Apparently the BRB rules for dedicated transports give the faction of the unit to their transport, so Acolytes could start on a valk with an inquisitor but not if you added non inquisitorial faction henchmen to them. Seems a bit of a mess.
reds8n wrote: "Codex: Adepta Sororitas OR Codex: Imperial Agents...."
.... wait....
.. does that mean there's a separate book coming ?
I was thinking the same until I saw that it was only the models special rules they were referring to. The digital and CIA both have the rules so I wouldn't look too much into this unfortunately.
Crazyterran wrote: Coteaz has objective secured now and also provides his preferred enemy: Daemons even if he is not the warlord.
So the only character outside of skull caddies got buffed!
Yes. This is funny to me.
Question: can you take Coteaz as the "Inquisitor" in formations, or does it have to be a generic bod?
Yep, says you can sub out the generic inquisitor for a unique one of the same order ( so you can replace a malleus inquisitor for Coteaz or Hector Rex etc.)
Loopstah wrote: Apparently the BRB rules for dedicated transports give the faction of the unit to their transport, so Acolytes could start on a valk with an inquisitor but not if you added non inquisitorial faction henchmen to them. Seems a bit of a mess.
No. It gives them the same Battlefield Role (e.g., Elites, Troops, Heavy Support, etc.) and not the Faction.
Last time I checked I can get no jetbikes, warwalkers, vanguard veterans or flamers of tzeentch in any land raider box so not sure why bring those up to post about land raider.
Go back to the original conversation. It was models that got cheaper.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And finally! Someone who knew the codexes did the review. Thanks, Goon!
Where is this review?
Couple pages back
Spoiler:
GoonBandito wrote: Codex in hand, ask away. Things I can quickly confirm:
Canonness Veridyan has a dataslate with rules. She gives out a Precision Shot/Precision Strike bubble to Adepta Sororitas units within 12". Otherwise same as a regular Canoness, but comes with a Power Sword, and she costs 85pts. My first thought - sit her near a unit of Retributors for pseudo-Snipers (ie Rending Heavy Bolters with Precision Shots). Incidentally, the cast on my model looks good - only a very minor bubble on the back of the cloak where you'll never see it. It's also got a 2016 copyright for those interested.
All the armies in the book are their own Factions, with all the implications that carries. The Valkyrie in particular is listed as-is from the Astra Militarum codex (with Faction: Aeronautica Imperialis instead). BUT, Acolytes *can* take a Valkyrie as a Dedicated Transport (as well as Battle Sister Rhinos and Grey Knight Land Raiders). Games Workshop just borked their own FAQ as far as I can tell :s
The Canoness still has the Eviscerator and Inferno Pistols as a wargear option on her dataslate for those who were worried.
The Exorcist Missile Launcher is specifically ruled as a Turret Mounted weapon with 360-degree arc of sight.
Condemnor Boltguns and Immolators have the modified FAQ rulings (ie Condemnor Boltguns only need to hit a unit with a Psyker in it to cause Perils, and Immolators have a Fire Point).
Warlord Traits/Relics are unchanged for both Sororitas and Inquisition
Grey Knights Formation (Demonhunter Strike Force) is 1 Troop, 1 Fast Attack, 1 optional Heavy Support and all units can start making Deep Strike reserve rolls from turn 1 as well as Running and Shooting the turn they Deep Strike. Basically its a slightly different Nemesis Strike Force
Acolytes are 3-9 Acolytes with same statline and upgrade options as before (though Carapace and Power Armour got cut in cost by half). Additionally, any Acolyte can be upgraded to a Mystic with the same No Deep Strike Scatter rule as before. The unit can take Chimeras, Soroitas Rhinos, Land Raiders of all 3 types and Valkyries as Dedicated Transports.
Demonhosts are a unit of 1 - and now have the actual Demon rule too! - but are otherwise unchanged.
Edit2: So after looking through the Adepta Sororitas and Inquisition lists, here are the changes I can see from the e-dexs. If I didn't mention it, it didn't change as far as I can see.
Sororitas Command Squad moved to the Elites section
New unit: Arco-flagellants (Elite). 3 Arco-Flagellants for 30pts, can buy up to 7 more. Rhino or Immolator as DT.
New unit: Crusaders (Elite). 2 Crusaders for 30pts, can buy up to 8 more. Rhino or Immolator as DT
New unit: Death Cult Assassins (Elite). 2 DCA's for 30pts, can buy up to 8 more. Rhino or immolator.
New detachment: Ministorum Delegation. 1 HQ (must be a Ministorum Priest) and 1 optional Elite, all units in the detachment gain Shield of Faith.
New detachment: Vestal Task Force. 1 HQ, 2 Troops, 1 Elite, optional 1 HQ, 4 Troops, 2 Elites, 3 Fast Attack, 3 Heavy Support. Once per game all units can re-roll saving throws of 1 until the end of the turn. Warlord can re-roll Walord Trait if Primary Detachment.
New formation: Ecclisarchy Battle Conclave. 1 Ministorum Priest or Uriah Jacobus. 3-10 units in any combination of Arco-flagellants, Crusaders or Death Cult Assassins. All models in the Formation form a single unit, and all models get the Shield of Faith rule.
Immolator: Gained a Fire Point on the top hatch (as per the draft FAQ).
Condemnor Boltgun: Only requires you to hit an enemy unit with a Psyker to cause Perils, rather than having to cause an Unsaved Wound (as per the draft FAQ)
Acts of Faith: They all now last until the End of the Turn, rather than the End of the Phase. This means some slight buffs, eg Battle Sister Squads can now carry their Preferred Enemy Act of Faith from the Shooting Phase into the Assault Phase of the same turn.
Exorcist: Exorcist Missile Launcher clarified to be a turret mounted weapon with a 360-degree arc of sight.
New Tactical Objectives:
* Slay the Heretic: Score 1 VP at the end of your turn if you killed any enemy characters during the turn
* Armour of Contempt: The next time one of your Adepta Sororitas makes a successful Shield of Faith save or Deny the Witch roll, immediately score 1 VP.
* Reclaim Lost Relic: Roll a D6 - Score 1 VP at the end of your turn if you control the objective that corresponds to the D6 result.
* Trust in the Emperor: Score 1 VP at the end of your turn if a unit with the Act of Faith rule destroys an enemy unit. If the unit was under the effects of an Act of Faith, score D3 VPs instead.
* The Blood of Martyrs: Next time one of your Adepta Sororitas characters is slain, score 1 VP. If the model as the Martyrdom rule, score D3 VPs instead.
* A Leap of Faith: Score 1 VP at the end of your turn if you pass at least 1 Act of Faith test during the turn. If you pass 3, score D3 VPs instead. If you pass 6 or more, score D3+3 VPs instead.
Inquisition:
Inquisitors - lost the cheaper power weapon, power fist and plasma pistol options which are now standard price (with the exception of the Ordo Xenos Inquisitor, who can still take 10pt Power Swords but still can't take Power Fists or other Power Weapons).
Inquisitors - Power Armour upgrade reduced to 3pts from 8pts
Inquisitors - lost Servo Skulls
Inquisitors - can now only take the Inquisitorial Relic associated with their Ordos.
Inquisitors - Psyk-Out grenade rules changed to match the updated Grey Knight rules
Ordo Malleus Inquisitors - Can generate from Demonology (Malefic). Does not extend to Coteaz.... (heresy).
Inquisitor Coteaz - Gained the Lord of Formosa special rule. All units in the same detachment as Coteaz are Objective Secured.
Dedicated Transports - Lost Razorbacks and Rhinos, but gained Sororitas Rhinos. Chimeras are still only 55pts, but lost the 5 Fire Points (now work the same as Codex: Astra Militarum ie 2 Fire Points and the Lasgun Arrays rule). Lost the ability to give Inquisitorial Vehicle Upgrades to anything but the Chimera - this means no more Psybolt Land Raider Crusaders. This is because Land Raiders, Sororitas Rhinos and Valkyries come from the Grey Knight, Adepta Sororitas and Aeronautica Imperalis lists respectively, and can only take the Vehicle Upgrades listed in those sections.
Inquisitorial Henchman Warband unit removed.
Psykers Removed (ie no longer an option as a Henchman. Effectively moved to the Adepta Astra Telepathica section, where you can grab Primaris Psykers, Astropaths and Wyrdvane Psykers). Astropaths btw are 25pts for ML1 (Divination and Telepathy), same statline as the Astra Militarum Regimental Advisor. However you can upgrade this one to ML2 for 25pts, give him a Refractor Field for 10pts and also gets a rule where if he manifests a Psychic Power you can re-roll Reserve Rolls in your next turn. Basically a mini Primaris Psyker
Servitors Removed (moved to the Cult Mechanicus section of the book. Plasma Cannon option increased to 15pts from 10pts)
New Unit: Acolytes (Elite). 3 Acolytes for 12pts and can buy up to 9 more for 4pts/model. Same statline and wargear options as previous codex, however the cost of Carapace/Power armour upgrades are cut in half (2 and 5pts respectively). Any Acolyte can be upgraded to a Mystic for 6pts, and gain the same Psychic Beacon rule. Can take Chimeras, Sororitas Rhinos, all 3 Land Raider types or Valkyries as transports.
New Unit: Demonhost (Elite). 1 Demonhost for 10pts. Gains the Demon rule, otherwise identical to previous codex.
New Unit: Jokaero Weaponsmith (Elite). 1 Jokareo Weaponsmith for 35pts. Identical to previous codex.
New Unit: Chimera (Heavy Support). Also lost the 5 fire points, and now works the same as the Astra Militarum one.
New Detachment: Inquisitorial Representative. 1 HQ, optional 3 Elites. One Inquisitor from the formation (including Unique models) can generate a Warlord Trait even if they are not the Warlord.
New Formation: Inquisitorial Henchman Warband. 1 Inquisitor (including Unique models), 1 Unit of Acolytes, 0-1 Ministorum Priests, 0-1 Crusaders, 0-6 Demonhosts, 0-1 Arco-flagellents, 0-1 Death Cult Assassins, 0-1 Tech-Priest Enginseer, 0-6 Jokearo Weaponsmiths, 0-1 Astropaths. All units except the Inquisitor must form a single Unit. Inquisitor can generate a Warlord Trait even if they are not the Warlord. Can include either a Battle Sister Squad, Grey Knight Terminator Squad or Deathwatch Veteran squad in the formation as per your Inquisitors Ordo.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Do formations have the faction of their parent list? So, if you take a CAD of Adepta and a fortification, is the fort also AS faction?
nudibranch wrote: Yep, says you can sub out the generic inquisitor for a unique one of the same order ( so you can replace a malleus inquisitor for Coteaz or Hector Rex etc.)
Excellent. Sounds like an excuse to paint up the Coteaz model I've had lying around for 8 years.
After checking that review and it's unit breakdown I'm quite surprised at how much of that stuff I can actually field, despite not playing 40k all that much any more.
I've just gotten in touch with my FLGS to secure me a copy, I'm genuinely interested in the book now, if only for the fluff.
Vash108 wrote: Inquisitors lost Servo Skulls? Wow, I actually used those to defend from infiltrators/scouts and to fill in some points
Just like anyone else did - Grab a barebone Inquisitor for 25 and use it to get 3 Skulls for 9 more points. 34 points was still cheap for what those skulls did, and you could make one of your units Stubborn on top of that.
Vankraken wrote: I seriously can't believe they made a whole new faction for valks (a fething transport aircraft) so nobody besides an officer of the fleet can actually start on the thing.
