# Mechanicus Psykers.



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

I just finished reading _Heart of Rage_, a short story concerning a squad of BAs and their mission to salvage a seemingly dead hive ship. 

There happens to be an AdMech priest already on the ship, who, it turns out, is a psyker, and has bonded or been taken over by the hive tyrant, and tries to tempt the BA librarian to join him.


This raises the question, has anybody else heard of the AdMech using these particular indiviuals? Is Swallow the first to make the connection? Also, for those who have read the story or listened to the CD, what did you make of the hive tyrant seemingly having an individual personality? I know they are the hub of the hive and must be capable of some independent thought outside the hive mind, but this one seemed to be a proper individual.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

I haven't read the book, so take it with a bit of salt. Though on one hand it could make my opinion less biased.

The Mech probably need astropaths and navigators. I'd imagine they'd turn them into servitors, like the captain from the Eisenhorn series, though.

Hive Tyrants aren't exactly your run of the mill Tyranid. From the Tyranid codex, "Unlike many other Tyranid creatures, Hive Tyrants are incredibly intelligent and completely self-aware. Whilst they are still slaved to the gesalt consciousness of the Hive Mind, they are permitted far wider latitude in achieving their goals and can even learn from their mistakes."

So probably not too far from having their own personality.

Though, to be honest, I don't think they should, even though they do. Oh well.


----------



## Harriticus (Nov 10, 2010)

The Adeptus Mechanicus Priests are born humans, just like everyone else. Thus certain amounts of them will have the Psyker gene, just like everyone else. Particularly high-ranking individuals probably can easily get training for their powers at the Adeptus Astra Telepathica as well.

Other then that, they'll use Astropaths and Navigators.


----------



## Giant Fossil Penguin (Apr 11, 2009)

I've always wondered if there would something like a psychic Servitor. Not sure how it would work; either a Servitorised Psyker (bad, bad boy?girl!), or somehow the AdMech can clone brain tissue so that it has some psychic ability, and then put it into a Servitor to be used for whatever- Astropathy, battlefield secure(ish) comms, use to boost a Psychic Choir. If they can do this, then it would make the Warp beacons that mark out Warp translation points easier to operate, not requiring living beings to be stuck in them for life. They might also be more resisitant to corruption, or at least more controllable as the machine they are connected to could terminate the organic parts if it registers beyond certain parameters, much how the crew of GK spacecraft are surgically de-personalitied (to coin a word) and fitted with termination devices that will decapitiate them should the signs of the start of Daemonic possession be detected.
Erm, I think I had a point somewhere...

GFP


----------



## TheReverend (Dec 2, 2007)

My belief was stretched a little by this story if I'm honest. Based on all other stories of the great devourer, I couldn't quite believe in the tyranids taking the time to essentially posses a mere human. 

But then I look back at all the old fluff concerning human-genestealer hybrids back in Space Hulk and catch myself laughing a little


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

GFP, there are psychic servitors. Tobias Maxilla, from the Eisenhorn series, used them.

And I'm not sure if there are warp beacons that show safe points to reenter the material universe (like a lighthouse of sorts). I think it's the job of the navigator to find a safe path. Though there are routes that are known for their stability. If you have a source that says so, I'd be interested in reading it, though!


----------



## Giant Fossil Penguin (Apr 11, 2009)

Again, from Lex; the 'Warp Jump' page (although I'll have to cast around the books I have because I'm certain I've seen it mentioned before this).
'Ships coming out of the Warp must do so some distance away in deep space...Because of this, many civilised worlds have specific jump points marked by beacons to assist in navigation.' It also says that ships can lurk close to these beacons so as to ambush those that have just translated in-system.
For such a beacon to work it would have to be psychic, wouldn't it? 

GFP


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

hailene said:


> GFP, there are psychic servitors. Tobias Maxilla, from the Eisenhorn series, used them.


That was not a psychic servitor, that was a psyker augmented with bionics. There is a difference. 

And as for a tyrant having personality? Perfectly feasible. Every tyrant is an individual entity. Their every action is based on their own drives and goal, which in turn are geared to beneffiting the tyranid race as a whole. A tyrant possessing a human would likely be a means to an end, which makes sense if this Hive Ship was dead or damaged as you say.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Giant Fossil Penguin said:


> Again, from Lex; the 'Warp Jump' page (although I'll have to cast around the books I have because I'm certain I've seen it mentioned before this).
> 'Ships coming out of the Warp must do so some distance away in deep space...Because of this, many civilised worlds have specific jump points marked by beacons to assist in navigation.' It also says that ships can lurk close to these beacons so as to ambush those that have just translated in-system.
> For such a beacon to work it would have to be psychic, wouldn't it?
> 
> GFP


I read the Lex's source (in this case the BFG rulebook) and I'll have to concur. It first mentions the Astronomican and it requiring 10,000 psykers to maintain and then it goes on to talk about "weaker, shorter-ranged astropathic ducts and beacons". I'd assume they are similar to the Astronomican and require psykers to maintain as well. So, yeah, it'd probably be nice to keep a psychic servitor there. 

Though the beacons are probably well defended, relatively. You wouldn't want a psyker falling into the hands of pirates and what not. Plus trained psykers are a valuable commodity. 



Serpion5 said:


> That was not a psychic servitor, that was a psyker augmented with bionics. There is a difference.


Who are you talking about? I was talking about his navigator and astropath he had on board. And since it was stated that all his crew were servitors, then of course his astropath and navigator would be servitors.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

hailene said:


> And since it was stated that all his crew were servitors, then of course his astropath and navigator would be servitors.


I'll have to look up the text passages, but I wouldn't necessarily jump to that conclusion. It probably referred to just the menial crew, ie not including the psychics. 

The Navigator most certainly was no servitor, since Maxilla would not have the right (and daring) to turn one of them into a servitor. They are too independant and valuable for that. And a servitor-ised one would probably not be able to handle navigating the warp anyway.

