Yes, I know. So?Hans:
That GT quote is without basis in non-GT sources.
That's one way of putting it. I prefer to think of it as ex post facto proof that he had the right to go fetch it.Especially since the warrant Norris obtains is in fact ex post facto justification for the forbidden attempt to obtain it.
The reason why I qouted Nobles was that previously published material just didn't explain Imperial warrants. What you say here might be so and it might not be so. There's simply not enough material to say for sure, and some of what there is is highly implausible. I'm thinking especially about the 'to bearer' warrants here.An Imperial Warrant legalizes all actions taken... only the issuer can cancel it. They speak with the Emperor's Voice, and act with the Emperor's authority; the Emperor is the font of all imperial law.
And what if the world is filled with loyal, productive citizens that the Emperor does not want to upset? Especially if it has five Imperial fleets' worth of system defenses and half a dozen Imperial battleships building in its shipyards? What's your BatRon worth then?While the treaty of admission might grant certain powers to the locals, that's not going to matter much in the face of a warrant, if that world is filled with even a large minority of now-loyal-to-the-3I citizens, or the warrant holder arrives with "assistance" of a BatRon. (Yes, I've had a player do just that kind of thing... toppling a semi-autonomous client state for harboring Ine Givar... on a ducal from Delphine.)
Hans