I'm starting to seriously ask them again about the Battle Brother transports rule.
I know the FAQ says it's a nono but the original question just refer to deployment, and maybe it's just a limitation for deploying on table (like dedicated transports), but reserves are allowed to start embarked in battlebrothers transports.
Let's be serious if units coming from reserves can do it nearly 99% of complaints about the restriction will be gone.
I think the FAQ was written from the perspective of having forces from two different Codecies as Battle Brothers. This is the first book (AFAIK?) to detail multiple factions and there's never been a situation before where a unit entry allowed you to add something from a different faction as one of its options.
What I'm saying is that that FAQ answer isn't setting a precedent. Units really should be able to start the game in their own transports. I imagine that if there isn't something in the book about it already, there'll be an FAQ that makes all parts of a formation into the faction it's drawn from (which is how it works in AoS).
Thommy H wrote: I think the FAQ was written from the perspective of having forces from two different Codecies as Battle Brothers. This is the first book (AFAIK?) to detail multiple factions and there's never been a situation before where a unit entry allowed you to add something from a different faction as one of its options.
What I'm saying is that that FAQ answer isn't setting a precedent. Units really should be able to start the game in their own transports. I imagine that if there isn't something in the book about it already, there'll be an FAQ that makes all parts of a formation into the faction it's drawn from (which is how it works in AoS).
One would hope so. I truly wish that the game designers would look at rulings they've already made and take those into account when writing these things up. They've just never understood that games are governed by rules for a reason and they need to be consistent....
It's a pretty minor oversight tbf. RAI is obvious and they get FAQs out on the day of release now. In fact, we don't even know for sure that the faction thing isn't addressed somewhere in the book already.
Thommy H wrote: It's a pretty minor oversight tbf. RAI is obvious and they get FAQs out on the day of release now. In fact, we don't even know for sure that the faction thing isn't addressed somewhere in the book already.
It really feels like it should be.
I'm guessing this book was originally written with everything being the same faction, and the decision to make it 8 different factions was made late in the process without much contemplation of the consequences. Similar to the way the Wraithknight became a GC, or the Orkanaunts became normal Walkers instead of SHW.
Shotgun wrote: Apologies, bit AM Chimeras have 2 firepoints? When did that happen, book I have says 5. Sorry, just starting back up after years of inaction.
6th edition codex for IG applied some over-nerf to a strong 5th edition IG. In 6th. Before 7th.
Now IG needs points reduction across the board, couple of rules back, and a designer giving a flying don't bypass the language filter like this please. Reds8n .
But nowadays things are fixed with MOAR FORMATIONS.
Khadorstompy wrote: Question: How do the Jokaero upgrades work now that they are their own unit....Are they ICs? Cause if you can stick them in different factions now...
This. Will someone with the book please let us know?
So I've finally caught up on this...holy cow, that was exhausting. I want to agree with those that are calling this book lazy. This book is exactly what many people complained about before the apparent attitude shift at GW over the last year or so. To copy/paste rules in without making any adjustments or alterations, then to delete models that were fairly popular, put in a unit with a DT that breaks a very recent FAQ ruling, and give lackluster, at best, formations to the 2 armies that this will be the army book for is a lot of suck. Also, since they have stated that this book supercedes the existing codices for Inq and AS, not taking the opportunity to address issues within those armies is almost indefensible. Also, it shocks me that their response to the questions about their comment about the plastic sisters from their video could be so absolutely tone deaf. I didn't think they would go about trolling their player base quite that much. I was thinking about buying this, but cannot convince myself to do so, just on principal. Good job erasing a whole lot of the good will you've generated recently GW, kudos to you.
Again, apologies but what the hell did he just say?
I have no clue....
But in answer to your question:
The Astra Militarum(fancy title for the Imperial Guard as a faction; people got all upset about this renaming despite the fact that within the book it flatout states the faction is commonly just called "Imperial Guard") book made it so that the top hatch of the Chimera is the 'only' Fire Point and it made the Lasgun Arrays their own weapon that can be fired independent of whatever is shooting from within the top hatch.
The previous book's 5 model Fire Point made an explicit note that most of the models firing from within the Fire Point were just firing the Lasguns that were hull mounted.
So, before you were basically firing Lasguns and whatever other weapons you had in the squad(a Weapons Team, Plasma Guns, whatever) for a maximum of 5 models shooting out of the top hatch. That was great if you did something like a Veteran list, where you could fire a Weapons Team and 3x Specials.
Now? Now you have a bit more firepower coming from full squads of basic infantry. An Infantry Squad with a Heavy Weapon and a Special Weapon can have those two fire out of the top hatch(Heavy Weapons Teams count as a single model firing for the purposes of this), while the remaining 8 models can choose to have 6 fire the 2 different Lasgun Arrays. Each Lasgun Array can choose to fire at a different target to the Chimera or each other, the only mandate is that all of the Lasguns from a single array(Right or Left Lasgun Array) have to be fired at the same target.
In 6th edition, Chimeras have only 2 firepoints. This is one of the long series of nerfs IG got in 6th.
Is baffling, but it looks like the designer assigned to write the 6th edition Codex for IG did it hastily (perhaps to remove character without mini, and change the name, after the Chapterhouse debacle) and/or with just no idea of what was doing.
The nerfs, albeit hard, would have made sense in 5th, but in the context of 6th edition were too harsh, and in the context of 7th even worse.
IG needs a new codex, but nowadays, as shown with CSM, GW "fixes" armies with formations.. in new books. It took CSM 6 books to get something. Also, this often does not address overpowered stuff they wrote to sell giant robots.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Battlesong wrote: So I've finally caught up on this...holy cow, that was exhausting. I want to agree with those that are calling this book lazy. This book is exactly what many people complained about before the apparent attitude shift at GW over the last year or so. To copy/paste rules in without making any adjustments or alterations, then to delete models that were fairly popular, put in a unit with a DT that breaks a very recent FAQ ruling, and give lackluster, at best, formations to the 2 armies that this will be the army book for is a lot of suck. Also, since they have stated that this book supercedes the existing codices for Inq and AS, not taking the opportunity to address issues within those armies is almost indefensible. Also, it shocks me that their response to the questions about their comment about the plastic sisters from their video could be so absolutely tone deaf. I didn't think they would go about trolling their player base quite that much. I was thinking about buying this, but cannot convince myself to do so, just on principal. Good job erasing a whole lot of the good will you've generated recently GW, kudos to you.
Bingo.
Remember people: this is the staff in charge of 8th edition. Brace yourselves.
The previous book's 5 model Fire Point made an explicit note that most of the models firing from within the Fire Point were just firing the Lasguns that were hull mounted.
So, before you were basically firing Lasguns and whatever other weapons you had in the squad(a Weapons Team, Plasma Guns, whatever) for a maximum of 5 models shooting out of the top hatch. That was great if you did something like a Veteran list, where you could fire a Weapons Team and 3x Specials.
Now? Now you have a bit more firepower coming from full squads of basic infantry. An Infantry Squad with a Heavy Weapon and a Special Weapon can have those two fire out of the top hatch(Heavy Weapons Teams count as a single model firing for the purposes of this), while the remaining 8 models can choose to have 6 fire the 2 different Lasgun Arrays. Each Lasgun Array can choose to fire at a different target to the Chimera or each other, the only mandate is that all of the Lasguns from a single array(Right or Left Lasgun Array) have to be fired at the same target.
So basically my Vet list is back to fubar'd. as the firepoints drop to 2? What book/FAQ did this show up in? How does this increase fire power? Lasgun Arrays are left and right. The hull heavy is forward. They split fire into potentially multiple useless targets when at least the 5 firepoint system could have had the left or right array focusing at the same place the other array was shooting at?
All of my old henchmen squads can be reconstructed. So I start to love this book now. The only strange thing is that I appear to be a sisters player now with my death cult + crusader + priest totally not henchmen squads
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thommy H wrote: Yeah, 3 - 10 units does seem odd there. It seems to be to enforce a minimum size (i.e. 6 models) but I feel like there might have been a better way to do that. Annoyingly it makes my Battle Conclave (2 Crusaders and 3 Arco-flagellants) illegal, but I can use them separately until I kitbash more models I guess.
@nekooni: he's referring to the Battle Conclave, which allows 3 - 10 units, each of 10 models, which all form a single unit.
WHUTTT.... I am going to have so much fun with this formation : D
The previous book's 5 model Fire Point made an explicit note that most of the models firing from within the Fire Point were just firing the Lasguns that were hull mounted.
So, before you were basically firing Lasguns and whatever other weapons you had in the squad(a Weapons Team, Plasma Guns, whatever) for a maximum of 5 models shooting out of the top hatch. That was great if you did something like a Veteran list, where you could fire a Weapons Team and 3x Specials.
Now? Now you have a bit more firepower coming from full squads of basic infantry. An Infantry Squad with a Heavy Weapon and a Special Weapon can have those two fire out of the top hatch(Heavy Weapons Teams count as a single model firing for the purposes of this), while the remaining 8 models can choose to have 6 fire the 2 different Lasgun Arrays. Each Lasgun Array can choose to fire at a different target to the Chimera or each other, the only mandate is that all of the Lasguns from a single array(Right or Left Lasgun Array) have to be fired at the same target.
So basically my Vet list is back to fubar'd. as the firepoints drop to 2?
If you strictly relied on Vet spam firing specials from Chimeras, then yes it did get fubar'd.
It would have been fubar'd anyways though, since tanks tend to be garbage this edition.
What book/FAQ did this show up in?
Codex: Astra Militarum. It's the latest Imperial Guard book.
How does this increase fire power? Lasgun Arrays are left and right. The hull heavy is forward. They split fire into potentially multiple useless targets when at least the 5 firepoint system could have had the left or right array focusing at the same place the other array was shooting at?
The 5 fire point system would have meant that all of the shots from the hatch would have had to been at the same, single target.
Now a 10 man squad consisting of a Heavy Weapons Team, a Special Weapons Squad, and 6 Lasgun armed models plus a Sergeant with a Laspistol can fire:
A shot from the Heavy Weapons Team and Special Weapon at the same target
3 shots from the Left Lasgun Array at a target(if any) within their firing arc.
3 shots from the Right Lasgun Array at a target(if any) within their firing arc.
That's in addition to the hull mount firing at something within its firing arc and the turret firing at something it can hit.
Before you had the hull mount, the turret, and then 5 models shooting at the same target.
Khadorstompy wrote: Question: How do the Jokaero upgrades work now that they are their own unit....Are they ICs? Cause if you can stick them in different factions now...
Checked in the book when I read it at the GW shop. They're not IC. Thus they're only useful when taken with the Inquisition formation that makes them in the same unit with the other choices.
The Adepta Sororitas list is indeed something with very few changes and without Saint Celestine. There are interesting things to do with them, though (Death Cult Assassins and Crusaders in separate Elite choices without the obligatory priest? Yes please!). Their only true "loss" is Celestine herself.
Won't mourn the Servo-Skulls. It really was a thing of the past and complete nonsense to allow in V7 games.
The most important question is this: Can we still buy Searchlights for 1pt each on the Sororitas Rhinos in order to make even numbers??????? The old Rhinos and Razorbacks could.
sizzlebutt666 wrote: The most important question is this: Can we still buy Searchlights for 1pt each on the Sororitas Rhinos in order to make even numbers??????? The old Rhinos and Razorbacks could.
The leaked data sheet shows the Immolator with one as stock - likely the Rhino is the same - as before.