Navigators also tend to seperate themselves from the others on board of a ship and are pretty much locked away during the actual warp transit, so it may be that Eisenhorn never actually met him and hence made no reference to him.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

It says, from the Eisenhorn omnibus, page 74:

"'Your crew are all servitors', [Eisenhorn] remarked.

"'Yes', [Tobias] said distractedly."

On page 84 it gives the the reason why Tobias is so willing to help Eisenhorn, and because stems from loneliness:"[Tobias] had been alone in the company of machines for too long."

Just flipping through real quick and a couple of statements that directly say that all his crew are servitors.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

In addition to the reasons already stated above...

From the omnibus, page 417:
"His gold-masked servitors chimed in agreement. His hooded navigator, all senses fixed on some different, quite other place, said nothing."

Page 487, on celebrating Candlemas:
"The two astropaths and the navigator were not invited to attend."


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Your first quote says nothing since servitors can speak.

Your second quote is mainly talking about the two astropaths he just picked up, not Tobias'. You should have known that by reading. Shame for trying to manipulate an out of context quote to your benefit!

For my own quote, this shows that his navigators are, without a doubt, servitors.

"'[Tobias's] astronavigators had not been idle. The chief of them emerged from their annexe at the side of the domed bridge and hummed across the red-black marble of the floor to join us. Like all of his crew, it was essentially mechanical. Its organic, human component - my guess was no more than a brain and some key organs - supported both physically and biologically in a polished silver servitor sculpted in the form of a griffin..."


----------



## ThatOtherGuy (Apr 13, 2010)

psykic mechanicus people are better known as 'malfunctioning toasters'.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

I'm not sure that it would be possible to have an actual 'psychic' servitor, let alone a navigator. Firstly servitors are always described as mindless, they are 'programable' automatons. Navigators require conscious thought to navigate the warp, trying that with a servitor who can go into 'mindlock' if someone isn't supervising him is asking to get lost in the warp.

Secondly a mindless psychic is effectively an unwarded portal for daemons, it would basically be a huge flashing neon 'exit' sign.

Finally, the description of the navigator above is not one of a servitor, but an extremely mechanised human with bionics replacing almost every organic part. This is not what a servitor is. They are vat grown (in most cases) lobotomised humans with bionic additions to serve specific purposes.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

hailene said:


> Your first quote says nothing since servitors can speak.


My point is that he mentions the navigator seperately from the servitors.



hailene said:


> Your second quote is mainly talking about the two astropaths he just picked up, not Tobias'. You should have known that by reading.


Huh? As you mention it's "mainly", not "only". Plus I wasn't referring to either one's astropath(s), but the navigator. Who was not picked up by Eisenhorn. The navigator was Tobias'.



hailene said:


> For my own quote, this shows that his navigators are, without a doubt, servitors.
> "Its organic, human component - my guess was no more than a brain and some key organs -* supported both physically and biologically in a polished silver servitor* sculpted in the form of a griffin..."


That'd be the key difference to an actual servitor. It's like the high ranked Magi or, to take an example from the Eisenhorn novels, Pontius Glaw. They are heavily augmented and some put their organic "parts" into a servitor chassis. But they are not servitors themselves.

Perhaps this is a misunderstanding. Servitor normally refers to a specific sort of creature, lobotomised humans, that are essentially mindless and that perform some menial task. It does not usually refer to "just" mechanically augmented people (no matter the degree of augmentation).


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

I still don't see the issue of having a mindless navigator. 

As long as there's an understanding of what portions of the brain control the third sight, then you simply leave that portion of the brain active. It's comparable of any other servitor work. 

Secondly, having a mindless psychic would be the last thing a daemon would want. It can not be tempted or corrupted. 

And lastly, yes, it is a navigator. Yes it is a servitor.

The degree a servitor is modified with bionics has no bearing on whether it's a servitor or not. Often times they'll replace everything minus the brain, as having an AI run something is techno-heresy.

Another quote from Eisenhorn

"Within half an hour I was on the bridge of the Essene, surrounded by attentive servitors, reporting the incident to battlefleet command by confidential astropathic link." 

Or did Abnett wanted to say *again* "surrounded by attentive servitors and the non-servitor astropath, reporting the incident to battlefleet..."

And again, when Tobias is asked how many people are on his ship he says,

"The rest are my crew, servitors *all *of them, slaved into my ship"

Emphasis added by me. He's lying at the time (saying there are only 4 other people on the ship, when in reality there's 6, but that's Aemos and Kara that are missing. He makes no mention of a non-servitor astropath or navigator).

Edit: JaqTaar, you posted between me reading Maidel's post and my posting. I'll respond to your points here.

There could have been a big ballroom party in the center of the ship and the navigator had to guide the ship. Or he had to go under maintenance. Or maybe Eisenhorn just didn't liked how he looked. You can't say absolutely sure he's a non-servitor just because he wasn't invited to Christmas dinner.

Yeah, you mentioned the astropaths...for what reason?

On further reading about the chassis, it appears Glaw was put in a servitor chassis. So it may be something like that.

Still, there are multiple statements of Tobias's crew being all servitors. Have you any direct proof to say otherwise? Or merely conjecture from ambiguous passages?


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

hailene said:


> The degree a servitor is modified with bionics has no bearing on whether it's a servitor or not.


Yes. A servitor is a servitor is a servitor. But not every heavily augmented person is a servitor.



hailene said:


> Still, there are multiple statements of Tobias's crew being all servitors. Have you any direct proof to say otherwise? Or merely conjecture from ambiguous passages?


The latter. I simply think the quotes do not imply what you think they do. Abnett just didn't bother to list the exeptions every time the issue came up. Abd why would he?


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Hopefully you saw my edit!

