"Adeptus" lol.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:
I'd put it like this:
Sisters of Battle should be "peak human": the best of humanity. Space Marines are not the best of humanity, they are the best abhumans humanity can create. On the other hand, Sisters of Battle should be immune to chaos influence, because psycho-surgery and brainwashing are no substitute for True Faith. Grey Knights should be immune to chaos influence too, because they have sacrificed even more of their humanity than regular marines, with anything that chaos could latch onto excised to the point where they're not really people any more.

So...Grey Knights are basically Flesh Golems?

Basically, yes. The Grey Knight brain should be half way between regular Space Marines and Servitors - sufficiently brutalised that they lack the ability to do anything that would let them fall to chaos, but not brutalised so much that they just stand in the corner drooling on themselves.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:
I'd put it like this:
Sisters of Battle should be "peak human": the best of humanity. Space Marines are not the best of humanity, they are the best abhumans humanity can create. On the other hand, Sisters of Battle should be immune to chaos influence, because psycho-surgery and brainwashing are no substitute for True Faith. Grey Knights should be immune to chaos influence too, because they have sacrificed even more of their humanity than regular marines, with anything that chaos could latch onto excised to the point where they're not really people any more.

So...Grey Knights are basically Flesh Golems?

Basically, yes. The Grey Knight brain should be half way between regular Space Marines and Servitors - sufficiently brutalised that they lack the ability to do anything that would let them fall to chaos, but not brutalised so much that they just stand in the corner drooling on themselves.

I'm betting part of it is the Apothecary taking a tub of spackle and filling in all those "bothersome wrinkles" to ward against Chaos.

 Manchu wrote:
"Adeptus" lol.

They can't even remember how to spell the factions name. Epic Fail.

After the whole "Retributor with Heavy Bolter" (which was clearly a multi-melta), this whole Adeptus thing doesn't bug me.

I can't help but note the language they use in describing the Sisters of Battle Codex and the Blood Angels Codex...

The SoB have updated rules for 6th edition. BA don't...

BA have 360 views of models and will get updated with FAQ's. The SoB don't have that in their description...

 Lynata wrote:
Plus they just got their own section on the website.

What website? They've always had a section on the GW website.

drbored wrote:
And from a business perspective

Ah, but if you're considering that angle, then this mini-update makes absolutely no business sense. Why spend the time and money on updating them when they'll just be handed over to FW, who will then need to publish the rules themselves anyway? That would make this mini-update completely pointless.

 Lynata wrote:
"The uniforms of the Adepta Sororitas are based upon the original garments worn by the Daughters of the Emperor. The Orders of the Ebon Chalice and Valorous Heart display the colours of the original Convents, unchanged for 4.000 years. The other Orders continue this principle with only minor modifications to distinguish them on the battlefield. The Orders Militant make use of three main colours in the design of their uniforms; black, white and red."

However, GW also released a Painting Masterclass article for the SoB to accompany the 3E Codex, which included a colour scheme section where they elaborated a bit on the concept of re-arranging these three "sanctioned" colours for use with a Minor Order, or the option of using completely "Alternate colour schemes":

I have to say, I've never liked this piece of fluff. It seems like it's needlessly limiting the creativity in players in a hobby where creativity plays a big role. I've seen some very nice paintjobs deviate massively from the "sanctioned" colours, and I don't think it's right for those players to be told that their paintjobs, that they've put effort into, are "wrong". My own Minor Order violates it, even, their primary colour being grey. Personally, I'd prefer if this particular piece of fluff were retconned, or just quitely forgotten. Major Orders can still look the same, of course, but Minor Orders should be completely unrestricted.

 Manchu wrote:
I'd rather have them all in power heels

Oh, hey there, Blanche. I didn't know that you were a moderator here.

 Manchu wrote:
"Adeptus" lol.

You mean because you really want the codex to be called "Adeptae Sorroritatum"? Or maybe "Addeptarum Sororitas"?

drbored wrote:
I can't help but note the language they use in describing the Sisters of Battle Codex and the Blood Angels Codex...

The SoB have updated rules for 6th edition. BA don't...

BA have 360 views of models and will get updated with FAQ's. The SoB don't have that in their description...

I wouldn't worry about it. Plastics are the pivotal factor here, IMO. The SoB will get their real update once those are able to be released.

Also, porting the SoB over from a WD is probably more complex than doing so from a codex, it could be that they decided to do some extra work on the SoB anyway, since they'd take more effort.

Maybe I'm blind but where does it say it's a digital codex?

Edit: NVM I see way up on the top left corner.

 Necrosis wrote:
Maybe I'm blind but where does it say it's a digital codex?