Why are people talking about the Death Cults being able to take a Rhino/ Immolator as new - they always could.
If AS Command Squads are now Elite - doesn;t that make Celestain squads even worse
Khadorstompy wrote: Question: How do the Jokaero upgrades work now that they are their own unit....Are they ICs? Cause if you can stick them in different factions now...
Checked in the book when I read it at the GW shop. They're not IC. Thus they're only useful when taken with the Inquisition formation that makes them in the same unit with the other choices.
The Adepta Sororitas list is indeed something with very few changes and without Saint Celestine. There are interesting things to do with them, though (Death Cult Assassins and Crusaders in separate Elite choices without the obligatory priest? Yes please!). Their only true "loss" is Celestine herself.
Won't mourn the Servo-Skulls. It really was a thing of the past and complete nonsense to allow in V7 games.
Thank you. Too bad...
I know astropaths are now ICs.. are there any other units that are ICs now that weren't before? Might be cool for some allied shenanigans.
Mr Morden wrote: Why are people talking about the Death Cults being able to take a Rhino/ Immolator as new - they always could.
If AS Command Squads are now Elite - doesn;t that make Celestain squads even worse
Because you can take 2 DCA or 2 Arcos and get an immo. Before it was Priest, 3 Arcos and then an immo.
Ah right -
Looking at the old codex stats the Celestains seem pretty awful when compared to the Command sqaud if both are now elite unless there are any changes? The Command Squad is cheaper with far more options and even arugably a better AOF?
Khadorstompy wrote: Question: How do the Jokaero upgrades work now that they are their own unit....Are they ICs? Cause if you can stick them in different factions now...
Checked in the book when I read it at the GW shop. They're not IC. Thus they're only useful when taken with the Inquisition formation that makes them in the same unit with the other choices.
The Adepta Sororitas list is indeed something with very few changes and without Saint Celestine. There are interesting things to do with them, though (Death Cult Assassins and Crusaders in separate Elite choices without the obligatory priest? Yes please!). Their only true "loss" is Celestine herself.
Won't mourn the Servo-Skulls. It really was a thing of the past and complete nonsense to allow in V7 games.
Celestians can get to a bigger squad size. That is the only thing they can really do that may be considered beneficial as opposed to the command squad, though it is playstyle dependent whether that matters.
Khadorstompy wrote: Question: How do the Jokaero upgrades work now that they are their own unit....Are they ICs? Cause if you can stick them in different factions now...
Checked in the book when I read it at the GW shop. They're not IC. Thus they're only useful when taken with the Inquisition formation that makes them in the same unit with the other choices.
The Adepta Sororitas list is indeed something with very few changes and without Saint Celestine. There are interesting things to do with them, though (Death Cult Assassins and Crusaders in separate Elite choices without the obligatory priest? Yes please!). Their only true "loss" is Celestine herself.
Won't mourn the Servo-Skulls. It really was a thing of the past and complete nonsense to allow in V7 games.
Huh interesting. Given that a "Unit" of Acolytes is just 1 model. You could take an Inquisitor with a single Acolyte, and couple of Jokaero to buff a Deathwatch, Adepta Sororitas, or GK Termi squad.
That could be rather nasty considering the Inquisitor gets a free Warlord trait on top of the buffs the Jokaero and Priest can give... Also lets Karamazov join a unit which i don't think he could previously do.
I was really excited to start then disappointed but now I'm head back toward excited again. There do seem to be allot of possibilities with this book that I didn't see at first.
Hi. Question for you all that I can't see the answer to... can warlord traits stack?
For example I take a normal warlord and one of the new inq detachments, giving me 2 warlord traits. Let's say I roll on strategic and get 2 4's (Strategic Genius: +1 to Seize and re-roll reserves while Warlord is alive)
Does that give me +2? Or is the second trait wasted?
I'm not just theorising here... playing a tournament on Sunday where this codex is legal, and I could easily rejig my list to give me 2 or 3 warlord traits!
Khadorstompy wrote: Huh interesting. Given that a "Unit" of Acolytes is just 1 model. You could take an Inquisitor with a single Acolyte, and couple of Jokaero to buff a Deathwatch, Adepta Sororitas, or GK Termi squad.
Guys, just to chime in here ... I know everybody is planning on how they're going to spam their detachments to get tons of additional Warlord traits and Priests into every one of their squads and spam-floods of cheaper squads or Servitors or NDKs or whatever into their armies, but has anybody noticed that every page that's been leaked that talks about a Detachment refers to it as a "unique Detachment?"
DETACHMENTS:
"Each Faction included in this book is represented by a unique Detachment..."
ASTRA TELEPATHICA:
"Primaris Psykers, Astropaths, and Wyrdvane Psykers, and a unique Detachment making it easy to add these operatives to your army."
AERONAUTICA IMPERIALIS:
"Officer of the Fleet and Valkyries, and a unique Detachment..."
CULT MECHANICUS:
"Tech-Priest Enginseers and Servitors, and a unique Detachment making it easy..."
... and so on.
Has anyone else considered that these might actually be "Unique" (as in the BRB usage of the term "Unique", meaning ONLY ONE PER ARMY?) The intention of the special abilities certainly seems that way (I highly doubt GW wants us paying 100 points to get four extra rolls on the Strategic Warlord table every game.) If that ISN'T their intention then it's game design that's just itching to be abused.
I'm with most of the group on this. While I won't call this book a disaster, it's pretty epic fail from a writing standpoint. They completely bungled the faction/transport issues and made for a ton of arguments in the process. Hackneyed cut-and-paste job with no understanding of their own rules, conflicting or misleading writing, and no significant thought given to the possible repercussions. For factions that haven't seen attention for years, it's incredibly disappointing.
Although the blurb on the LE Canoness model and the Black Library response cited above are making me think that Warhammer Facebook was wrong, and this was truly NOT intended to replace the eDexes ... which gives me at least some small peace, because honestly Sisters and Inquisition were better off with their old books. Legion of the Damned as well.
There may be more we haven't seen that better explains or "fixes" these problems. Right now I'm doubting it. There better be an extensive FAQ coming pronto.
Khadorstompy wrote: Huh interesting. Given that a "Unit" of Acolytes is just 1 model. You could take an Inquisitor with a single Acolyte, and couple of Jokaero to buff a Deathwatch, Adepta Sororitas, or GK Termi squad.
You don't combine with the DW, AS or GK squad.
Looks like you might be right. If so we are back into the "this book sucks" mode again.
VitruvianZeke wrote: every page that's been leaked that talks about a Detachment refers to it as a "unique Detachment?"
.
Interesting. If that's what it says then yes, I would assume you can only take one of each.
However, that still leaves you with 2 warlord traits.
Will it blend? Wait... I mean... do they stack?
Using the precedent established for the Daemonic Incursion Infernal Tetrad formation, which allows each Daemon Prince to share the same warlord trait as if they were the warlord, then no, it does not stack. They specifically call out "strategic genius" as an example and you would only get +1 to seize.
Khadorstompy wrote: Huh interesting. Given that a "Unit" of Acolytes is just 1 model. You could take an Inquisitor with a single Acolyte, and couple of Jokaero to buff a Deathwatch, Adepta Sororitas, or GK Termi squad.
You don't combine with the DW, AS or GK squad.
Looks like you might be right. If so we are back into the "this book sucks" mode again.
If the jokero uses the same wording as before the bonus will apply to the entire warband detachment so it will affect dw/gk/sob. They could change the dataslate for the ability so that it states unit instead of inq war-band.
We've been over that image. It is referring to two books that are being sold right now. Codex: AS and Codex: IA already exist and are being sold. It does not reference a book that may or may not come. (I believe it will. I also am 100% sure that that datasheet is not confirming a thing.)
VitruvianZeke wrote: every page that's been leaked that talks about a Detachment refers to it as a "unique Detachment?"
.
Interesting. If that's what it says then yes, I would assume you can only take one of each.
However, that still leaves you with 2 warlord traits.
Will it blend? Wait... I mean... do they stack?
Using the precedent established for the Daemonic Incursion Infernal Tetrad formation, which allows each Daemon Prince to share the same warlord trait as if they were the warlord, then no, it does not stack. They specifically call out "strategic genius" as an example and you would only get +1 to seize.
thanks for the quick answer with actual backup to a precedent!
I guess you have to be careful rolling on the same table.
Khadorstompy wrote: Huh interesting. Given that a "Unit" of Acolytes is just 1 model. You could take an Inquisitor with a single Acolyte, and couple of Jokaero to buff a Deathwatch, Adepta Sororitas, or GK Termi squad.
You don't combine with the DW, AS or GK squad.
Looks like you might be right. If so we are back into the "this book sucks" mode again.
If the jokero uses the same wording as before the bonus will apply to the entire warband detachment so it will affect dw/gk/sob. They could change the dataslate for the ability so that it states unit instead of inq war-band.
Now you got me hopeful again. Stop toying with me.
So for 5 points more than that load out normally would be the Canoness gets to single out sergeants (the only use i can see for this). I was kind of expecting a relic of some sort.
NivlacSupreme wrote: So for 5 points more than that load out normally would be the Canoness gets to single out sergeants (the only use i can see for this). I was kind of expecting a relic of some sort.
It's more useful to single out special weapons like meltagunners. They can't look out sir.
Rather than get this expensive book with next to nothing to offer, I am going to try to find White Dwarf Weekly Issue #65 so I can have hard copy Assassin rules. Anyone have a copy they are willing to part with?
casvalremdeikun wrote: Rather than get this expensive book with next to nothing to offer, I am going to try to find White Dwarf Weekly Issue #65 so I can have hard copy Assassin rules. Anyone have a copy they are willing to part with?
I was hoping that you could take 3 engineseers and three units of servitors as a single formation, kind of like the unit in the Imperial Guard codex. Oh well, could be worse I guess.
Khadorstompy wrote: Huh interesting. Given that a "Unit" of Acolytes is just 1 model. You could take an Inquisitor with a single Acolyte, and couple of Jokaero to buff a Deathwatch, Adepta Sororitas, or GK Termi squad.
You don't combine with the DW, AS or GK squad.
I think this needs a FAQ. It says the unit is added to the formation, and it also says the formation is a single unit. It's not clear which units are included in that second rule.
It really looks like this is a money grab/stop gap measure. I'd be surprised if we don't see either a full codex or a War Zone with Formations in the next few months or year, maybe plastics. I don't think they would remove Celestine altogether. I'm picking it up to trundle along and get a hard copy. If the sisters models are metal, unlike everything else being produced right now, it may be safe to assume that they are killing old stock before a later release. I have faith even if I'm underwhelmed with this release. I'm still annoyed they didn't just release this codex in Shield of Baal, that would have been sensible. Fingers crossed, maybe we'll see that Inquisitor game we had heard about a while back. I don't believe the bin thing was a joke, I think they are still a month or more out.
Khadorstompy wrote: Huh interesting. Given that a "Unit" of Acolytes is just 1 model. You could take an Inquisitor with a single Acolyte, and couple of Jokaero to buff a Deathwatch, Adepta Sororitas, or GK Termi squad.
You don't combine with the DW, AS or GK squad.
I think this needs a FAQ. It says the unit is added to the formation, and it also says the formation is a single unit. It's not clear which units are included in that second rule.
Actually it is clear upon a 2nd look. It says the models marked with a 1* are included with the acolytes as a single formation which is everything but the Inquisitor and "extra" unit. So allot is going to depend on the wording the Jokaero.
Hmm, bolter acolytes in power armor are looking tasty for 10pts. Some cool conversation opportunities as well. Not bad in a list with coteaz making them objective secured.