Anyway, any direct statements saying that they aren't servitors? Because Tobias has mentioned quite frequently that they are all servitors.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

I think the distinction is grey due to us combining 'rules fluff' and 'background fluff'.

The 'rules fluff' merely concetrates on servitors that function on the battlefield and are 'mindless zombies' for want of a better comparason.

Whereas in some of the background fluff we have talk of 'servitors' in more general terms to describe someone who has no independant 'life' but may or may not retain an individual personality.

The quote from the book does NOT say the navigator IS a servitor, but specifically says he sits WITHIN a servitor body.

This leads me to the above conclusion. The navigator is a fully concious brain, but slaved to the ship within a mechanical body which prevents an independant life, but does not make him a 'mindless lobotomised automaton'.

Therefore he is not any 'company', most likely because he doesnt actually have a mouth and can therefore not communicate (not that navigators are ever described as being much in the way of conversation).

So the background fluff expands on 'servitors' to include mechanical constructs which support biological entities with differing levels of conciousness.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

He could easily be company (if he had any ability to socialize). He's a psyker, for one. If he can't do that, then I'm sure something could be easily fitted to give him speech. Or sign language. Or even a piece of paper with a pencil. 

It's difficult to say how functional (in terms of social functions) his astropaths and navigators are. They could literally be no more social than my cellphone all the way up to human. There isn't any evidence.

Actually, the evidence lends that they're really not able or willing to communicate. Tobias being the captain of the ship, and therefore master, and who is starving for some actual human contact, would suggest that they're not able at all. After all, if he's so desperate for human contact and his human-ish astropath/navigators refuse, he could fire them. Which he clearly didn't, which leads me to believe they are incapable of socializing. 

Anywho, off to bed for me. Good luck finding something that gives hard evidence that they're not servitors. I tried pretty thoroughly, I think. The best way to try to prove your argument is ironclad is by trying to disprove it, after all.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

A navigator in Imperial heirarchy is like royalty. They do not deign to speak with others unless absolutely necessary. The fact that this particular navigator did not attend means nothing. Astropaths likewise keep to themselves. 

Given that psykers are socially awkward at the best of times, using their absence from a dinner as an example to claim they are servitors is not a strong platform to argue from. 

A navigator or astropath requires intense concentration to perform their craft, you cannot possibly expect anyone to believe a lobotomised zombie could achieve this do you? A servitor piloting a ground car is one thing, but I do not believe them to be capable of navigating ships through the warp and conducting astrotelepathy. It just doesn`t work that way. 

You`re clinging to the idea that Maxilla says his crew are all servitors. A ship`s crew are essentially the property of the ship`s master. 

Navigators and astropaths are far more mercenary in nature, remember elsewhere in Eisenhorn Gregor is required to hire a freelance astropath? 

Therefore, one could claim that Maxilla`s astropath and navigator are contracted, and therefore not technically part of his "crew."


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

I'm not saying that they didn't attend the party and therefore are servitors. The other side is arguing that they weren't invited and so were human (though as I already said the two astropaths were recently hired and so it's pretty obvious why they weren't invited).

As I said, the reason why the astropaths were not invited is clear. The reason why the navigator was not is less so. 

Servitors aren't retarded nor are they zombies (as they never died). Their abilities are usually very narrow and limited. But within their field of expertise they're usually very good at what they do. Is there any evidence that a servitor is incapable of navigating the warp?

You're really grasping at straws. If someone is part of your crew there's a contract. Some more formal than others. If he hired them they're part of his crew.

Plus if they were human and not servitors, why didn't he chat with them? Why was he craving human contact so badly? If he wanted human contact he probably would have reached out to them eventually, no matter how socially awkward they may be.

More and more conjecture. More and more "what if, maybes..." give me someone concrete that says they aren't servitors.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

hailene said:


> Is there any evidence that a servitor is incapable of navigating the warp?
> (...)
> More and more conjecture. More and more "what if, maybes..." give me someone concrete that says they aren't servitors.


When something is assumed, corollary or plain common sense it is often not spelled out. Like, forgive the exaggeration, you also won't find a quote explicitly mentioning that the Emperor was not reborn in the body of a chicken.

The nature of the Navis Nobilite * as well as descriptions of what navigating the warp entails ** simply make the notion of a navigator-servitor very hard to believe, to say the least.


* King's novels involving House Belisarius are probably the ones with most information about that. I assume the Rogue Trader RPG also has lots of relevant information, but I don't have that one.

** Here's a quote from the Fantasy Flight Games forums that puts it well, if bluntly:


> It just seems odd that such a mental discipline could continue to function adequately after lobotomization. The way warp navigation is described it is a real art, requiring visualization, imagination, pattern recognition, planning, will, creativity, and rapid response to quickly changing situation.
> You know, all the stuff that servitors suck at?


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> Servitors aren't retarded nor are they zombies (as they never died). Their abilities are usually very narrow and limited. But within their field of expertise they're usually very good at what they do. Is there any evidence that a servitor is incapable of navigating the warp


Well in game if they aren't supervised then there is a one in six chance that they will do bugger all. I know that rules aren't exactly the same as the background but when it comes to navigating the warp a 1 in a million chance that you will simply do nothing while your captain is having his dinner is not a chance that anyone would take (let alone 1 in 6!).

I never said that they were zombies, I used it in the non-dead sense eg - acting like a zombie. If I had meant they were actual zombies then what would be the point in lobotomising them.

Anyway, the poster above summed it up nicely, the limited abilities of servitude couldn't navigate in the warp.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

JaqTaar said:


> When something is assumed, corollary or plain common sense it is often not spelled out. Like, forgive the exaggeration, you also won't find a quote explicitly mentioning that the Emperor was not reborn in the body of a chicken.
> 
> Here's the thing, though. It's been said multiple times that all of his crew are servitors. Plain as day. The burden of proof lies on you guys to find information that says that there are exceptions.





