RE: [DL] Pinkerton and Agency questions

["Roy Spence" <roy.ster@virgin.net>]

> I have some questions about the Pinkertons and the organization that
> replaced them, the Agency.  I own Men In Black Dusters, so no
> problems
> there.  There's a few spoilers for those who don't have the
> Agency book, so
> here's the requisite spoiler space:
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> Question 1:  Now that the Pinkertons have lost their
> government contract, do
> their detectives still have Gatling Pistols as standard equipment?

I would think so, yes (if you are meaning that the original Pinkertons were
split into the new Pinkertons and the Agency and you are asking if the new
Pinkertons carry gattling guns.).  Basically I think that all Pinkertons
would carry the standard S&R gattling gun and Agency operatives carry their
own more reliable varient.  Helps keep up the whole secrecy business about
the Agency.

> Questions 2 and 3:  The current Deadlands game year is 1877,
> and the Agency
> was formed in January.  Given that the Pinkertons has/had
> roughly 8000
> members (A: MiBD pg 16), and the Agency only has 900 (only
> some of which
> came from the Pinkertons), how much of the Pinkerton
> organization is aware
> of the Event?  Were Pinkerton operatives with exposure to the
> Event required
> to swear the same oath required of those leaving the Agency?

I would expect that Alan Pinkerton, pre-split, had a select number of
operatives that were used for "supernatural" investigations and the rest
were relatively unaware of what was going on and spent their time on more
mundane cases.  Hence when the Agency was formed they simply took the
operatives that had been working on the supernatural cases and drafted them
into the new organisation. If there was any overlap in operatives I would
assume that they would be few and would also be required to swear the oath
as per pg 69 (the "I quit" section).  Oh and BTW the Deadlands year has
advanced to 1878.

> Question 4:  Can an Agency operative use their badge
> effectively in the
> Disputed Lands?  Given the Pinkerton and Agency presence,
> Denver seems to be
> a Union city, despite its location.  It'd be interesting to know what
> higher-level law enforcement is present in the Disputed Lands
> (beyond the
> local officials).

They can use their badge anywhere they like, however the results will be
unpredictable, ranging from joy to indifference to hatred.  I would make it
in the disputed lands that the operative is better to suss out the loyalties
of the town before flashing his badge around (he may already know these
details about some of the larger towns).  As far as I can see it the
disputed lands should have undercover operatives an spies from both sides
lurking, sowing (false) information about their oter side and gathering
information of use.  I cannot remember if Denver is Union - however for some
reason I tend to think of it as a more neutral city, which is why it is so
important to those in the spy biz.

> Question 5:  If an Agency operative wants to permanently add
> certain pieces
> of equipment to his bag of tricks (such as the duster), is
> there a way to
> purchase it from the Agency?  Some items seem fairly simple
> to replace (such
> as Hollow Fountain Pens and Blackjacks), and could probably be bought
> outside of the Agency if needed.

I imagine the agency stuff is exclusive - sure you can find stuff like it -
however the quality is likely not as good.  Also the Agency might not like
the operative relying on inferior equipment, however would be happy with
them using their resource to add to their arsenal.  I liked the fact that
the Agency actively encourage the "no armour" policy as otherwise the agents
tend to think with their trigger finger.

> Question 6:  With a single Agency operative in an ongoing
> campaign, the
> posse will eventually find the Weird in the Weird West, no matter how
> vigilant the agent.  How is EO 347 to be interpreted in this
> instance?  Does
> the operative actively deny the obvious, such as the Headless
> Horseman that
> killed two posse members before finally being put down?  Or
> does he accept
> the fact that the posse knows these things, focusing instead
> on keeping them
> from telling others?

As a single operative I think they need to be more flexible than a group of
operatives.  In the above example - the group lost 2 members taking down the
abomination - if the operative was alone would they have surivied? -
probably not - therefore they are happy to continue working with these
people as long as they didn't draw too much attention to the horror of what
they have just killed.  The operative will accept the obvious (2 men
killed) - by a now dead "wild animal", and deny the impossible (the headless
horseman) to standard civilians.  With the group he really has to accept the
fact that they know and so focuses instead on preventing them from telling
others of the horror and prevent the fear from spreading.

> Question 7:  This is more of a generic rules question, but it
> does involve
> the Gatling Pistol.  Has
> there been any
> errata to address this?
> (I fixed it in my home campaign by making a double-action act
> as a 2-shot
> autofire, instead of two separate shots.)

Don't think there has been any official erratta regarding this.  There has
been some discussion about the gattling pistol.  One such discussion is back
in March of this year and should be available from the archives.  A number
of people have their own house rules concerning gattling guns - Ross Coburns
page at  http://pages.infinit.net/deadland  is one such example and may be
of help. I agree that gattling guns have lost a lot of their fun value,
however I've yet to see anything sorting it (I think Ross's house rule makes
it a little too easy to hit with a gatling gun)

Sorry for the delay in replying - multiple weddings over a weekend make me
non-email friendly.

Cheers



Roy