Hoping this is all just a ploy to get rid of the overstock of metal Sisters minis before they release plastic ones. Once the plastic is out, no one is going to want to buy metal minis for twice ( oh i do hope) the price. Nothing really is getting nerfed here as far as I can see, besides the lack of Celestine.
Once they release plastic sisters, demand for the metal ones will go to next to zero, thus this quick "money grab." Please tell me why this could be wrong, cause it makes sense to me.
Souba wrote: imagine the 12" precision shot bubble in the backline with exorcists. having S8 ap 1 shots that can suddenly go as percision shots is very handy.
Why not put a few of her out there? She's not listed as unique as far as the datasheet shows.
Souba wrote: imagine the 12" precision shot bubble in the backline with exorcists. having S8 ap 1 shots that can suddenly go as percision shots is very handy.
Why not put a few of her out there? She's not listed as unique as far as the datasheet shows.
Because you'll still need a useful warlord like Uriah or a generic canoness with eternal warrior to not always give up slay the warlord points.
Also, with the Sororitas Command Squad moved to Elites, do they still require a Canoness to be purchased?
Souba wrote: imagine the 12" precision shot bubble in the backline with exorcists. having S8 ap 1 shots that can suddenly go as percision shots is very handy.
Why not put a few of her out there? She's not listed as unique as far as the datasheet shows.
Because you'll still need a useful warlord like Uriah or a generic canoness with eternal warrior to not always give up slay the warlord points.
Also, with the Sororitas Command Squad moved to Elites, do they still require a Canoness to be purchased?
no, just like regular command squads or honor guard of space marines. they are a "normal" elite unit.
Souba wrote: imagine the 12" precision shot bubble in the backline with exorcists. having S8 ap 1 shots that can suddenly go as percision shots is very handy.
Why not put a few of her out there? She's not listed as unique as far as the datasheet shows.
Because you'll still need a useful warlord like Uriah or a generic canoness with eternal warrior to not always give up slay the warlord points.
Also, with the Sororitas Command Squad moved to Elites, do they still require a Canoness to be purchased?
I've had a decent bit of success just by taking a couple canonesses before. Plus you can easily still fit in Uriah alongside them.Multiple CADs are going to be easier than before now that priests are an HQ choice.
Remember, Sisters of Battle Adepta Sororitas can very easily become the next Tomb Kings/Lizard Men.
If Sisters became holy aligned demons that could fly into space in giant battle pyramids and summon dinosaurs, well, I think they'd get even MORE fans to be honest.
I'm shocked. Those rules are terrible. Veridyan is like the most iconic figure in the SoB army next to Celestine and those are her stats?
Everything about her screams relics. Her sword, unique. Her bolter, unique. Her armor, unique. Her servoskull eye tech, unique. Yet they're no special rules for any of it? Seriously GW? Facepalming so hard right now. I just don't get it. Are the people writing the rules for these models just lazy or incompetent?
So you take the Canoness Veridyan, 3 units of Command squads and give them all heavy bolters, 3 units to Retributors and give them all heavy bolters for 27 heavy bolters total (15 from command squad and 12 from Retributors.
You can now put out 81 S5 Ap4 precision shots, 36 of which can be rending 2 times per game (if you also add a banner to the Retributors).
Fleet, Crusader and Move Through Cover is completely useless on command squad though...
MadCowCrazy wrote: So you take the Canoness Veridyan, 3 units of Command squads and give them all heavy bolters, 3 units to Retributors and give them all heavy bolters for 27 heavy bolters total (15 from command squad and 12 from Retributors.
You can now put out 81 S5 Ap4 precision shots, 36 of which can be rending 2 times per game (if you also add a banner to the Retributors).
Fleet, Crusader and Move Through Cover is completely useless on command squad though...
I can definitely see the synergy between Veridyan and Retributors, I'm just super disappointed Veridyan does not possess any relics. Her aesthetic is completely unique. No other armor/ power swords, eye tech look like that in the entire game. I thought for certain her power armor would have a 2/3+ invul, her sword would be hitting at AP2, and her servo eye would yield something...
Sisters are a low/bottom tier army. Would it have killed GW to give sisters players a special character that other armies envy?
Jimsolo wrote: Are Inquisitorial Psykers (the ones with the Care Bear stare communal blast power) still a thing? Or did they get cut?
They got cut a fair while ago, when the Digital Codex got updated to 7th Edition, and changed them to instead roll on the rulebook powers. Codex: Imperial Agents removed the Psyker Henchman completely. However you can add an Astropath (from the Adepta Astra Telepathica) to the Inquisitorial Henchman Warband formation. They're kinda like the Regimental Advisor that you can buy for Imperial Guard Company Command Squads (same points cost and statline), except these ones can be upgraded to have ML2 and a refractor field and have a rule that lets you re-roll reserve rolls on your next turn if you manifest a power.
buddha wrote: Hmm, bolter acolytes in power armor are looking tasty for 10pts. Some cool conversation opportunities as well. Not bad in a list with coteaz making them objective secured.
How do Acolytes in power armor with bolters stack up to Sisters? pros, cons?
buddha wrote: Hmm, bolter acolytes in power armor are looking tasty for 10pts. Some cool conversation opportunities as well. Not bad in a list with coteaz making them objective secured.
How do Acolytes in power armor with bolters stack up to Sisters? pros, cons?
Sisters get Shield of Faith (6+ Invuln and Adman Will) and Act of Faith (Preferred Enemy for a turn for basic Sisters),
Sisters have bolt guns, bolt pistol and grenades as stock.
Sisters are also BS4 rather than the Acolytes BS3
Sisters can have a Superior who is LD9 and +1A
Sisters can have squads of up to 20
They are 12pts.
Acolytes can have Land Raiders, Valkyrie (*) or Chimera as a transport (*) even if they can't start the game in it but that's really the only advantage if you are just upgrading them as Power armoured troops and you still have to buy them weapons as they only have laspistol and Chainsword as stock
Warhams-77 wrote: I'm unable to verify the post at the moment. I also do not tend to react emotionally to stuff like this as it would not change anything to the better
Screenshot by Markain on www.gw-fanworld.net - from 40kFB
I'm not sure GW should post stuff like this. If they don't plan to release plastic Sisters they should say so straight away. If they do, keep silence until the miniatures are ready and drum up interest shortly before release. Maybe they do already and this is their way? But it is getting kind of... annoying... to be honest.
I think people really need to have a sense of humor and some thicker skin.
Either they will come, or they will not but there is nothing wrong with GW taking a piss with the whole thing.
Warhams-77 wrote: I'm unable to verify the post at the moment. I also do not tend to react emotionally to stuff like this as it would not change anything to the better
Screenshot by Markain on www.gw-fanworld.net - from 40kFB
I'm not sure GW should post stuff like this. If they don't plan to release plastic Sisters they should say so straight away. If they do, keep silence until the miniatures are ready and drum up interest shortly before release. Maybe they do already and this is their way? But it is getting kind of... annoying... to be honest.
Or they could get ahead of the backlash that just sitting silently and not addressing any of the issues people are raising would ferment and defuse it by saying that plastic sisters are coming and tell people when.
What backlash?
The internet is a small minority of players of this game.
This book will come and go like a burp in the night.
Some will love it, some will hate it.
Two months from now nobody will be talking about it.
There is no backlash.
There may be people that believe that they are entitled to something, mistakenly mind you and they may feel that they will leverage this to force GW to say something but they would be mistaken.
This is a game of ups and downs, we live in their world and you either enjoy playing or it may be time to take a break until something comes along for you.
Remember, Sisters of Battle Adepta Sororitas can very easily become the next Tomb Kings/Lizard Men.
Remember, Sisters of Battle Adepta Sororitas can very easily become the next Tomb Kings/Lizard Men.
If Sisters became holy aligned demons that could fly into space in giant battle pyramids and summon dinosaurs, well, I think they'd get even MORE fans to be honest.
Question:
Can Acolytes still take Hot Shot Lasguns?
Can they take Shotguns?
I heard that you can now take an Inquisitor in Termie Armour with Dual Daemon Blades, Is this True?
Can Termie Armour Inquisitors take Lightning Claws?
Can Krazypants Still call down his Orbital Bombardment Every Single Turn?
Waaaghpower wrote: Question, if anyone knows: Can Deathwatch Veterans still take Drop Pods from the book, or do they have to walk if they're not from the DW codex?
According to GoonBandito, the only option for transport for the DW squads in this book is the Corvus Blackstar.
Waaaghpower wrote: Question, if anyone knows: Can Deathwatch Veterans still take Drop Pods from the book, or do they have to walk if they're not from the DW codex?
According to GoonBandito, the only option for transport for the DW squads in this book is the Corvus Blackstar.
Aw, darn. The short range on most of their weapons is going to be pretty difficult to find much use for without Deep Striking.
Next question, or rather, next thought: It looks like the option for a Boltgun/Shotgun combo has been removed, by virtue of no longer letting anyone swap out their Chainsword for a Boltgun.
This has me worried that the Deathwatch codex is going to be FAQd or Errata'd or something, and I'm going to have 16 nicely customized Deathwatch Veterans with a weapon loadout that I can't use.
We now effectively have 2 codecs. Even if your restricted to taking units from one or the other in separate CADs it's not that much of a tax to run double cad to have celestine and 6e codex units in one cad and a priest and C:IA units as the other cad.
Waaaghpower wrote: Question, if anyone knows: Can Deathwatch Veterans still take Drop Pods from the book, or do they have to walk if they're not from the DW codex?
According to GoonBandito, the only option for transport for the DW squads in this book is the Corvus Blackstar.
Aw, darn. The short range on most of their weapons is going to be pretty difficult to find much use for without Deep Striking.
Next question, or rather, next thought: It looks like the option for a Boltgun/Shotgun combo has been removed, by virtue of no longer letting anyone swap out their Chainsword for a Boltgun.
This has me worried that the Deathwatch codex is going to be FAQd or Errata'd or something, and I'm going to have 16 nicely customized Deathwatch Veterans with a weapon loadout that I can't use.
BloodGrin wrote: This is a game of ups and downs, we live in their world and you either enjoy playing or it may be time to take a break until something comes along for you.
I've been waiting since 3rd Ed. Getting a little restless at this point.
BloodGrin wrote: This is a game of ups and downs, we live in their world and you either enjoy playing or it may be time to take a break until something comes along for you.
I've been waiting since 3rd Ed. Getting a little restless at this point.
Still playing and buying 40k in that time or just waiting until you get the update you want for your army of choice?
Drider wrote: Hooray, new and contradictory information!
We now effectively have 2 codecs. Even if your restricted to taking units from one or the other in separate CADs it's not that much of a tax to run double cad to have celestine and 6e codex units in one cad and a priest and C:IA units as the other cad.
Customer service replies are almost never considered authoritative. E-mail them twice in an hour and get three different answers.
Drider wrote: Hooray, new and contradictory information!
We now effectively have 2 codecs. Even if your restricted to taking units from one or the other in separate CADs it's not that much of a tax to run double cad to have celestine and 6e codex units in one cad and a priest and C:IA units as the other cad.
Customer service replies are almost never considered authoritative. E-mail them twice in an hour and get three different answers.
Drider wrote: Hooray, new and contradictory information!
We now effectively have 2 codecs. Even if your restricted to taking units from one or the other in separate CADs it's not that much of a tax to run double cad to have celestine and 6e codex units in one cad and a priest and C:IA units as the other cad.