Maidel said:


> Well in game if they aren't supervised then there is a one in six chance that they will do bugger all. I know that rules aren't exactly the same as the background but when it comes to navigating the warp a 1 in a million chance that you will simply do nothing while your captain is having his dinner is not a chance that anyone would take (let alone 1 in 6!).
> 
> Dangerous territory when dealing with game rules. But look at this. Tobias's entire ship is run by servitors. If they weren't capable of being unsupervised, his ship would be in constant trouble, no?
> 
> ...


Ah, yes, circular logic. Servitors can't navigate the warp. Therefore Tobias could not have a servitor navigator. Why? Because servitors can't navigate the warp.


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

As I understand astropaths send messages in coded feelings and images, it's kind of hard to send a message when you think in 1s&0s.
Astorpaths do the same.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Servitors don't only speak in binary cant. They can process speech and physical cues.

Servitors are not retarded. They are no zombies. They're probably closer to someone with autism. Specialized in a very narrow field while most other abilities are crippled to a point of uselessness.

So don't expect a navigator servitor to prepare a 6 course meal or an astropathic servitor to give you love advice. Those aren't the roles they were created for.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Hailene. You keep telling u's the burden of proof is on u's because it says his entire crew ARE servitors. Well problem is the book you are quoting from so vermently is self contradictory. The quote says the navigators organs were IN a servitor. The implication of that is not that he WAS a servitor, but that he was being carried around by one, most likely because as he was now only a brain and a few organs he needed some form of transportation. If I said to you that the space marine was IN his rhino would you then tell me a space marine IS a rhino?

So, we have a contradiction, one part of the text says they ARE all servitors, another part says one of the crew is simply IN a servitor body.

Therefore we are back at my first suggestion, there are different 'grades' of servitor, mindless automatons who simple carry out fixed programable tasks all the way up to 'debodied' humans who reside within a mechanical shell.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

No. You misunderstand. It's in a servitor chassis. Which is quite odd, I'm not quite sure what that is. As a servitor is something. Then again they put Glaw's personality into a "servitor chassis". I assume it's something that you put a servitor in to make it more mobile or useful to whatever task it has at hand.

With that in mind, they probably put the navigator servitor into a servitor chassis. Maybe its legs at atrophied or something.

Anywho, going by your definition, the navigator would be a "high" grade servitor. And so...is a servitor. Thanks for the support?

Quick question, have you read the Eisenhorn series? If not, I'll probably have to explain who Glaw is and what they did with him.

Edit: A thought struck me. It probably isn't what the author intended (as I think I covered what he intended earlier in my post), but maybe the navigator servitor is simply in another servitor. For whatever reason. Maybe moving on his on volition--even after "death"--is still beneath him. I dunno, it's an interesting idea. 

Though honestly, I think the chassis is probably some sort of anti-grav plate or something for mobility.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

How have I misunderstood? This is what the quote says - in a polished silver servitor sculpted in the form of a griffin - nothing about anything you are saying.

And yes I have read those books, abeit rather a king time ago, but I don't need explaining who he is.

In response to 'am I agreeing with you' well the answer is 'sort of'. The book does not describe 'servitors' as we understand them from the game. Firstly, he calls them 'machines' which servitors aren't. Secondly, mist of them are robotic bodies with human organs, as opposed to human bodies, lobotomised, with bionic adaptions.

Therefore one must conclude that outside of the 40k 'game' universe there are differing forms of servitor with differing levels of conciousness and individuality. 

So, do I think 'servitors' as described in the 40k game could be navigators, no matter how programmed, then the answer is unequivocally no. However do I think that something called a 'servitor' which is a fully independent and intelligent brain suspended in a mechanical body could be a navigator, then the answer is yes.

However the second one is NOT a servitor as 40k GENERALLY describes them which is why everyone is disagreeing with you.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

A servitor chassis or body is, well, just that. Basically a servitor minus a servitor's mind/brain, to put the organic "parts" of some human in it, be it out of necessity due to heavy wounds or voluntarily like the Mechanicus higher-ups.

PS:
To (sort of) pick up what Maidel last wrote...
It is far more likely that instead of intentionally creating such a concept on a whim and in passing, Abnett simply (and rightly) didn't bother with writing it in a way to make sure his words couldn't be misconstrued.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

But the thing is, a servitor is a servitor because what you've done to the brain.

If you did the proper procedures any person's body is a servitor chassis. As soon as I remove some things from your head, bam, instant servitor. 

And again, even if so, being a servitor chassis does not automatically make one not a servitor. In fact, I'd imagine you'd probably, you know, put servitors in servitor chassis...


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

hailene said:


> But the thing is, a servitor is a servitor because what you've done to the brain.


Exactly. Now you just have to imagine a person in the body of a servitor, but without having something done to the brain (besides placing it there). That person has the body/chassis/mechanical parts of a servitor, but is not a servitor.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

That's the thing. There's no "servitor" body, not in that sense. No more than say a "stroke victim" body. Or an "autistic" person's body. It's what happened to their head that makes them a stroke victim or autistic (well, techincally their genes...but their genes that affected their head!).

It becomes a servitor body the moment the brain of the body is modified. Or a modified servitor brain is added to a body.

It can't be a servitor body without a servitor brain.

Unless it's some sort of body designed for servitors. Then it'd sorta make sense to put a servitor into it...


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Erm, where does it say that THE thing that makes a servitor is the modification to the brain?


Edit - add to that that I'm the eisenhorn books those servitors had entirely mechanical bodies, that's how you can put a Human brain in a servitor chassis.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

"It can't be a servitor body without a servitor brain."
I guess if you take it literally, it might be misleading.

"Unless it's some sort of body designed for servitors."
That's it, sort of.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Maidel said:


> Erm, where does it say that THE thing that makes a servitor is the modification to the brain?
> 
> How else would you define a servitor? It's their programming that differentiates a servitor from a human. Bionic augmentation isn't the defining factor.
> 
> ...