It does say "Avaliable on the iBookstore" in the top left of BrookM's picture.

Edit: NVM, you saw so for yourself.

Does anyone have a link cause I can't find it.

Drakka77 wrote:
Does anyone have a link cause I can't find it.

Link to what? It hasn't even been announced yet. These are pics from the white dwarf that comes out tomorrow.

Troike wrote:What website? They've always had a section on the GW website.

Nah, they were "Witch Hunters" for quite a while.

Troike wrote:I have to say, I've never liked this piece of fluff. It seems like it's needlessly limiting the creativity in players in a hobby where creativity plays a big role. I've seen some very nice paintjobs deviate massively from the "sanctioned" colours, and I don't think it's right for those players to be told that their paintjobs, that they've put effort into, are "wrong". My own Minor Order violates it, even, their primary colour being grey. Personally, I'd prefer if this particular piece of fluff were retconned, or just quitely forgotten. Major Orders can still look the same, of course, but Minor Orders should be completely unrestricted.

But uniformity is, I think, a rather important element in their fluff. It reflects their unity as a singular Sisterhood compared to the many Marine Chapters that all have different cultures, and plays on their respect for tradition and history concerning their own origins.

When you really want to use different colours for your Order, then it's probably not surprising that you wouldn't like this piece of fluff. But does this mean it is bad ("needlessly limiting"), or are you merely influenced by your personal preferences? It's no different from, say, wanting to play female Space Marines, and one could well argue with the same good reasons you have put forth.
Somewhere, there will always be a border where one will either have to ignore the material, or cave in and adjust one's ideas.

You aren't wrong.

Gav Thorpe wrote:With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong.

It's just that your interpretation is not supported/reflected by the interpretations of the people who wrote the Codex, and this is something you will have to deal with as a result of the decision that you made.
For what it's worth, Forge World obviously leans more towards your opinion.

I like these limitations for the aforementioned reasons, so if you had your wish, then suddenly I would be "wrong". There's just no way to please everyone, but I wouldn't put it against GW that not all their armies offer the same degree of customisation. As I've recently mentioned in that "fav part about IG" thread, customisation may even be just as much of a defining aspect of an army (IG) as uniformity is for others (Sisters).
And when you start with colours, where do you stop? Suddenly we're arriving at Mitchell's novels and drunk Sisters Superior - because "the Imperium is huge, they can be different" has been used to explain that as well ...

The chan link please so I can read what is out so far, please.

Drakka77 wrote:
The chan link please so I can read what is out so far, please.

We don't really have it, that I know of. I try to avoid 4chan. There is no more information on the codex than we have posted though. It is literally just a blurb in WD.

 Lynata wrote:
And when you start with colours, where do you stop? Suddenly we're arriving at Mitchell's novels and drunk Sisters Superior - because "the Imperium is huge, they can be different" has been used to explain that as well ...

Woah, hey now, I think that's a bit of a huge leap. It's their mindset and organisation that binds them together, varying colours really aren't a huge deal. And, this being 40K, it's going to be something that a lot of hobyists tinker and experiment with anyway. It seems silly to limit the SoB to three colours when pretty much every other army can be any colour they want to be.

 Lynata wrote:
When you really want to use different colours for your Order, then it's probably not surprising that you wouldn't like this piece of fluff.

I'm not just disliking it for personal reasons. Most of my post was about how it limits everybody, not just myself.

 pretre wrote:

Drakka77 wrote:
The chan link please so I can read what is out so far, please.

We don't really have it, that I know of. I try to avoid 4chan. There is no more information on the codex than we have posted though. It is literally just a blurb in WD.

So the only available info is that in the OP, or has there been rumor-monger confirmation, etc?

I see 11 pages but no update to the OP so I don't know if there's new info or not... summary would be appreciated

 RiTides wrote:
So the only available info is that in the OP, or has there been rumor-monger confirmation, etc?

I see 11 pages but no update to the OP so I don't know if there's new info or not... summary would be appreciated

There's really just the blurb from the picture. Rumor mongers have speculated but we have actual confirmation that it appears in white dwarf.

 RiTides wrote:

 pretre wrote:

Drakka77 wrote:
The chan link please so I can read what is out so far, please.

We don't really have it, that I know of. I try to avoid 4chan. There is no more information on the codex than we have posted though. It is literally just a blurb in WD.

So the only available info is that in the OP, or has there been rumor-monger confirmation, etc?

I see 11 pages but no update to the OP so I don't know if there's new info or not... summary would be appreciated

On page 10 is a new photograph of the same thing, and that is all there is really.

Troike wrote:Woah, hey now, I think that's a bit of a huge leap. It's their mindset and organisation that binds them together, varying colours really aren't a huge deal.