Customer service replies are almost never considered authoritative. E-mail them twice in an hour and get three different answers.
Ditto the FB team, I guess?
Yes, although the FB team has been surprisingly consistent.
Drider wrote: Hooray, new and contradictory information!
We now effectively have 2 codecs. Even if your restricted to taking units from one or the other in separate CADs it's not that much of a tax to run double cad to have celestine and 6e codex units in one cad and a priest and C:IA units as the other cad.
Customer service replies are almost never considered authoritative. E-mail them twice in an hour and get three different answers.
However the fact the named canoness says she can be taken in either codex:adeptus sororitas or codex:imperial agents suggests both are still valid. That's the only way the named cannoness makes sense.
Drider wrote: Hooray, new and contradictory information!
We now effectively have 2 codecs. Even if your restricted to taking units from one or the other in separate CADs it's not that much of a tax to run double cad to have celestine and 6e codex units in one cad and a priest and C:IA units as the other cad.
Customer service replies are almost never considered authoritative. E-mail them twice in an hour and get three different answers.
However the fact the named canoness says she can be taken in either codex:adeptus sororitas or codex:imperial agents suggests both are still valid. That's the only way the named cannoness makes sense.
Unless they update the digital codex Saturday to match the list in Codex: Imperial Agents...
Drider wrote: Hooray, new and contradictory information!
We now effectively have 2 codecs. Even if your restricted to taking units from one or the other in separate CADs it's not that much of a tax to run double cad to have celestine and 6e codex units in one cad and a priest and C:IA units as the other cad.
Customer service replies are almost never considered authoritative. E-mail them twice in an hour and get three different answers.
However the fact the named canoness says she can be taken in either codex:adeptus sororitas or codex:imperial agents suggests both are still valid. That's the only way the named cannoness makes sense.
Unless they update the digital codex Saturday to match the list in Codex: Imperial Agents...
Mr Morden wrote: Acolytes can have Land Raiders, Valkyrie (*) or Chimera as a transport (*) even if they can't start the game in it
I've seen this sentiment expressed several times throughout the thread, can we talk about it?
If an acolyte squad takes a sororitas rhino as it's dedicated transport it can absolutely start embarked on it. It doesn't matter if the unit entry is considered a different 'faction', the fact remains that you're not allying in sisters and taking rhino's from their force org, you're taking a dedicated transport that that unit has available.
Your unit being allowed to start in its dedicated transport is in play, the rule about taking allies' transports does not apply here.
Mr Morden wrote: Acolytes can have Land Raiders, Valkyrie (*) or Chimera as a transport (*) even if they can't start the game in it
I've seen this sentiment expressed several times throughout the thread, can we talk about it?
If an acolyte squad takes a sororitas rhino as it's dedicated transport it can absolutely start embarked on it. It doesn't matter if the unit entry is considered a different 'faction', the fact remains that you're not allying in sisters and taking rhino's from their force org, you're taking a dedicated transport that that unit has available.
Your unit being allowed to start in its dedicated transport is in play, the rule about taking allies' transports does not apply here.
I would hope that this is the case but its being debated already and consequently the rule is not clear I don't think - hence it needs a faq.
GW were pretty quick about FAQs for the Fury of Magnus books so they may be here - but they may also continue to be disinterested in the whole product.
http://natfka.blogspot.fi/2016/12/rumors-return-of-saint-celestine.html via Whisky Priest on Faeit 212
The rumours coming out of GWHQ suggest that Celestine will be back next year in a forthcoming Black Crusade plotbook - the same kind of thing that has seen the reappearance of Magnus, and potentially other primarchs
Manager of my local store picked it up on his last product training day down at GW towers
Manager of my local store picked it up on his last product training day down at GW towers
Natfka, some dude who isn't in the rumor tracker, "my manager heard".
Well, I'll put that on salt for the next year or so.
To be fair has anyone's rumours been reliable lately?
If only there were a place to check that!
Also, Whisky is now in the tracker. Also, Feth 'in the next year' rumors. They take forever to put down as FALSE. Not as bad as '18 months' or '2 year' rumors though.
To be fair has anyone's rumours been reliable lately?
Lady Atia, Sad Panda, and a few others.
Natfka has always been guess work.
That's kind of Naftka's mission statement, though. It's not a rumor source, it's a rumor aggregator. They basically post all rumors and let the reader sort through them. That's why I rarely visit the site. It's about as reliable as trusting the old man who stands on the street corner and insists the government is placing tracking devices in our fine American cheeses.
I don't understand why anyone would even think Naftka to be a source of rumours. All he does is post things sent to him or that he finds on the net. It would be the exact same thing as to have pretre on the rumour tracker. Afaik he/she isn't a source for rumours but compiles the sources, Naftka does the exact same thing but posts rumours sent to him or that he finds.
To be fair has anyone's rumours been reliable lately?
Lady Atia, Sad Panda, and a few others.
Natfka has always been guess work.
That's kind of Naftka's mission statement, though. It's not a rumor source, it's a rumor aggregator. They basically post all rumors and let the reader sort through them. That's why I rarely visit the site. It's about as reliable as trusting the old man who stands on the street corner and insists the government is placing tracking devices in our fine American cheeses.
Well, the glaring issue with that statement is that American cheeses are in any way "fine"
That's kind of Naftka's mission statement, though. It's not a rumor source, it's a rumor aggregator. They basically post all rumors and let the reader sort through them. That's why I rarely visit the site. It's about as reliable as trusting the old man who stands on the street corner and insists the government is placing tracking devices in our fine American cheeses.
Yes, that is obviously crazy. Everyone knows that American cheeses are far from fine!
MadCowCrazy wrote: I don't understand why anyone would even think Naftka to be a source of rumours. All he does is post things sent to him or that he finds on the net. It would be the exact same thing as to have pretre on the rumour tracker. Afaik he/she isn't a source for rumours but compiles the sources, Naftka does the exact same thing but posts rumours sent to him or that he finds.
There's plenty of archived discussion in the Rumor Tracker thread if you want to discuss it there.
While you are filling up on your us and British cheeses I'm gonna be eating up some grey knight nemesis dreadnaught cheese I've already warned my group. Dreadnaught a and penitent engines all day with inquisitor spam. I'm sure there's something that lets me build that
I feel like this book is going to start spreading that "house rule" were you need to agree on both points AND number of detachments.
If I'm playing agiest a imperial army and he says he is running 6+ detachments will be a red flag. The number of detachments should really be in proportion to the point level your playing.
Versatilebeats wrote: While you are filling up on your us and British cheeses I'm gonna be eating up some grey knight nemesis dreadnaught cheese I've already warned my group. Dreadnaught a and penitent engines all day with inquisitor spam. I'm sure there's something that lets me build that
There's a new formation for GK that makes you take 1 troop choice or fast attack choice and optionally take 1 heavy support choice. There's nothing at all for penitent engines, but why bother with those? They're really terrible.
The episode went up Tuesday night and though we discussed implications and usage we don't read rules or stats so if you go for the pics leaked by someone you may be better served depending on your question. Ep 175 of combat phase on iTunes or direct link. I'm traveling so probably can't go through messages on boards much until next week.
Happy almost-holidays, all!
Hmm..no Santa Ork emoticon.
Lockark wrote: I feel like this book is going to start spreading that "house rule" were you need to agree on both points AND number of detachments.
If I'm playing agiest a imperial army and he says he is running 6+ detachments will be a red flag. The number of detachments should really be in proportion to the point level your playing.
Why would that be a problem? Most of those 'Detachments' are going to be tiny. (I mean, the Sisters or Inquisition detachments can be as small as one model.) That's kind of backwards thinking, and really just makes most of the IA book unusable.
Lockark wrote: I feel like this book is going to start spreading that "house rule" were you need to agree on both points AND number of detachments.
If I'm playing agiest a imperial army and he says he is running 6+ detachments will be a red flag. The number of detachments should really be in proportion to the point level your playing.
Why would that be a problem? Most of those 'Detachments' are going to be tiny. (I mean, the Sisters or Inquisition detachments can be as small as one model.) That's kind of backwards thinking, and really just makes most of the IA book unusable.
I agree. Even if the book was intended to add small imperial cohorts to a larger army, there shouldn't be too much animosity toward people who want to build a fluffy imperial grab bag army. Plus, it's not like there's a decurion you can craft out of this stuff. I feel like 1850 of pure imperial agents will be underpowered in the meta.
MacPhail wrote: I agree. Even if the book was intended to add small imperial cohorts to a larger army, there shouldn't be too much animosity toward people who want to build a fluffy imperial grab bag army. Plus, it's not like there's a decurion you can craft out of this stuff. I feel like 1850 of pure imperial agents will be underpowered in the meta.
That may be true, but for many Min / Max armies we are going to see 37 points spent as many times as possible to add warlord traits. Maybe add 5 or 10 points to give the models some upgrades, but mainly it is about more rolls on the strategic warlord trait table.
Lockark wrote: I feel like this book is going to start spreading that "house rule" were you need to agree on both points AND number of detachments.
If I'm playing agiest a imperial army and he says he is running 6+ detachments will be a red flag. The number of detachments should really be in proportion to the point level your playing.
Good tournaments limit to two or three detachments for good reasons, chiefly Space Marine superfriends deathstars. I don't know if new Imperial Agents helps those much or not.
There is no limit to the number of Detachments a Battle-forged army can include.
Seems GW has absolutely no problems with the number of Detachments a player uses to make his army.
Of Course they don't. Right now GW is all about picking winners and losers and catering towards Min/Maxers. One of the best ways to do that is to encourage convoluted armies with the best parts of every Codex. Here is a list that took 2nd place at a big tourney the other day:
Spoiler:
Brett Perkins - Various Factions
Tau CAD fireblade
2x5 strike team
Ta'unar supremacy suit (triaxis ion cannonx2, pulse ordnance multidriver)
imperial bunker with (escape hatch, 1 x barricade)
Inquisition detachment:
Coteaz
2x(2 x acolyte; 1 psyker)
Daemon CAD:
Fateweaver
2x3 Nurglings
When I saw that list all I could think is "This guy gets it. He understands 7th edition, and is totally on board with what GW is trying to do." GW wishes we all played that way, except without the points. When we try to build cohesive forces with limited sources and few detachments, GW is shaking their head thinking we are playing their game wrong.
Brett is a friend of mine, and he plays to win, and GW is 100% on board with that.
I am excited they seem to have fixed the armor point totals for the basic dudesmen (also, glad I repriced the armor upgrade for corsair eldar the same way. Makes me more confident I did it appropriately)
People, this is another step toward AoSification. Next iteration of the game will be built in a way that it will be impossible put limits to 1-3 detachments.
Mark my words, the integrity of the CAD fill get the final blow, it will be all cherry-picking. No flavour.
Very convenient for those hack frauds of the designers, because I suppose design a single codex with a structure (and with weak and strong points), and balance it toward other factions is harder
UltraPrime wrote: Is this the first time we have ever had 'Sister' and 'cheese' in the same thread?
Hmmm maybe I seem to recall some expressions when the revised Dominion rules came out - "how many Scouting meltas with ignore cover!!"
Some Marine players were quite envious of the two special weapons in a 5 woman squad as well - course now the Marines have been massively cheesed up with formations and the like to compensate but it was fun whilst it lasted.
I think you are slightly off the mark in terms of what GW wants.
GW wants people to be able to build armies out of what they think is cool. So if you want to have a really pious imperial guard regiment which has a priest in every squad, and like a space marine Chaplin and friends in a Razorback that drive around with them, and an Inquisitor with a bunch of crusaders.