JaqTaar said:


> "It can't be a servitor body without a servitor brain."
> 
> "Unless it's some sort of body designed for servitors."
> That's it, sort of.


One would think that you'd put a servitor's brain into it, then.

Now you guys have been able to show that the navigator in question may not explicitly be a servitor (at least from that one quote), but you have yet to prove it is not a servitor.

Since the book says multiple times that every member of his crew is a servitor and nothing directly contradicts those statements, it would be fair to assume that all of his crew are in fact servitors.

If you don't understand this point I can explain it better. I just woke up from less hours of sleep than I'd wanted (you guys should post earlier!), still a bit drugged up from my sleeping medication (which has yet to run its full course since I woke up only a handful of hours after taking it) and I'm on the run 'cause I have to go to Easter brunch with my family.

BTW, Happy Easter to those of you that celebrate it. Uhh, Happy Sunday for the rest of you folks.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

hailene said:


> Since the book says multiple times that every member of his crew is a servitor and nothing directly contradicts those statements, it would be fair to assume that all of his crew are in fact servitors.
> If you don't understand this point I can explain it better.


It's not that we don't understand it, we just don't agree with your interpretation of it.




hailene said:


> ... you have yet to prove it is not a servitor.


You might note that it doesn't make much sense to ask for a quote that says something doesn't exist or isn't the case. Because if it doesn't/isn't, why would it be mentioned to begin with?
For example (and sorry to go slightly off topic): In a previous discussion you may have noticed that, as far as I remember, nobody asked you to provide a direct quote saying that the Arbites do not have access to a Strike Cruiser. Because, even assuming that it were the case, there'd be no reason for an author to actually write it that way. :wink:

PS:
Thinking about it, I seem to remember a text in which a radical sect was mentioned that hated psykers (might have been Monodominants) and that wanted to turn Astropaths and/or Navigators into servitor-like, ie mindless, creatures. I'll see if I can find it again. I think it might have been the Thorian Sourcebook or perhaps Wolfblade.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

For some odd reason I didn't see this post. Maybe it was posted the same time I was writing a reply. I'll reply now.




Maidel said:


> How have I misunderstood? This is what the quote says - in a polished silver servitor sculpted in the form of a griffin - nothing about anything you are saying.
> 
> It's not in a polished servitor. The navigator's internal organs (brain and whatever else was needed) was put into a silver servitor chassis. Whether or not the navigator was a servitor or not is unclear.
> 
> ...





JaqTaar said:


> It's not that we don't understand it, we just don't agree with your interpretation of it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Monodominants don't want to turn astropaths or navigators into servitors. They want to destroy them completely as they are mutants, period. Their existence is an abomination.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Firstly, the reason why you 'still' havent heard what I think makes acservitor is that you replied to my posts out of order and I hadn't had a chance to reply!

Secondly, the answer is I DONT KNOW what makes a servitor, that's the point. You keep banging on about us PROVING a navigator can't be a servitor, well in this case you PROVE it to me that the defining characteristic of a servitor is that it's been lobotomised/ reprogrammed.

I'm pretty certain you can't, for exactly the reason stated by jataar, they don't write books/ fluff like that. They will tell you what something IS, but not what it is not. I will give an example. If you read about a gun servitor you will know it's a reprogrammed human body with a big gun bionically coupled to it. Therefore, from that description alone you will assume that all servitors have a built in gun, but that's not the case. Therefore you read other sources that tell you there are combat servitors and menial servitors and god knows if I can remember all the other types that have been mentioned.

So from all those slightly differing descriptions you get a picture of what servitors are, however it never puts 'limits' on it, it will never give you a decryption saying 'all servitors must comply with the following specifications, IRS always left open ended so they can add in new things without contradicting a previous text.

Therefore you won't find a source that states 'all servitors must gave been lobotomised'.

And that leads me on to my conclusion about the ships navigator, having a lobotomised, navigator, even if it were possible, would be crazy in the same way as having a trained chimp perform open heart surgery. Sure you could trains chimp how to open a chest with a knife and how to take out a heart, but the patient would die. A lobotomised navigator would be fine, up to the point where it's programming was limited and then the ship is doomed.

Therefore we have to look at alternatives to the traditional 'servitir' which is what I've been saying from the start. Perhaps he is termed a servitor because he has been denied the comforts of a human body, he is incapable of speach and has literally been slaved to the ship, he can't leave it, all he is is a mind trapped in a cage forced to navigate the warp (forced or drugged, or coherced).


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

From the Deathwatch rulebook: 

"A servitor is an automaton whose controlling components are organic and mostly human in origin."

So I suppose you're right. You don't have to be mind-wiped to be a servitor. But mind-wiping still helps.

Basically you have to have no free-will while not being actively controlled. Like being used as a psychic puppet wouldn't turn you into a servitor. 

I find it funny you bring up a medical analogy. There are medical servitors (in the very Eisenhorn trilogy, actually). 

And the evidence for servitor navigators/astropaths are within the book. Tobias says all his crew are servitors. He has astropaths (as that's how his ship was contacted in the first book before they went into Gundrum's orbit) and he has to have a navigator to travel.

If you'd like to bring evidence that shows that some of his crew are not servitors I await your reply. And as I said earlier, avoid circular logic. "He can't have a servitor navigator because you can't have a servitor navigator."

Until anyone can bring evidence that Tobias's multiple statements of saying his entire crew is servitors I'm going to have to check out of this thread. It's rather explicit that Tobias is alone on his ship before the arrival of Eisenhorn and his cadre. And I don't feel as if this discussion is moving forward. 

I'm emailing Dan Abnett right now, though. Hopefully I'll be able to fill in what he meant.

So, unless there's some new piece of evidence I'll see you guys in the next thread!