I'm just saying it's a visual representation of that mindset, 's all.

Troike wrote:I'm not just disliking it for personal reasons. Most of my post was about how it limits everybody, not just myself.

I know, but ... it's the same for female Space Marines. Would we argue about that? [edit] Actually, some people do - goes to show how personal preferences can affect this, though.

Don't get me wrong, I know well how you feel when something one likes a lot isn't supported or even outright contradicted in the material. FFG's decision to basically turn the Sisters into Space Magicians was a huge blow for me, so much so that it turned me off of DH and will likely keep me from buying into their 2nd edition. I can only be fortunate that SO FAR Games Workshop did not disappoint me in a similar manner.
You went with your preferred colour in spite of the material, so obviously it's something you feel strong enough about to accept inconsistency to Codex fluff (which I think you value highly).

 Troike wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I'd rather have them all in power heels

Oh, hey there, Blanche. I didn't know that you were a moderator here.

You should be so blessed, pah!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DrunkPhilisoph wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
"Adeptus" lol.

You mean because you really want the codex to be called "Adeptae Sorroritatum"? Or maybe "Addeptarum Sororitas"?

Yes that is exactly what I mean.

Yeah, the OP should be updated with this:

 Lynata wrote:
I know, but ... it's the same for female Space Marines. Would we argue about that?

No, because that's a major contradiction of their established background. Different coloured Sisters, on the other hand, hardly seem like such a major transgression.

It just seems like such a... petty thing to do, limiting their colours. Most hobbyists like to customise paintschemes, and with any most other armies (Wolves and Gks aside, but they have no successors), the fluff allows for it. But for us? Suddenly, there's fluff saying that you can only use three colours, or you're wrong. Sounds rather unfair.

 Lynata wrote:
You went with your preferred colour in spite of the material, so obviously it's something you feel strong enough about to accept inconsistency to Codex fluff

I didn't know about it at the time. I just fiddled with the Soulstorm painter until I got a colourscheme that I liked the look of.

 Lynata wrote:
Codex fluff (which I think you value highly).

I do. Don't get me wrong, I find that codexes generally are the best at portraying them. But that doesn't mean that I have to like everything in the codexes. You yourself don't like Ward's Praxedes retcon.

 pretre wrote:
Yeah, the OP should be updated with this:

Done, now RTides can rest easy.

 Manchu wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Yeah, the OP should be updated with this:

Done, now RTides can rest easy.

Awww, thanks!

Drakka77 wrote:
The chan link please so I can read what is out so far, please.

Well there is the magic of Google that you can use to help you there.

But when it comes to Sisters, that one image is it.

Also anything on 4chan doesn't usually stay there long.

 Troike wrote:
Most hobbyists like to customise paintschemes, and with any other army, the fluff allows for it. But for us? Suddenly, there's fluff saying that you can only use three colours, or you're wrong. Sounds rather unfair.

There's soft fluff and hard fluff, I guess. Somebody might really want to paint their Ultramarines red and the Blood Angels blue. As for the SoB, the comments Lynata mentions are ambiguous. What does "minor modifications" mean? I've argued in the past that the Blue Robe scheme can reasonably fit within the ambit of "minor modifications." But that doesn't get you to painting your Sisters hot pink and orange ... but at that point, I think we're in red Ultramarines territory.

All of this could be settled with a new dex of course. Maybe this digital one will include some fluff?

I think the Order of Our Martyred Lady gives us a loophole to abuse for alternate colors: significance to the order due to a historical event in their past. It's the only reason Martyred Lady has red robes after all.

 Manchu wrote:
Maybe this digital one will include some fluff?

Someone's been taking their crazy pills.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I think the Order of Our Martyred Lady gives us a loophole to abuse for alternate colors: significance to the order due to a historical event in their past. It's the only reason Martyred Lady has red robes after all.

Yep, that's a great point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Maybe this digital one will include some fluff?

Someone's been taking their crazy pills.

It's getting to be super frustrating with GW on this SoB issue. It's one thing that they say nothing generally to their customers about releases but I think we're in a separate zone with the SoB where it really is a matter of faith. Which I suppose is fitting in a typically cruel way. Never will I understand why this company is so adverse to its customers.

 pretre wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Maybe this digital one will include some fluff?

Someone's been taking their crazy pills.

Remember, the blue ones keep you from screaming.

Troike wrote:No, because that's a major contradiction of their established background. Different coloured Sisters, on the other hand, hardly seem like such a major transgression. [...] I didn't know about it at the time. I just fiddled with the Soulstorm painter until I got a colourscheme that I liked the look of.