I think they have realized, that they can't make the game flexible enough for the creative gamer who loves the background and stop the power gamer from cherry picking.
With this in mind, the message is, and has always been, play people who play the game the same way you play it.
Got my copy last night. I love it. I can finally run the inquisition how I wanted to like a joint task force mission of all 3 with supporting military branches. (Currently I only have deathwatch/inquisition)
The jakeros got better. What the monkeys got better? Yes they did. On a roll of 6 or more you get to choose 2 options instead of rolling. That's right last night my laser cannons were shooting 60" and my acolytes were saving on 2+
I need more monkeys.
While underpowered compared to all your vehicles are free last night I was able form a force like I wanted to.
Sadly my store didn't get its copies and the Canoness models today (unless it's a really, really late delivery!), so I won't be able to pick mine up until the new year.
There is no limit to the number of Detachments a Battle-forged army can include.
Seems GW has absolutely no problems with the number of Detachments a player uses to make his army.
Of Course they don't. Right now GW is all about picking winners and losers and catering towards Min/Maxers. One of the best ways to do that is to encourage convoluted armies with the best parts of every Codex. Here is a list that took 2nd place at a big tourney the other day:
Spoiler:
Brett Perkins - Various Factions
Tau CAD fireblade
2x5 strike team
Ta'unar supremacy suit (triaxis ion cannonx2, pulse ordnance multidriver)
imperial bunker with (escape hatch, 1 x barricade)
Inquisition detachment:
Coteaz
2x(2 x acolyte; 1 psyker)
Daemon CAD:
Fateweaver
2x3 Nurglings
When I saw that list all I could think is "This guy gets it. He understands 7th edition, and is totally on board with what GW is trying to do." GW wishes we all played that way, except without the points. When we try to build cohesive forces with limited sources and few detachments, GW is shaking their head thinking we are playing their game wrong.
Brett is a friend of mine, and he plays to win, and GW is 100% on board with that.
Zero part of this list looks "fun" to play against, which I would argue is an exact COUNTER to what GW wants. You don't get to decide how "fun" is defined, so things need to be reeled back a bit.
There is no limit to the number of Detachments a Battle-forged army can include.
Seems GW has absolutely no problems with the number of Detachments a player uses to make his army.
Of Course they don't. Right now GW is all about picking winners and losers and catering towards Min/Maxers. One of the best ways to do that is to encourage convoluted armies with the best parts of every Codex. Here is a list that took 2nd place at a big tourney the other day:
Spoiler:
Brett Perkins - Various Factions
Tau CAD fireblade
2x5 strike team
Ta'unar supremacy suit (triaxis ion cannonx2, pulse ordnance multidriver)
imperial bunker with (escape hatch, 1 x barricade)
Inquisition detachment:
Coteaz
2x(2 x acolyte; 1 psyker)
Daemon CAD:
Fateweaver
2x3 Nurglings
When I saw that list all I could think is "This guy gets it. He understands 7th edition, and is totally on board with what GW is trying to do." GW wishes we all played that way, except without the points. When we try to build cohesive forces with limited sources and few detachments, GW is shaking their head thinking we are playing their game wrong.
Brett is a friend of mine, and he plays to win, and GW is 100% on board with that.
Zero part of this list looks "fun" to play against, which I would argue is an exact COUNTER to what GW wants. You don't get to decide how "fun" is defined, so things need to be reeled back a bit.
Looks fun to me. We play nasty stuff all of the time. I still have loads of fun, even playing my "noncompetitive" sisters. Perhaps you shouldn't be attempting to define fun by asking them to reel things back
There is no limit to the number of Detachments a Battle-forged army can include.
Seems GW has absolutely no problems with the number of Detachments a player uses to make his army.
Of Course they don't. Right now GW is all about picking winners and losers and catering towards Min/Maxers. One of the best ways to do that is to encourage convoluted armies with the best parts of every Codex. Here is a list that took 2nd place at a big tourney the other day:
Spoiler:
Brett Perkins - Various Factions Tau CAD fireblade 2x5 strike team Ta'unar supremacy suit (triaxis ion cannonx2, pulse ordnance multidriver) imperial bunker with (escape hatch, 1 x barricade)
Inquisition detachment: Coteaz 2x(2 x acolyte; 1 psyker)
Daemon CAD: Fateweaver 2x3 Nurglings
When I saw that list all I could think is "This guy gets it. He understands 7th edition, and is totally on board with what GW is trying to do." GW wishes we all played that way, except without the points. When we try to build cohesive forces with limited sources and few detachments, GW is shaking their head thinking we are playing their game wrong.
Brett is a friend of mine, and he plays to win, and GW is 100% on board with that.
Zero part of this list looks "fun" to play against, which I would argue is an exact COUNTER to what GW wants. You don't get to decide how "fun" is defined, so things need to be reeled back a bit.
That list looks fine to play against, because you can interact with everything in it.
2 or more Wraithknights are not fun to play against and you don't need to even cheese detachments to achieve it. Deathstars only require minimal detachment shenanigans depending on your faction and they are unfun as hell. The things that are unfun are the things that remove interaction from one side or another - a GC or Deathstar that you can't kill is unfun, because you're just trying to move your models around ineffectually while your opponent murders you. Tau and Eldar feel unfun for many people because they shoot you from beyond your range, so you do nothing but move and get shot.
You'll note that most complaints of unfun or OP come from a lack of interaction or reaction from the side of one player or the other, but of course that's also the best way to win games. Unlimited Detachments doesn't in and of itself remove interactivity, but it does open up doorways for more armies to create non-interactive armies.
Versatilebeats wrote: Got my copy last night. I love it. I can finally run the inquisition how I wanted to like a joint task force mission of all 3 with supporting military branches. (Currently I only have deathwatch/inquisition)
The jakeros got better. What the monkeys got better? Yes they did. On a roll of 6 or more you get to choose 2 options instead of rolling. That's right last night my laser cannons were shooting 60" and my acolytes were saving on 2+
I need more monkeys.
While underpowered compared to all your vehicles are free last night I was able form a force like I wanted to.
can you still attach the monkeys to the acolytes without having to play the henchmen formation
I don't know if this is still topical, but regarding the old "plastic sisters in the bin was a joke" thing we do have a reliable rumor source saying otherwise:
Wait, they weren't joking when they talked about Sisters of Battle?
ClockworkZion wrote: I don't know if this is still topical, but regarding the old "plastic sisters in the bin was a joke" thing we do have a reliable rumor source saying otherwise:
Wait, they weren't joking when they talked about Sisters of Battle?
Lady Atia
Nope :X
Yep, it has been covered previously in this thread a couple times.
I was thinking of something that would encourage more "balanced" lists. How would you feel if 8th edition stated that only units from the primary detachment (regardless of other rules) can be objective secured. Troops from the allied detachment that would normally be objective secured could simply contest. All other units from the allied detachments couldn't contest at all.
cuda1179 wrote: I was thinking of something that would encourage more "balanced" lists. How would you feel if 8th edition stated that only units from the primary detachment (regardless of other rules) can be objective secured. Troops from the allied detachment that would normally be objective secured could simply contest. All other units from the allied detachments couldn't contest at all.
Versatilebeats wrote: Monkeys are elite so you can take the inquisitorial representative and have 1-3 elites your elite choices are acolytes, demonhosts, or monkeys
But they don't have a rule like the rule for Ork Mek's that allow them to join a unit?
So they lost their ability to buff units unless you take the formation, right?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cephalobeard wrote: Zero part of this list looks "fun" to play against, which I would argue is an exact COUNTER to what GW wants. You don't get to decide how "fun" is defined, so things need to be reeled back a bit.
GW doesn't want us to have fun. They want us to call each other names, and then go home and paint. Their goal for the game is for us to not play it nearly so much. One thing they can do to facilitate that is to cater to min/maxers in an effort to strain the social contract and break up gaming clubs. It's been their strategy all the way through 7th edition.
You can see that GW is perfectly comfortable with making something less fun to drive away players. They didn't want people to play Orks, or Nids in certain ways so they wrote their codexes with rules that were designed to make them less fun to play (Mob Rule, Instinctive Behavior). I think they were generally successful. Anyone can see on a single read how those rules would make the game less fun for the units affected by them. That isn't incompetence. That was by design.
The new split rule is another example. It is no fun to play against. GW knows that. Anything they can do to put strain on the social contract and break up gaming clubs into garage-hammer players, or hobbiest that don't play. Those are the customers they want, not gamers. At least not in 7th ed. Many signs point positive for 8th edition.
Versatilebeats wrote: Monkeys are elite so you can take the inquisitorial representative and have 1-3 elites your elite choices are acolytes, demonhosts, or monkeys
But they don't have a rule like the rule for Ork Mek's that allow them to join a unit?
So they lost their ability to buff units unless you take the formation, right?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cephalobeard wrote: Zero part of this list looks "fun" to play against, which I would argue is an exact COUNTER to what GW wants. You don't get to decide how "fun" is defined, so things need to be reeled back a bit.
GW doesn't want us to have fun. They want us to call each other names, and then go home and paint. Their goal for the game is for us to not play it nearly so much. One thing they can do to facilitate that is to cater to min/maxers in an effort to strain the social contract and break up gaming clubs. It's been their strategy all the way through 7th edition.
You can see that GW is perfectly comfortable with making something less fun to drive away players. They didn't want people to play Orks, or Nids in certain ways so they wrote their codexes with rules that were designed to make them less fun to play (Mob Rule, Instinctive Behavior). I think they were generally successful. Anyone can see on a single read how those rules would make the game less fun for the units affected by them. That isn't incompetence. That was by design.
The new split rule is another example. It is no fun to play against. GW knows that. Anything they can do to put strain on the social contract and break up gaming clubs into garage-hammer players, or hobbiest that don't play. Those are the customers they want, not gamers. At least not in 7th ed. Many signs point positive for 8th edition.
He singles out pickup games against unknown opponent, and comes out strongly in favor of garage hammer games where you limit your opponents to 1 or 2 players.
Every time they do an interview that discusses balance or points costing, they actively disparage the concept.
pretre wrote: "Don't attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence."
My gaming group and I have been debating the 3 possibilities of GW.
Evil GW Incompetent GW and Disinterested GW (They just want to sell models, and don't care about the game)
I have long been in the Incompetent GW. If you don't play 40K, you could write the Ork, or Dark Eldar codex, and make those mistakes. The Eldar Codex screams incompetence. The newest Tau codex was interesting because it had both incompetence (poorly thought out and worded rules) and Disinterest or Evil (Riptide Wing, Ghostkiels).
When GW called in the TO's to re-engage competitive 40K, they made the case to them that they were disinterested in the game. They've been leaning on a few high end TO's to help them with FAQ's recently, but I didn't really buy it. Some of the decisions are so bad, and result in models that don't sell (ever seen a maleceptor on the table?), so I stuck with incompetent theory.
But with the new split rule, The Rules for Magnus, and now the Agents of the Imperium codex, I've been swayed to the Evil GW side. Nobody is that incompetent. Even someone who doesn't play 40K can understand the playability problems with the split rule. Plus wouldn't it be cool to help tell your end times narrative by introducing a bunch of OP models on the side of Chaos so that everyone started losing to chaos. It's basically what they did with the Fantasy End times. Nagash was basically nuts, and didn't work in the framework of the fantasy rule-set.