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Erm. You just proved my point for me.

As I said way back at the very beginning I have absolutely no issues with a non-lobotomised 'servitor' being a navigator or astropath, my point the entire time has been that the definition of a servitor is 'wrong' as the common lobotomised servitor wouldn't be capable of navigation through the warp as someone quoted earlier it needs imagination and servitors simply dint have that.

So I have never denied that he might be a servitor (although it clearly states he is IN a servitor) but what I have always said is that the definition of a servitor is too narrow to incorporate a free thinking navigator and thus either must be expanded to include him, or he isn't one.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

As you said, the thread isn't moving forward. Everything you ask us to provide is already in the thread. It's just a matter of interpretation.



hailene said:


> Monodominants don't want to turn astropaths or navigators into servitors. They want to destroy them completely as they are mutants, period. Their existence is an abomination.


Not all Monodominants are alike. I imagine that most do acknowledge that the use of psykers is necessary for the continued existence of the Imperium.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

JaqTaar said:


> As you said, the thread isn't moving forward. Everything you ask us to provide is already in the thread. It's just a matter of interpretation.
> 
> I'll return to the thread, but I won't talk about the servitor thing directly anymore.
> 
> ...


From the Witchhunter Codex, "To the ultra-puritan Witch Hunters these psykers--Navigators, Astropaths, Sanctioned Psykers, and even Space Marine Libarians--are to be equally reviled and persecuted as any other witch..."

Monodominants are, of course, ultra-puritan, as they are as conservative as can be.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

There's not much reason to doubt the apple statement. It's also a one-time event and there're no further sources for it. On the issue of whether a navigator-servitor can exist we can draw information from all over the place.

PS:


hailene said:


> (...) Monodominants are, of course, ultra-puritan, as they are as conservative as can be.


 Not to mention that apparently all Monodominants are Witchhunters. 

PPS:
Concerning asking Abnett, you can try at his blog: 
http://theprimaryclone.blogspot.com/


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Not all servitors are human, a lot are VAT grown sub-humans. But the important point is Sevitors are basically mono-tasked machines to the largest extent because the Imperium are dicks. 

Not only could a Servitor not carry out the complex tasks of the Navigator the Navis Nobilite would never allow such a thing to happen to a Navigator. In terms of the book, Navigators are often left out of what people refer to as the 'crew', he is something different something special. Having a Navigator Sevitor would be something so extraordinary you would mention it, not just say you're whole crew are servitors.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

JaqTaar said:


> There's not much reason to doubt the apple statement. It's also a one-time event and there're no further sources for it. On the issue of whether a navigator-servitor can exist we can draw information from all over the place.
> 
> Such as? I haven't seen any such information. And that's what I've been asking the entire time.
> 
> ...


Yeah. There was an option to either go to his blog or email. I just opted for the email. If I don't get a response in a couple of weeks I'll try the blog.



Aramoro said:


> Not all servitors are human, a lot are VAT grown sub-humans.
> 
> I've never read that they're sub-human. I think I've read that they can be grown without a brain or something like that, but nothing about being sub-human. Care to cite a source, please?
> 
> ...


That was my special service to Aramoro since he hadn't replied to the thread yet and I thought it would be rude not to reply to his post.


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

hailene said:


> Such as? I haven't seen any such information. And that's what I've been asking the entire time.


Sigh.

As explained, there are no mentions of Servitor-Navigators (that alone might tell you something). Not even explicitly in Eisenhorn. Which is why we're discussing here.
There are however lots of sources for information about Servitors and lots of sources for information about Navigators. And with the combined knowledge of those some of us reach the conclusion that Servitor-Navigators simply wouldn't work.

As for the Monodominants (you might want to open another thread for that one :wink
Those are their beliefs (and not all of them share them to that extent), not their actions. If they did kill Astropaths and Navigators (they'd also have to go after many of their colleagues btw), eventually they'd be declared radicals and hunted down themselves.
And in practical terms, after a while they'd be stranded, because they wouldn't be able to reliably travel in the warp anymore. 

In general: The factions (Ordos as well as doctrinal ones) aren't that cut-and-dried.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

The thing is, it had been said multiple times in Eisenhorn series that Tobias's crew was all servitors. Then in a few other points in the series it wouldn't have made any sense if some of Tobias's crew were non-servitors (namely his craving for human interaction which he couldn't fulfill outside of Eisenhorn's group and when his ship is captured there is no attempt to round up his Navigator or Astropaths. Probably because, as Tobias said, his entire crew is servitors and slaved to his ship).

And I have still yet to be convinced that you couldn't have a servitor do it.

You guys mention that servitors are dumb? As I said before, they have servitors capable of surgery. They have servitors created for the express purpose of processing information. Servitors are dumb in the sense that they lack imagination and freewill, but that doesn't make them incapable of doing anything.

And I never said Monodominists made much sense. Going too conservative or too radical is a bad way to roll. Probably why they're a relatively small sect.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> Servitors are dumb in the sense that they lack imagination and freewill, but that doesn't make them incapable of doing anything.
> .


It does, however, make them incapable of being psykers.

OR at least, for any length of time.

Ive been researching this for a good 20 minutes and everything says something similar to this (from 5th Edition rule book)

_The Mind of Psykers appear as bright flames in the ether of the warp.... An untrained psykers only chance of survival lies in going unnoticed - he cannot help to defend himself aginst a hungry warp prescene._
_If ensnared a psyker is gradually transformed into a portal through which steams of warpspawn begin to manifest..._


Therefore a servitors mind is incapable of blocking the warp presences that will come calling and thus would be incapable of being a navigator.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

All I see are untrained psykers being an enormous risk.

You take a trainer psyker and take away the portions of his brain that allow free-thought and you're good to go.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> All I see are untrained psykers being an enormous risk.
> 
> You take a trainer psyker and take away the portions of his brain that allow free-thought and you're good to go.