Ahh. Well, for what it's worth I would certainly agree that GW could have made it much more obvious. I still like the idea, but at the same time I feel sorry you got caught in this trap.

What is and isn't a major contradiction seems to hinge largely on how often something is pointed out in the material here. If only the painting guides would tell us about Space Marines having to be male, how would this affect public perception? Same thing for the Imperial Guard, though ironically there it's people argueing they supposedly don't have female troops. Again a matter of representation.

Troike wrote:You yourself don't like Ward's Praxedes retcon.

And I'm still struggling with this...

ClockworkZion wrote:I think the Order of Our Martyred Lady gives us a loophole to abuse for alternate colors: significance to the order due to a historical event in their past. It's the only reason Martyred Lady has red robes after all.

Although red was already a "sanctioned" colour long before Armageddon... it's one of the three that were part of the original uniforms of the Daughters of the Emperor.

I'm sorry! No, not the whip!

pretre wrote:

Manchu wrote:Maybe this digital one will include some fluff?

Someone's been taking their crazy pills.

You guys certainly make it much easier to deal with how GW treats us. Thanks.

 Manchu wrote:
Somebody might really want to paint their Ultramarines red and the Blood Angels blue.

That's accounted for, though. Both of those Chapters can spawn successors. Changing a canon faction's paintscheme would obviously be a major fluff violation, but making your own faction and giving them unique colours? Not a problem.

 Manchu wrote:
But that doesn't get you to painting your Sisters hot pink and orange ...

The Marines and the Guard also get to be pretty much any colour they want. Again, it's a matter of creativity. If the fluff of most other armies let's them utilise every colour avliable, I think it's unfair to limit SoB players in such an extreme way.

 Manchu wrote:
but at that point, I think we're in red Ultramarines territory.

We would be, were anybody advocating that we can have yellow Martyred Lady Sisters, or Valorous Heart Sisters with purple gauntlets. But Minor Orders are not established factions, and specifically exist to let the players make their own custom faction. In light of this given customisibility, in fact, a three colour limit seems especially odd. "Oh sure, make your own unique faction, just don't go beyond these three colours!"

 Manchu wrote:
All of this could be settled with a new dex of course. Maybe this digital one will include some fluff?

Don't know about the digital one, but the actual one sure will.

 Lynata wrote:

ClockworkZion wrote:I think the Order of Our Martyred Lady gives us a loophole to abuse for alternate colors: significance to the order due to a historical event in their past. It's the only reason Martyred Lady has red robes after all.

Although red was already a "sanctioned" colour long before Armageddon... it's one of the three that were part of the original uniforms of the Daughters of the Emperor.

I'm sorry! No, not the whip!

Stop struggling and it won't hurt as much!

More seriously, the point was they changed their colors due to significance, opening the door for others to do the same. As long as you can justify a historical meaning then it's not an issue.

 Troike wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Somebody might really want to paint their Ultramarines red and the Blood Angels blue.

That's accounted for, though. Both of those Chapters can spawn successors.

That's not what I said. I said there are probably people who want to paint their Ultramarines red.

 Troike wrote:
But Minor Orders are not established factions, and specifically exist to let the players make their own custom faction

Hey no one is going to stop you from painting your Sisters hot pink or whatever. Whether anyone else in the world would say "yeah, that makes sense given the published fluff" is a different issue.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Lynata wrote:
I'm sorry! No, not the whip!

Stop struggling and it won't hurt as much!

I sense a disturbing lack of contrition ...

Yes, red was already one of the trifecta hues BUT the point about changing livery thanks to history remains valid. The real question, as things stand, is about "minor modifications." And it's not answerable on the face of the text if one is unwilling to include FW as "canon" material.

 Manchu wrote:
That's not what I said. I said there are probably people who want to paint their Ultramarines red.

Right, and I also said that changing an established faction was different than customising the colours of your own custom factions. Successors merely provide a way of getting "clones" of these Chapters without actually clashing with the fluff.

 Manchu wrote:
Hey no one is going to stop you from painting your Sisters hot pink or whatever. Whether anyone else in the world would say "yeah, that makes sense given the published fluff" is a different issue.

But it's not just a matter of "obnoxious" colours. There's also colours like blue or tan, fairly neutral, "serious" colours that wouldn't look silly.

This issue still exists with the "fully customisible" IG and Marines, anyway. Would it make any more sense to have them in pink? Not really, and yet those armies have no barriers to what colours they can be painted. Silliness is silliness, but far from all colours would look silly on the Sisters.

 Troike wrote:
But it's not just a matter of "obnoxious" colours.

Well it is important to read the whole post ...