The PR disaster that was the launch of Agents of the Imperium and the removal of Celestine, and Servo Skulls flow very nicely into that narrative. You make players lament the loss of a favored model, and then when they return in a new form, more powerful than before as the answer to the current problems. It just seems like it would make as much sense to someone like Jervis. Using rules, and imbalance to tell a story.
I'm newly come to the Evil GW side, but I think I'm convinced. Perfectly rational people could go with Incompetent or disinterested, and it is clearly somewhat a combination of all 3. After all the aeronautica faction is a thing, and nothing but incompetence can explain that one.
That's a lot different than 'they don't want us to have fun'. That's in fact the exact opposite. They want us to have fun and not take things so seriously.
So his list was too resilient for what the game allows with far more board control than what is in a single list and still only got second place.
You can't make the statement of whether or not someone "gets it" when the tournament in question doesn't know what the rulez for the game are...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: nevermind. Misread something
It isn't. The Rengades of Vracks book from forgeworld changed the wording on covenant of nurgle. It's a small thing, but the taking of the covenant leads to any number of zombie units. Please don't stir the kool-aid if you don't know the flavor.
Considering that this book has 100% of inquisitors and 100% of sisters as intended, I would say otherwise.
DW and GK aren't fully loaded in because each Ordo calls on a select group. Malleus = gk, Xeno = DW, heri = sisters.
All of sisters were revised so they could have an actual book. Inquisitors already had a ebook and got revised to have their own fill in book.
I posted the SS early of the wh40kFB profile stating that this book was to revise, update and therefore consolidate all the misfits in one book. If the snooks remain available they will probably be updated to reflect the changes, if they don't it's probably because they backed down from their original intent because of crying adult babies.
Just move on from it, no one is a special flower.
Cele will probably make a return in a new red of their own as a LoW and you can all calm the f down.
I don't know of any groups that even allow the use of special characters anyways, so boner jam all you want or be a sad crying adult baby.
Pariah-Miniatures wrote: Considering that this book has 100% of inquisitors and 100% of sisters as intended, I would say otherwise.
DW and GK aren't fully loaded in because each Ordo calls on a select group. Malleus = gk, Xeno = DW, heri = sisters.
All of sisters were revised so they could have an actual book. Inquisitors already had a ebook and got revised to have their own fill in book.
I posted the SS early of the wh40kFB profile stating that this book was to revise, update and therefore consolidate all the misfits in one book. If the snooks remain available they will probably be updated to reflect the changes, if they don't it's probably because they backed down from their original intent because of crying adult babies.
Just move on from it, no one is a special flower.
Cele will probably make a return in a new red of their own as a LoW and you can all calm the f down.
I don't know of any groups that even allow the use of special characters anyways, so boner jam all you want or be a sad crying adult baby.
Isn't this exactly the kind of inflammatory stuff people were warned against earlier?
Pariah-Miniatures wrote: ...I don't know of any groups that even allow the use of special characters anyways...
That would be all groups. 3rd Ed was the last time anyone needed to ask permission.
Not using special characters is stupid. It'd be the same as not allowing troop choices. Anyone that refuses to play with legal rules is an "adult baby".
It's a fairly large perception that isn't just my own. People can bc upset about what is said but it doesn't make it any less true just because they don't like how they have projected themselves to be.
The perception of special characters may be an old one, but the idea is that they are 'cheap'. Don't rely on special gimmicks and make your own HQs. That's how it's always been perceived in my area.
But hey agents codex seemed bunk but is actually turning out to be quite nice, I'll take free warlord trait and TDA with daemon weapon in trade of servo skulls
Pariah-Miniatures wrote: It's a fairly large perception that isn't just my own. People can bc upset about what is said but it doesn't make it any less true just because they don't like how they have projected themselves to be.
The perception of special characters may be an old one, but the idea is that they are 'cheap'. Don't rely on special gimmicks and make your own HQs. That's how it's always been perceived in my area.
But hey agents codex seemed bunk but is actually turning out to be quite nice, I'll take free warlord trait and TDA with daemon weapon in trade of servo skulls
Chaplain T, pitier of the fools, tosser of the suckas! was my home made character (google him). After 3rd Ed changed chaplains to useless piles of gak I had no interest in using the standard chaplain.
Now T is a chapter master on bike because my HQ is going to have 3 wounds minimum.
Pariah-Miniatures wrote: The perception of special characters may be an old one, but the idea is that they are 'cheap'. Don't rely on special gimmicks and make your own HQs. That's how it's always been perceived in my area.
I take it you ban Wraithkights, Eldar bikes and the like then as they are cheap and OP, relying on Special gimmicks?
So his list was too resilient for what the game allows with far more board control than what is in a single list and still only got second place.
You can't make the statement of whether or not someone "gets it" when the tournament in question doesn't know what the rulez for the game are...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: nevermind. Misread something
It isn't. The Rengades of Vracks book from forgeworld changed the wording on covenant of nurgle. It's a small thing, but the taking of the covenant leads to any number of zombie units. Please don't stir the kool-aid if you don't know the flavor.
Except I play against that army at least once a month. If you are using the siege of vracks, your army is outdated. Imperial armour renegades and heretics upgraded those rules and it stipulates that the army may include A UNIT of zombies as a troop choice if you have the covenant of Nurgle. If your tourney allowed outdated rules, that doesn't point to the game being broken in any way.
Judging by the "is this cheating" thread in the other area of the forum, I'd say the players do a good job of making things not fun by themselves, they don't require a GW lead on it.
dan2026 wrote: Well I went down to gw today to get the Canoness model.
And they had exactly zero....
What the feth is going on with this model?
Still waiting for the email to say its in stock so there are probably none to be had. It appears that GW assumed they would sell a few hundred and be done with it but were wrong.
tag8833 wrote: The PR disaster that was the launch of Agents of the Imperium and the removal of Celestine....
She wasn't removed. She just wasn't included.
AotI is a gathering of basic units from various imperial factions. It IS NOT A NEW SISTERS CODEX!
The Adepta Sororitas book is still legal. Including Saint Celestine.
so are tomb kings and bretonies.
No, those are two factions from a discontinued game. They still have rules available in a new game system.
Sisters are an existing faction with a current rules set. This new book simply reprints their rules for use by allied factions.
Notice there aren't any Grey Knight characters? Oh noes! I guess Grey Knights are being squated!!!!
Except that's not exactly true. The first bit of information was that the IA dex supersedes the AS one, then they said both were valid, and AS was being updated.
Either way it's a rather poor update for sisters. The fact Celestine is gone from the store obviously means she's not meant to be used anymore. Regardless if she has rules in AS.
The fact sisters have been one minute to midnight for several years now isn't doomsaying, this is probably the last dex for 7th, and shows sisters are an afterthought at best, as the only printed dex removes their iconic hero. Even the web team considers the army a joke.
dan2026 wrote: Well I went down to gw today to get the Canoness model.
And they had exactly zero....
What the feth is going on with this model?
Still waiting for the email to say its in stock so there are probably none to be had. It appears that GW assumed they would sell a few hundred and be done with it but were wrong.
The woman there was giving me all this crap about 'well because it's made of resin, we can only make like 50 before the mold breaks...' 'this wouldn't be a problem if it was plastic as those masters last forever '
So I was like 'why the heck didn't you make it out of plastic then!?
dan2026 wrote: Well I went down to gw today to get the Canoness model.
And they had exactly zero....
What the feth is going on with this model?
Still waiting for the email to say its in stock so there are probably none to be had. It appears that GW assumed they would sell a few hundred and be done with it but were wrong.
The woman there was giving me all this crap about 'well because it's made of resin, we can only make like 50 before the mold breaks...' 'this wouldn't be a problem if it was plastic as those masters last forever '
So I was like 'why the heck didn't you make it out of plastic then!?
GWs incompetence over this thing is staggering.
Northern England store? If it's the one I'm thinking of she's rather unpleasant.
S.Y.
dan2026 wrote: Well I went down to gw today to get the Canoness model.
And they had exactly zero....
What the feth is going on with this model?
Still waiting for the email to say its in stock so there are probably none to be had. It appears that GW assumed they would sell a few hundred and be done with it but were wrong.
The woman there was giving me all this crap about 'well because it's made of resin, we can only make like 50 before the mold breaks...' 'this wouldn't be a problem if it was plastic as those masters last forever '
So I was like 'why the heck didn't you make it out of plastic then!?
GWs incompetence over this thing is staggering.
Northern England store? If it's the one I'm thinking of she's rather unpleasant.
S.Y.
Nah, Lincoln.
To be fair to the women, it's not her fault.
She is clearly caught in a gak situation.
Yeah stores managers normally know less than us and even if they do know something - GW has been so obsessed with secrecy that they have to be extremely careful.
Well, I managed to get a Canoness from the local GW today but the manager felt that he didn't have enough for his central core of regulars.
Additionally, GW seem to attempting to cater for customers who may not want both flyers from the Stormcloud Attack boxes by giving you the option for the rules and one flyer:
"This multi-part plastic and resin kit contains the components necessary to assemble an Immolator, armed with a twin-linked heavy flamer, heavy bolter or multi-melta."
The Exorcist is still advertised as plastic/ metal.
Just picked up my copy, and if Im reading this right the Inquisition section is insane.
25 points for an inquisitor in an inquisitor formation with a free warlord trait? And theres no cap on how many you can take?
Whats to stop you taking 6 and getting all the warlord traits from, I dunno, tactical?
Do they double up? Like if I manage to roll 6 times on Strategic and get "divide to conquer" every time does that mean my opponents reserve rolls are at a -6 and therefore never come on?
I must be reading this wrong, right?
Edit: oh, and they made the needle pistol AP 6 for no damn reason, thanks for that.
Some unlucky chap at the GW production facility will spend the next few months making Canoness Veridyan while muttering "why didn't they make this in plastic".
At least there will be proof people want Sisters of Battle.
They make one new model, and they literally cannot make enough of them!
Those mythical "8 sisters players" must have a huge pile of resin to play with right now
Yes lets hope they see it as a missed opportunity and decide to do some Sisters rather than "wow think of how many more it would have sold if it was a Marine."
I'm half convinced that the whole "Made to Order" initiative is caused by one of the old metal mold-guys' annual review.
Manager: You're retiring next year? What would you like to do between now an then?
OMMG: Metal. I'm done with the plastic press. Damn thing runs itself.
Manager: What about resin? We don't do metal anymore, and your skills are useful there.
OMMG: Metal. Resin is crap. Just give me ingots and I'll turn out howmany ever of anything... as long as it is in metal.
Manager: Um... I guess we can do that... but demand for the metal ones aren't going to be high. You'll have to clean the bathrooms when we don't have orders for you to fill.
OMMG: Deal.
Pretty sure that OMMG is whistling at work and the manager is cleaning the breakroom bathroom.
Pariah-Miniatures wrote: The perception of special characters may be an old one, but the idea is that they are 'cheap'. Don't rely on special gimmicks and make your own HQs. That's how it's always been perceived in my area.
Okay, cool, then I guess I'll make my own super-cool living saint with a super-cool background. Oh wait there are rules for customizable living saint, right? Oh no there aren't. Well, I'll make a custom Canoness with jump pack then! Oh wait there ain't rule for that too.
I really can't imagine why Sisters players don't use customizable characters .
Ragnar69 wrote: I think most people just want this model and not a full sisters army. Not to say that sister wouldn't sell well, just not to the extent of this model.
So his list was too resilient for what the game allows with far more board control than what is in a single list and still only got second place.