Great. No free will. If that worked on daemons why aren't all guardsmen subjected to that treatment?

Because that's not how it works, you don't simply go into the brain and remove the but that's marked 'free will'. Servitors are unthinking 'machines' they lack a lot more than free will. They lack the ability to 'think', your computer is very 'intelligent' it can do wonderful calculations, robots can perform surgery, but neither of them can 'think'.

That's what a psyker needs to be able to maintain his mental barriers, the ability to think and adapt. It's no good simply doing things by numbers. Daemons are chaos incarnate, they laugh at rigid thinking.

Way up is a list of things that navigators need, imagination is on that list, it's not something a servitor can do.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Why not? Guardsmen probably aren't worth the operation. 

They need to think? Based on what? 

Oh, from the Rogue Trader rule book:

"Unlike psychic powers, Navigators do not need to summon the energies of the warp or use arcane psychic foci to activate their powers. Rather, their powers are a result of their innate connection to the warp and the legacy of their genes....Note that Navigators never need to roll for Psychic Phenomena or Perils of the Warp, and cannot risk triggering these effects with the use of their powers."

Looks like they aren't affected by perils of the warp. Aka, attracting the attention of a daemon.

Whoops!


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Ah Good Luck Maidel you're going to need it to avoid beating yourself to death with a book.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> Looks like they aren't affected by perils of the warp. Aka, attracting the attention of a daemon.
> 
> Whoops!


 
How many times does this have to be wheeled out until someone actually gets it.

Rules =/ to Fluff.


If you go down that very same road then Eldar Warlocks are immue to the effects of the warp because all their rules say that their powers are 'perminant' and that they dont need to take a test to use them. Someone better tell them quick so they dont have to wander around with those spirit stones on them anymore...


And - Im going to have to call you on your 'quote' - please supply me with a rogue trader rule book page number because the bit you 'quoted' isnt on in the navigator description, astropath description, or in the psyonics section. Thank you.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

They're immune from drawing attention from Daemons when they use their psychic powers. It doesn't mean that they're immune to Slaanesh's grasp after they die. It's different.

Anywho, the page number is 178. Bottom right under "Using Navigator Powers."


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> Anywho, the page number is 178. Bottom right under "Using Navigator Powers."


Im really sorry, I have no idea what you are reading.

Page 178 of the rogue trader rule book is the second page of 'The Eldar Race and the Craftworlds'.

Im totally lost here.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

It's the Rogue Trader corerule book for the pen and paper RPG.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Question then. Do third party products fit into 40k canon?


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

It's licensed by Games Workshop.

It's written by a "GW Design Studio member", whatever that means.

I don't see how it can be any less authentic than a BL book.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Well I think fluff conversations need to stick to actual GW products. I'm not forking out £200+ just to by some other companies products so I can keep up with the fluff.


And, even if we do accept that, it does not mean the same is true for the ships astropaths who are equally part of this conversation and are affected by the warp and will still be unshielded psychic beacons for daemons.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

It's pretty obvious from Eisenhorn the astropaths were servitors:

"Within half an hour I was on the bridge of the Essene, surrounded by attentive *servitors*, reporting the incident to battlefleet command by confidential astropathic link."


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> It's pretty obvious from Eisenhorn the astropaths were servitors:
> 
> "Within half an hour I was on the bridge of the Essene, surrounded by attentive *servitors*, reporting the incident to battlefleet command by confidential astropathic link."


Erm - that isnt how I would read it.

The servitors are reporting the incident VIA an astropathic link. The servitors arent THE astropathic link.

Many historical accounts will saying something like 'Wellington reported the victory to the king'. No he didnt - he wrote a message that 100's of poor sods on horseback had to carry for mile after backbreaking mile.

So, those servitors are gathering the imformation and reporting it VIA an astropathic link. Its just like a telephone. I can speak to my friend VIA a telephone - this doesnt make me the telephone - merely the person using it.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

So let me get this straight...

Eisenhorn is talking to a bunch of servitors. Then the servitors are relaying the information to the Astropath? Who then relays the information to battlefleet command?

Because Eisenhorn didn't ask to play telephone with a bunch of servitors. A few lines above the one I quoted earlier has Eisenhorn asking, "I need access to your astropathic link. I need to contact battlefleet command and speed the closure of this matter."

If you want to believe that Eisenhorn politely asked Tobias to play telephone with his servitors for kicks then I suppose you can believe that.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> If you want to believe that Eisenhorn politely asked Tobias to play telephone with his servitors for kicks then I suppose you can believe that.


The astropaths and navigators are often locked away in their own rooms - I dont know why - maybe some rubbish about needing to maintain concentratin or something.

I dont understand why this is so difficult for you to grasp. Often 'senior' officers dont do anything themselves - they will give a message for someone to relay to the relavent person.

So - eisenhorn wants a message sent - tell a sevitor who has a perfectly good memory (not an issue for something that is effectively an organic computer) and he then goes and finds the astropath who relays the message. Where is the issue with that?

You bring out quote with huge holes in them and then try and explain them away by saying that our reading is 'silly'. Thats not really fair when at all times you demand proof from us.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

See, what I'm failing to grasp is the entire lack of any mention of him relaying the orders.

If I talk to someone via the telephone I'm using the phone.

If I'm relaying the information to a middle man and they're using a phone I wouldn't say "I talked to by phone." I'd say "I had someone call him".

I'm not dismissing that Eisenhorn could have done that. But there's absolutely nothing to say he did. 

Let me tell you a very basic point of a good discussion. Lose the "I'm right, ergo you are wrong." If you've followed the forum of late, you'll see where I've made a great many concessions in the forum. I myself have fought for a point and in my research to defend it discover I am, in fact, wrong. Then I say so. It'd be a good lesson to learn.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> Let me tell you a very basic point of a good discussion. Lose the "I'm right, ergo you are wrong." If you've followed the forum of late, you'll see where I've made a great many concessions in the forum. I myself have fought for a point and in my research to defend it discover I am, in fact, wrong. Then I say so. It'd be a good lesson to learn.