 Manchu wrote:
The real question, as things stand, is about "minor modifications." And it's not answerable on the face of the text if one is unwilling to include FW as "canon" material.

Manchu wrote:The real question, as things stand, is about "minor modifications."

I think the sentence following that one in the text is the actual problem:

"The Orders Militant make use of three main colours in the design of their uniforms; black, white and red."

Of course, then we could still argue about the definition of what "main colours" means, since this obviously opens a door for limited use of "secondary colours". But even then we'd still have the WD painting guide to deal with:

"Whether you decide to paint your Sisters of Battle in the uniform of one of the major convents or want to create your own using the same heraldry, the same colours and techniques should still prove useful. Of course, you may simply choose to use a whole new colour scheme from your own imagination. Here are a few examples of dramatically different colour schemes to get the inspiration flowing."

The last two sentences are also important, though - GW is completely fine with gamers using colour schemes not supported by the fluff, and even supports the idea by having posting examples of such colour schemes in WD. I still understand the concerns regarding the conflict with what the Codex says, though, and think Troike basically got cheated by the fluff not being "available enough"...

Actually, re-reading the text, with much goodwill one could still argue for different colours just because it's written so vague.

I'm afraid I'm having a hard time seeing why everyone is so hung up about the colors of Sisters of Battle.

If you want their skin to be green and their hair hot pink and their armor a rainbow to rival the most colorful clowns, that's your prerogative. I've seen Hello Kitty Necrons, I've seen Space Goats, I've seen an entire IG regiment made of converted Skaven, and I've seen a whole Space Marine force made to look like old fashioned diving suits. And then there's the Angry Marines.

If you want to make your own fluff, what's stopping you? If you want to devote your force to an established army, do that, there's lots of people that do. If you want to create a new faction of the Sisters of Battle, go for it! Convert them to Chaos, convert them to the Greater Good, convert them to the Waaagh!, it's YOUR ARMY. You spend hundreds of dollars on those figures, don't get hung up on some bit of fluff that some egghead in the UK wrote up!

@Lynata:

Well we already know that not every Order uses all three colors -- and that's before we get into the area of "minor modifications."

The trifecta hues are "main" colors, just as it says. This what I mean about the Blue Robe reasonably interpreted as a "minor modification." We've got white and blue; one of the main colors is present.

Also you underlined "the same colours" but please read the sentence to its end: "should still prove useful" -- it doesn't say "must always be present."

drbored wrote:If you want to make your own fluff, what's stopping you? If you want to devote your force to an established army, do that, there's lots of people that do. If you want to create a new faction of the Sisters of Battle, go for it! Convert them to Chaos, convert them to the Greater Good, convert them to the Waaagh!, it's YOUR ARMY. You spend hundreds of dollars on those figures, don't get hung up on some bit of fluff that some egghead in the UK wrote up!

And that's even what said "eggheads" are saying themselves!

But some people just really like the original material and strive to stick close to it as a matter of principle. What we have here is an issue where a detail was noticed too late.

Manchu wrote:The trifecta hues are "main" colors, just as it says. This what I mean about the Blue Robe reasonably interpreted as a "minor modification." We've got white and blue; one of the main colors is present.

With the robes as a whole being a rather major part of the outfit, *I* would not call that a minor modification anymore. The difference between main colours and others is, I think, that the main colours are the defining ones, the ones that dominate the uniform. An example for a minor modification could be, say, a blue stripe on a white robe.

But that's just my interpretation, and whenever interpretation is involved then it cannot be a crystal-clear fact, so there is that.

Manchu wrote:Also you underlined "the same colours" but please read the sentence to its end: "should still prove useful" -- it doesn't say "must always be present."

Yep, that's why I edited my post. More because of the sentence following that one, though, as it doesn't explicitly disconnect such schemes from the Minor Orders.

drbored wrote:
I'm afraid I'm having a hard time seeing why everyone is so hung up about the colors of Sisters of Battle.

Same reason anyone gets hung up on any fluff in 40k ...

 Manchu wrote:

 Troike wrote:
But it's not just a matter of "obnoxious" colours.

Well it is important to read the whole post ...

 Manchu wrote:
The real question, as things stand, is about "minor modifications." And it's not answerable on the face of the text if one is unwilling to include FW as "canon" material.

I don't understand. The issue isn't just about minor modifactions, but modifications of any kind, which is what this fluff bars.

drbored wrote:
I'm afraid I'm having a hard time seeing why everyone is so hung up about the colors of Sisters of Battle.