You can't make the statement of whether or not someone "gets it" when the tournament in question doesn't know what the rulez for the game are...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: nevermind. Misread something
It isn't. The Rengades of Vracks book from forgeworld changed the wording on covenant of nurgle. It's a small thing, but the taking of the covenant leads to any number of zombie units. Please don't stir the kool-aid if you don't know the flavor.
Except I play against that army at least once a month. If you are using the siege of vracks, your army is outdated. Imperial armour renegades and heretics upgraded those rules and it stipulates that the army may include A UNIT of zombies as a troop choice if you have the covenant of Nurgle. If your tourney allowed outdated rules, that doesn't point to the game being broken in any way.
Also, they still only placed second.
It's great you play against it. I own the book. The most recent version of the the detachment is in this book.
That has a bunch of stuff in it, as well as a very specific army list for Renegades of Vraks.
The army list is fundamentally the same, as are the warlord traits, with a couple of exceptions:
- First: you make not take the Covenant/Dedication of Tzeentch or Slaanesh anywhere in the army. - Second: Heretek Magus, Mutant Overlord and Bloody-Handed Reaver demagogue devotions are replaced by Ordnance Tyrant and Shock Legion Taskmaster. - Third: Special Characters which are Vraks-only. - Fourth: Chaos Sigil grant stubborn and a re-roll per game turn rather than the ability to completely ignore a failed check. - Fifth: No Valkyries or Arvus lighter. Like you were gonna take a frakkin Arvus anyway.
The rule for Covenant of Nurgle now reads that " you may take units of plague zombies or 1 unit of blight drones." That's a plural. Chaos spawn also got loosened up.
I played this list the entire ITC 2016 season, got first in my division, and placed highly at several GT's with no list challenges. I know you are incorrect.
dan2026 wrote: The woman there was giving me all this crap about 'well because it's made of resin, we can only make like 50 before the mold breaks...' 'this wouldn't be a problem if it was plastic as those masters last forever '
So I was like 'why the heck didn't you make it out of plastic then!?
GWs incompetence over this thing is staggering.
Because plastic moulds cost way more to manufacture. It also affects how the miniature is designed, so they'd not only have to have an expected number of sales they'd have to know that number months in advance. And even plastic isn't immune to being under produced, you make as many as you think you're going to sell, if you need to make more then you have to go back to the production line and tell them to make more then package them up and send them to distribution centres across the globe, doing that takes time.
Had a quick flip trough the codex on the ferry home and 2 things stood out like sore tumbs.
First was the 100 Crusader/Arco/Death cult formation and the other was the Inquisition one.
The monkey rule as we know is on a 6+ you can chose 2, the ones that seem best are 1+ armour and Rending.
So you can have a unit with 10 acolytes with 2+ armour save 100% guaranteed. The question is if you get the GK, SoB or Deathwatch squad in the unit as well. If you do you could have 20 more 2+ armoured models. If it's units of Crusaders instead of models you could have 10 3++ saves in there as well.
Adding a tech priest enginseer is completely useless, you can't add servitors and the only thing he can do is repair vehicles or give one machine spirit. So you can't add servitors to the unit, not through any means I've seen.
dan2026 wrote: The woman there was giving me all this crap about 'well because it's made of resin, we can only make like 50 before the mold breaks...' 'this wouldn't be a problem if it was plastic as those masters last forever ' So I was like 'why the heck didn't you make it out of plastic then!?
GWs incompetence over this thing is staggering.
Because plastic moulds cost way more to manufacture. It also affects how the miniature is designed, so they'd not only have to have an expected number of sales they'd have to know that number months in advance. And even plastic isn't immune to being under produced, you make as many as you think you're going to sell, if you need to make more then you have to go back to the production line and tell them to make more then package them up and send them to distribution centres across the globe, doing that takes time.
If only there were some way of gauging interest before you release a product... Some platform you could use to ask your customerbase about what future releases they would be interested in...
Adding a tech priest enginseer is completely useless, you can't add servitors and the only thing he can do is repair vehicles or give one machine spirit. So you can't add servitors to the unit, not through any means I've seen.
Thats correct - it would be fluffy to have one in your unit but not exactly clever - also its stupid that the Tech-Priest can only awaken Astra Militarum vehicles and not say Ad Mech ones.
The plastic sister in the immolator is pretty much only a torso and head. She doesn't have a back as that part is pushed against the chair. Her legs are stuck to the chair. The only thing you can use her for is as drivers for other vehicles unless you do some serious conversion work.
MadCowCrazy wrote: Had a quick flip trough the codex on the ferry home and 2 things stood out like sore tumbs.
First was the 100 Crusader/Arco/Death cult formation and the other was the Inquisition one.
The monkey rule as we know is on a 6+ you can chose 2, the ones that seem best are 1+ armour and Rending.
So you can have a unit with 10 acolytes with 2+ armour save 100% guaranteed. The question is if you get the GK, SoB or Deathwatch squad in the unit as well. If you do you could have 20 more 2+ armoured models. If it's units of Crusaders instead of models you could have 10 3++ saves in there as well.
Adding a tech priest enginseer is completely useless, you can't add servitors and the only thing he can do is repair vehicles or give one machine spirit. So you can't add servitors to the unit, not through any means I've seen.
They make one new model, and they literally cannot make enough of them!
Those mythical "8 sisters players" must have a huge pile of resin to play with right now
Actually it just shows you how popular that hack Blanche is and that some people will buy anything they think is limited. They could just be Lady Gaga fans also.
But realistically it shows people will buy 1 £16 figure based on a "iconic" piece of art. (jesus I feel dirty calling it art let alone iconic)
They make one new model, and they literally cannot make enough of them!
Those mythical "8 sisters players" must have a huge pile of resin to play with right now
Actually it just shows you how popular that hack Blanche is and that some people will buy anything they think is limited. They could just be Lady Gaga fans also.
But realistically it shows people will buy 1 £16 figure based on a "iconic" piece of art. (jesus I feel dirty calling it art let alone iconic)
this is exactly how gw see it and not the first SoB figure since 2003??
edit do you think Hieronymus Bosch is an artist ? because blanche seems very inspired by him.
Maybe......ok hear me out.......they're making a new celestine model/rules? They could easily put it in any of the supplements. Heck, even something black crusade related.
I feel like anyone who wanted Celestine already owns her by now. Are there people complaining who don't have her already? I'm honestly curious as to why they haven't.
I know, I know, people would play sisters they made all plastic sisters, but they haven't yet. They just rearranged how they boxed/priced their current ones. It's not a sisters update, its not an anything update if you ask me. Its just a nice physical copy of previously all digital rulesets. I don't think its worth getting upset over.
Ragnar69 wrote: I think most people just want this model and not a full sisters army. Not to say that sister wouldn't sell well, just not to the extent of this model.
That is probably a safe bet as anyone wanting a full sisters army would get it, as well as anyone else liking it.
.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NivlacSupreme wrote: So if immolators are plastic doesn't that mean that there is technically one plastic sister? The lady manning the gun...
IIRC there is that one, and an upper body vehicle crew.
If only there were some way of gauging interest before you release a product... Some platform you could use to ask your customerbase about what future releases they would be interested in...
Unless you're paying upfront I don't think that'd be a very good indicator. On top of that it would take longer to get the model from announcement to official release so people would just complain about that.
So it's not impossible to do the sisters in plastic like they claimed. Also I have a Veridiyan and her mouldin isn't very clear. The little skulls on her corset thingy are more like blobs.
MadCowCrazy wrote: I have the codex in hand if anyone has any questions, I also have 2 spare Canonesses if anyone is really desperate.
Okay question on something.
What is the wording on the Jokaero. Does it say unit or Inquisitorial warband.
I am holding off buying the book. (Mainly cause I don't have the models for an army) but was thinking of getting into the faction but want to know if it is workable or not to start.
What is the wording on the Jokaero. Does it say unit or Inquisitorial warband.
It says "unit". The Inquisitorial Henchman Warband is the name of the special formation that makes different entry choices joined in one unit, like Deathwatch Kill Teams formations. This is thus the only way to fully benefit from Jokaero.
I am holding off buying the book. (Mainly cause I don't have the models for an army) but was thinking of getting into the faction but want to know if it is workable or not to start.
Let's say it works differently. Plenty of things to try, and some things do indeed not work anymore.
Uriah Jacobus, for example, is far less interesting in this version.
If only there were some way of gauging interest before you release a product... Some platform you could use to ask your customerbase about what future releases they would be interested in...
Unless you're paying upfront I don't think that'd be a very good indicator. On top of that it would take longer to get the model from announcement to official release so people would just complain about that.
If you tell people what is going on, give them little sneak peaks during the design process etc. then they will not be complaining.
So his list was too resilient for what the game allows with far more board control than what is in a single list and still only got second place.
You can't make the statement of whether or not someone "gets it" when the tournament in question doesn't know what the rulez for the game are...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: nevermind. Misread something
It isn't. The Rengades of Vracks book from forgeworld changed the wording on covenant of nurgle. It's a small thing, but the taking of the covenant leads to any number of zombie units. Please don't stir the kool-aid if you don't know the flavor.
Except I play against that army at least once a month. If you are using the siege of vracks, your army is outdated. Imperial armour renegades and heretics upgraded those rules and it stipulates that the army may include A UNIT of zombies as a troop choice if you have the covenant of Nurgle. If your tourney allowed outdated rules, that doesn't point to the game being broken in any way.
Also, they still only placed second.
It's great you play against it. I own the book. The most recent version of the the detachment is in this book.
That has a bunch of stuff in it, as well as a very specific army list for Renegades of Vraks.
The army list is fundamentally the same, as are the warlord traits, with a couple of exceptions:
- First: you make not take the Covenant/Dedication of Tzeentch or Slaanesh anywhere in the army.
- Second: Heretek Magus, Mutant Overlord and Bloody-Handed Reaver demagogue devotions are replaced by Ordnance Tyrant and Shock Legion Taskmaster.
- Third: Special Characters which are Vraks-only.
- Fourth: Chaos Sigil grant stubborn and a re-roll per game turn rather than the ability to completely ignore a failed check.
- Fifth: No Valkyries or Arvus lighter. Like you were gonna take a frakkin Arvus anyway.
The rule for Covenant of Nurgle now reads that " you may take units of plague zombies or 1 unit of blight drones." That's a plural. Chaos spawn also got loosened up.
I played this list the entire ITC 2016 season, got first in my division, and placed highly at several GT's with no list challenges. I know you are incorrect.
Hmmm... Could have sworn the book that was written a year after had said it was the updated army list and that since it included every option while including new rules and units it would then take precedence...
My bad apparently. Congratulations on you tournament victories!
Adding a tech priest enginseer is completely useless, you can't add servitors and the only thing he can do is repair vehicles or give one machine spirit. So you can't add servitors to the unit, not through any means I've seen.
Thats correct - it would be fluffy to have one in your unit but not exactly clever - also its stupid that the Tech-Priest can only awaken Astra Militarum vehicles and not say Ad Mech ones.
Well technically they can 'awaken' all the Ad Mech vehicles in the game.
Adding a tech priest enginseer is completely useless, you can't add servitors and the only thing he can do is repair vehicles or give one machine spirit. So you can't add servitors to the unit, not through any means I've seen.
Thats correct - it would be fluffy to have one in your unit but not exactly clever - also its stupid that the Tech-Priest can only awaken Astra Militarum vehicles and not say Ad Mech ones.
Well technically they can 'awaken' all the Ad Mech vehicles in the game.
They can only grant Power of the Machine Spirit to Astra Millitarum vehicles which is real dumb. They can repair any vehicle.
