[Gilleon]

I've been working on updating some old and under-done characters, and came unstuck working on a Rogue trader turned Inquisitor.

Specifically, I'm unsure as to what the most fitting philosophy would be for such a character, Monodominant seems the most fitting, but I had originally written the character as a Recongregator. I'm wondering what people's thoughts might be regarding this, any help would be massively appreciated.

[Kaled]

The philosophy he might align himself with would depend a lot on his experiences, background, mentor, etc. An Inquisitor who used to be a Rogue Trader could follow any of the main Inquisitorial philosophies, or a minor one, or none at all. Or he might, if he's been an Inquisitor for some time, have followed a number of different philosophies at different times in his life and career.

In other words, if you want him to be a Recongregator, write his background to lead him to that way of thinking. As long as there's a coherent story about why he believes what he does then it's entirely up to you.

[MarcoSkoll]

I'd say a Rogue Trader could very believably turn into a Recongregator - after all, if he's seen the strengths of alien cultures, he might well believe humanity could benefit from changing to match some of those lessons.

Bear in mind that there's a lot of flexibility in what certain philosophies can be.

Amalathianism can be a mere attempt to maintain stability - or it can be a hard-line attempt to keep the Imperium exactly so, not allowing any advancement or regression.

Istvaanianism might be deliberate attempts to cause strife - or a belief that these are the fires in which the Imperium is made, and thus it is the Inquisitor's job to always seek out the hottest furnaces of progress, forging something stronger and better in them.

Recongregationism can be change for the sake of experiment; change for its own sake, always keeping the Imperium in a state of flux; change for the sake of weeding out inefficiency; change to weed out the stagnant... it can be so many different reasons.

Really, play with the ideas. They are somewhat nominally assigned as the Inquisitor in question chooses, so they can mean whatever the Inquisitor wants them to mean. Whether those around them agree... that's another matter.

[Dwi]

A Rouge Trader turned Inquisitor will most likely have a more radical openion that his bother and sister Inquisitors. Recon and Ista seem like the best choices, or perhsp seven Zanthite.

[Gilleon]

Excellent points guys, and thanks for the responses. I suppose the problem was I couldn't think of a way to justify Recongregation in his back story, and thought that might be as much the archetype. But as you say there are certainly plenty of possible explanations, I shall go away and have a think, hopefully something will stick in my head.

Thanks again for the input, it really is very much appreciated.

[Kaled]

If you're going to make him a Recongregator you need to figure out what it is about the Imperium that he believes needs to be changed and then look at why he believes that. As a Rogue Trader an obvious place to start is with his dealings with both human and alien civilisations outside the Imperium. Maybe he has seen a way in which the Imperium can be improved, or seen a civilisation that has made some mistake that he thinks the Imperium is also likely to make if it does not change. Then, having decided what he believes and why, look at what he has done and is prepared to do in order to further that belief.

If you haven't done so already, you might want to take a look at the Recongregator Sourcebook - if nothing else you can see some examples of Recongregator characters that other people have come up with.

[Gilleon]

Already read all four source books thoroughly, and big thanks to the whole team that made them by the way. Also can't wait to see source books for the remaining two.

My current thinking is that his turn to Recongregationism was caused by several factors; a combination of his mentor's philosophy, witnessing an alien or human civilization that succeeded or failed depending on their ability (or lake thereof) to change, as well as witnessing a decline on board his family ship due to a lack of innovation and change.
A build up of experiences as it were rather than one defining moment affecting his philosophy, which personally I find less plausible. But that's just me.