If you want their skin to be green and their hair hot pink and their armor a rainbow to rival the most colorful clowns, that's your prerogative. I've seen Hello Kitty Necrons, I've seen Space Goats, I've seen an entire IG regiment made of converted Skaven, and I've seen a whole Space Marine force made to look like old fashioned diving suits. And then there's the Angry Marines.

If you want to make your own fluff, what's stopping you? If you want to devote your force to an established army, do that, there's lots of people that do. If you want to create a new faction of the Sisters of Battle, go for it! Convert them to Chaos, convert them to the Greater Good, convert them to the Waaagh!, it's YOUR ARMY. You spend hundreds of dollars on those figures, don't get hung up on some bit of fluff that some egghead in the UK wrote up!

But this doesn't just affect extreme ideas like that. It also effects people who make Sisters who are "SoB to the core" in their background, with their only difference being cream coloured armour, or something like that. Different coloured armour is hardly as outlandish as Orky Sisters.

 Lynata wrote:
What we have here is an issue where a detail was noticed too late.

Sorry, are you arguing that FW would not have invented the Blue Robe had they, as you are assuming, not forgotten to read that blurb from the dex? That's kind of privileging your POV, wouldn't you say?

 Troike wrote:
The issue isn't just about minor modifactions, but modifications of any kind, which is what this fluff bars.

That's simply incorrect. Lynata provided the quotation a page or so back.

 pretre wrote:
Yeah, the OP should be updated with this:

Thanks (and thanks to Manchu for updating the OP!)

So, it really just looks like a digital rerelease of the old WD codex, since the Blood Angels codex language below it says "also gets a release as an Ipad Edition".

 RiTides wrote:
So, it really just looks like a digital rerelease of the old WD codex, since the Blood Angels codex language below it says "also gets a release as an Ipad Edition".

Seems so -- and thanks for bringing up an important point ... digital dexes aren't still iPad only, right? But the BA blurb only mentions and iPad release (with the iPad bells & whistle auto FAQs) ... so could the Sisters dex be iPad only? I'm stretching the words here but that would be awful. I mean, I won't even get the android version but it would be really awful to make it iPad only, especially since everyone knows there will be no FAQs.

 S'jet wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
"Adeptus" lol.

They can't even remember how to spell the factions name. Epic Fail.

Don't be so quick with blaming GW's bad memory (that's the official 2nd edition Codex in German):

 Manchu wrote:

 Troike wrote:
The issue isn't just about minor modifactions, but modifications of any kind, which is what this fluff bars.

Sorry, that's simply incorrect. Lynata provided the quotation a page or so back.

I don't think that you understand my complaint. I don't care that they've implicitly allowed for "minor variations", I'm opposed to the the colour limit itself. I've seen lots of nice looking SoB minis painted with primary colours that weren't one of the allowed colours, yet by the 2e fluff, these players are "doing it wrong".

 Kroothawk wrote:
(that's the official 2nd edition Codex in German)

So ... there was a bad translation in 1997? (IIRC the English dex has "Adepta" throughout.) And an editorial slip in 2013. Not seeing how the former justifies the latter.

It also got called "Adeptus Sororitas" in the UK(!) White Dwarf Rhinos article once. It happens. Maybe it even was the same writer.

Manchu wrote:Sorry, are you arguing that FW would not have invented the Blue Robe had they, as you are assuming, not forgotten to read that blurb from the dex? That's kind of privileging your POV, wouldn't you say?

Hum? No, I'm saying Troike wouldn't have picked blue as a colour.

As far as FW is concerned, I believe they just don't know or care too much about the Sisters in general. This includes the colour detail. And in this they are no different from a lot of BL novel authors.


PS: This "chat" is moving too fast. Is anyone even reading my edits?

 RiTides wrote:
So, it really just looks like a digital rerelease of the old WD codex

I'm not sure... it does say "background, photography and rules (all updated for Warhammer 40,000 6th edition". Doesn't this imply that the rules may have been updated, Warlord traits aside? Same for the fluff and photography.

WTB Adamantium Will!

 Troike wrote:
I don't care that they've implicitly allowed for "minor variations", I'm opposed to the the colour limit itself. and that is a problem. I've seen lots of nice looking SoB minis painted with primary colours that weren't one of the allowed colours, yet by the 2e fluff, these players are "doing it wrong".

I think he's quoting the Witch Hunters dex, which is Third IIRC. As to your complaint, again it's a matter of hard and soft fluff. So forget about "obnoxious" v. "reasonable" colors. Imagine instead a table full of tan Orks (I say tan because you earlier said tan was a "serious" color). I don't mean they have tan pants/shirts on or are dusty; I mean instead of green skin they have tan skin.

 Lynata wrote:
But that's just my interpretation, and whenever interpretation is involved then it cannot be a crystal-clear fact, so there is that.