So, basically, because you have been wrong and admitted it in other discussions - I should say I am wrong and 'let you have this one'.

I dont start discussions where I think I am wrong - I find and research first, then put my point in - occationally someone finds something that I havent and proves me wrong - you have done absolutely none of that.

You entire arguement is based on 'All of my crew are servitors'. Well we have explained that as it doesnt say 'everyone on board is a servitor' and he may well not consider the astropaths and navigator to be part of his 'crew'.

You then say they have to be because he 'craves conversation' and that is answered by the fact that they are all notoriously mentioned to being loners and not talking to other people much (either because they feel they are below them, or they simply dont see the need to talk to normal people).

You also pull out phrases where it says 'In a servitor' and 'via an astropathic link' and then use those very ambiguous phrases to say that they ARE servitors.

Read back many many posts and you will see where I have said that I have no issues with the astrophaths and navigators being 'servitorized' in nearly mechanical bodies supporting their brain and organs and again where I say that I have no issues with them BEING servitors so long as the defintion of a servitor can be stretched around bodies with no independant life, but still maintaining and fully functioning brain.

The only thing I have said is impossible is to have a functioning psyker as a lobotomised servitor - thats the issue.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

It's not "within" a servitor. It's within a servitor chassis. Which one would think they'd put a servitor in a servitor chassis?

And if you're talking through an astropath what are you doing? Talking via astropathic link. Not some sort of servitor relay.

And you have yet to prove a lobotomized servitor can not function as a psyker. Your attempt at refuting Tobias's astropath as servitor was, to be honest, comical. And your feeble dismissal of a recognized Games Workship work as invalid was equally transparent. 

If you want to have people take you seriously you have to give something concrete. Now as this is getting rather heated, and I have already broken my earlier promise of not talking about the possibility of psyker servitors, I am going to return to that vow of silence.

Until you can provide some credible source and not some contortionist attempt at justifying your position I will not reply to it. If you feel that this is a "victory" then go ahead and enjoy it.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

hailene said:


> It's not "within" a servitor. It's within a servitor chassis. Which one would think they'd put a servitor in a servitor chassis?


Ok - so cars go in a car chassis? I have no idea what you are refering to. If you take a servitor out of a servitor chassis then you have a body shell - into which they placed a navigator. How is that so difficult to understand?



> And if you're talking through an astropath what are you doing? Talking via astropathic link. Not some sort of servitor relay.


Im sorry but you again arent making any sense. If you have a team on a bridge of a ship all reporting via radios - those people arent radios - they are reporting whats comming through the radio.



> And you have yet to prove a lobotomized servitor can not function as a psyker. Your attempt at refuting Tobias's astropath as servitor was, to be honest, comical. And your feeble dismissal of a recognized Games Workship work as invalid was equally transparent.


What was comical? I have no idea to what you are refering. Psykers require mental shields to prevent them from being taken over by the warp. If you lobotomise someone who requires mental shields to prevent them from being turned into a daemon portal then you have just opened the door to the warp - what is comical about that?



> If you want to have people take you seriously you have to give something concrete. Now as this is getting rather heated, and I have already broken my earlier promise of not talking about the possibility of psyker servitors, I am going to return to that vow of silence.


How is this getting 'heated' I have on no occations insulted you or demeaned you. Admittedly you have accused us of being 'silly' and 'comical' on more than one occation so maybe you do need to go and cool down a bit... Sigh.

What more concrete do you need that what I posted above?



> Until you can provide some credible source and not some contortionist attempt at justifying your position I will not reply to it. If you feel that this is a "victory" then go ahead and enjoy it.


Right - here will be my credible sources:

*Description of a Servitor from codex Space Marines:* 
'Servitors are feeble minded and can only function at the command of programs inserted into their brains' 
'Babbling incoherant nonsense as their ravaged brains try to assert some form of awareness' 

*Compared to the description of a navigator from the 5th edition rule book:* 
'Only a Navigator can pilot a ship through warp space. His swollen cranium houses a mind that is sensitive to the tides and currents of the warp enabling him to guide his ship through warp space.

*Lets look at what the dark milenium has to say on psykers:* 
'To use a psychic power aspysker directs his will into the sea of the immaterium pulling forth power from the warp.'

*And lets look at dark millenium and astropaths:*
'this process is exhausting and requires focus to keep the psyker in the right frame of mind. These can take a wide variety of forms such as the use of the emperors tarot.


So - on the one hand we have mindless servitors incapable of doing anything but the simplest of tasks - on the other we have beings who have to be senstive to the tides of the warp and able to use the emperors tarot.

Seriously - do I need to go on - I just found all my dark heresy books and they are full of stuff like this!


Lets also back up my statement about astropaths being 'loners'

*3rd Edition rule book -* 'they do not mingle with ordinary men except where duty dictates and the privacy of their sanctum on worlds and aboard ship is sarosanct made invioloble by imperial law'


----------



## JaqTaar (Apr 9, 2011)

Just wanted to mention that a forum post somewhere else finally reminded me of what sect I was thinking about earlier: The Polarists mentioned in Farrer's novel Blind. Dunno why I didn't make the connection earlier, as the book deals extensively with psykers.

It was their belief that humans and psykers form a polarity (with the devine Emperor as the sole exception), ie one cannot be both human and a psyker, so they wanted to take away any human aspects from psykers.

I still have to search for the exact passage, but I remember now that it was said the Polarists did try to put their belief into practice and lobotomised some Astropaths and that these were treated and controlled like servitors, but that they could perform only a fraction of what a normal Astropath could.


----------

