything to contradict it.

I'm familiar with Dan Abnett's role in creating Inquisitor fluff and what he's done with it since. However, I'm not at all sure what that has to do with the validity of Inquisitor material as canon.

Abnett didn't create the fluff, he used it. But that it is being used in the same way in current Black Library material does reinforce it's legitimacy (as murky as that swamp is in GW), especially since it hasn't be contradicted by any material I've seen.

And I think the fact that GW clearly jettisoned these games and cut off development support says a lot about where they stand.

Yeah, it means they don't think they can't make enough money off it. It's been their pattern of behavior forever (like say WFRP). Doesn't invalidate the fluff although future changes will do that, as always.