Unless you are willing to consider Imperial Armour as authoritative as a dex; then there is a clear answer. But this is our age-old debate; where you say something like all and nothing, pointing to ex-employees and I say if anything then everything, pointing to logic. Funny thing is, we end up at the same place: it ends up being whatever we personally want ... "within reason."

"The Orders Militant make use of three main colours in the design of their uniforms; black, white and red."

Argent Shroud, one of the major orders have silver armour.... which presents a little dilemma.

 Troike wrote:
I'm not sure... it does say "background, photography and rules (all updated for Warhammer 40,000 6th edition". Doesn't this imply that the rules may have been updated, Warlord traits aside? Same for the fluff and photography.

If this was the "real" SoB dex release, and not just a dust off of the WD dex, that would be really tragic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 S'jet wrote:
"The Orders Militant make use of three main colours in the design of their uniforms; black, white and red."

Argent Shroud, one of the major orders have silver armour.... which presents a little dilemma.

Accounted for:

 Manchu wrote:
Well we already know that not every Order uses all three colors -- and that's before we get into the area of "minor modifications."

The trifecta hues are "main" colors, just as it says. This what I mean about the Blue Robe reasonably interpreted as a "minor modification." We've got white and blue; one of the main colors is present.

Manchu wrote:But this is our age-old debate; where you say something like all and nothing, pointing to ex-employees and I say if anything then everything, pointing to logic. Funny thing is, we end up at the same place: it ends up being whatever we personally want ... "within reason."

Just to clear something up, "ex-employees" sounds like they'd have nothing more to say. Three of those people were, at that point in time, still working as freelancers for Black Library (and thus obviously in the position to tell us "how it works"), and a 4th statement was printed in White Dwarf by the then-current Chief Editor of BL, Marc Gascogne.

Plus, it just makes sense. What is your explanation for the contradictions? The only other alternative would be that, yes, everything is canon, but then the newer source overrides the older one regardless where it comes from? Because that would create a rather "dynamic" universe, given the many differences throughout all the official fluff.

S'jet wrote:Argent Shroud, one of the major orders have silver armour.... which presents a little dilemma.

In heraldry, silver and white are the same - just like gold and yellow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tincture_(heraldry)#Basic_tinctures

Seeing as the pic in the OP does not link to the gallery and the disclaimer, could a mod PLEASE add in the following disclaimer to the OP, lest stores suffer from GW reprisals or overzealous idiots acting in their name: Picture taken at comic shop, it was not on sale at the time of the picture being taken, but I was allowed to leaf through it.

 Lynata wrote:
What is your explanation for the contradictions?

I favor the other one, also given by ex-employees/freelancers, that the fluff represents a subjective viewpoint rather than a crystal-clear lens.

 Lynata wrote:
In heraldry, silver and white are the same - just like gold and yellow.

Wow. I didnt actually know that. Cheers.

 BrookM wrote:
could a mod PLEASE add

DONE

Did i break the thread? =(

Something's up ... our technical liege, legoburner, is on it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
May have worked itself out now ...

 S'jet wrote:
Did i break the thread? =(

Aww, what was it doing? I missed it?

So Silver Scars ahoy then ?

Cool

All i want to know is will i have to buy this just to get a warlord trait table?
I will be a lot pissed if they change anything they printed in the white dwarves.

canadianguy wrote:
All i want to know is will i have to buy this just to get a warlord trait table?

Yes.

I will be a lot pissed if they change anything they printed in the white dwarves.

You're getting a codex update. If you really feel that strongly about it, copy down the warlord table onto some paper, fold it and stick it into your white dwarf.

Codex update? Or an update to a double white dwarf update lol.

Just saying if they alter units cost etc get a hard copy out asap.

right - so some good news - what do you actually need to use these digital products - I just have a PC is that enough?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

More seriously, the point was they changed their colors due to significance, opening the door for others to do the same. As long as you can justify a historical meaning then it's not an issue.

Because i don't like painting black and the look way cool in turquoise.. there justified

 Manchu wrote:
If this was the "real" SoB dex release, and not just a dust off of the WD dex, that would be really tragic.

Indeed, but I'm quite sure that that isn't the case. The "real" update will come alongside plastics, which apparently aren't yet around.

It needn't be anything so major as a real update, anyway. Just small tweaks, like others have been suggesting. Nothing much more than the addition of a Warlord table.

 Manchu wrote:
Imagine instead a table full of tan Orks (I say tan because you earlier said tan was a "serious" color). I don't mean they have tan pants/shirts on or are dusty; I mean instead of green skin they have tan skin.

I don't see actually changing the colour of a race's skin as radical as changing their armour colour.

Really, pretty much every army lets its players paint up their models however they want. In light of this, the same right being afforded to the SoB is hardly all that extreme. Certainly not as extreme as tan-skinned Orks.

 Troike wrote:
Certainly not as extreme as tan-skinned Orks.

I disagree. Orks are a fantasy race. They are no more or less fictional than the color of SoB power armor. According to fluff, Orks look a certain way -- they're Greenskins. So painting their skin tan may look great to someone but, again, the question of whether anyone else on earth thinks they look like Orks from 40k is a separate matter. Same applies to Sisters. What one person considers to look "serious," even if the scheme contains no white, black, or red, will not necessarily look like 40k Space Nuns to anyone else for the simple reason that just like Orks have green skins, Sisters wear white, red, and/or black. ITT you have a perfect example, Lynata, who does not think the Order of the Blue Robe looks like "real" Sisters because of the blue (even though they also have white).

 Mr Morden wrote:
right - so some good news - what do you actually need to use these digital products - I just have a PC is that enough?

You should be fine if you can get a program that reads .epub or .mobi.

thanks - I'd be tempted to get it just to make sure SOB gets my support

 Mr Morden wrote:
thanks - I'd be tempted to get it just to make sure SOB gets my support

That is some of my thinking as well.

 pretre wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
right - so some good news - what do you actually need to use these digital products - I just have a PC is that enough?

You should be fine if you can get a program that reads .epub or .mobi.

How about actually using these rules without owning a tablet? Say I were to buy this and print it off, would that be allright? Obviously LGSs probably woudn't mind, but a GW manager might.

 Manchu wrote:
Same applies to Sisters. What one person considers to look "serious," even if the scheme contains no white, black, or red, will not necessarily look like 40k Space Nuns to anyone else for the simple reason that just like Orks have green skins, Sisters wear white, red, and/or black.

The Major Orders, being the main ones are pretty much the ones that fans will see the most, so they're the main consideration in that. I'm not at all advocating that Major Orders be changed, just that we have the freedom to paint our own Minor Orders how we want. The main Sisters would still have the same colours.

 Manchu wrote:
ITT you have a perfect example, Lynata, who does not think the Order of the Blue Robe looks like "real" Sisters because of the blue (even though they also have white).

This ties into my above point. One could easily take the view that they are not "real" Sisters per se, in that they are a Minor Order, not a Major One. They're offshoots of a sort, is what I'm saying.

And before you say something like "then where do you draw the line?" in regards to skin pigament vs armour colour, I'll point to the other armies again. They keep their skin pigaments consistent, but have no set limits on their colourschemes. All I ask is as much freedom to make an army as much my own than is enjoyed by most other armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:
thanks - I'd be tempted to get it just to make sure SOB gets my support

Supporting our army aside, isn't this technically our official codex now, rendering those White Dwarfs obsolete? One can take the view that we have to buy it out of necessity, not just love for our Nuns with guns.

But yes, I too will buy it to support the Sisters. That, and I'm interested to see what they've done with it.

 Troike wrote:
How about actually using these rules without owning a tablet? Say I were to buy this and print it off, would that be allright? Obviously LGSs probably woudn't mind, but a GW manager might.

I really don't think they would. That being said, how many GW stores can you still play at?

Supporting our army aside, isn't this technically our official codex now, rendering those White Dwarfs obsolete?

Depends on how many changes there are. Will it be like DFTS and you can largely still use the WDs with the FAQs or will it be a lot more than that? We will know once it comes out.

 pretre wrote:
I really don't think they would.

Yeah, I figured as much. It's rather irritating that you cannot "officially" use these unless you happen to own a tablet, but whatever. I have two LGSs nearby anyway.

 pretre wrote:
That being said, how many GW stores can you still play at?

No idea about the other ones, but my one does games on thursdays. People book tables and then come in to play. Apart from that, there's the occasional event, like tournaments and such.

I'd talk to your GW store about it and see if they'll okay your "hard-copy backup". Worst they can say is no.


And maybe set you on fire for Heresy.

Well my local GW's manager was perfectly fine with me using a PDF of the WD codex. Without requiring the me to also bring the WDs themselves, in fact, so maybe he'll be cool with this. But then, customer services did tell him that he could do that.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
IAnd maybe set you on fire for Heresy.

But that's our schtick.

 Troike wrote:
Well my local GW's manager was perfectly fine with me using a PDF of the WD codex. Without requiring the me to also bring the WDs themselves, in fact, so maybe he'll be cool with this. But then, customer services did tell him that he could do that.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
IAnd maybe set you on fire for Heresy.

But that's our schtick.

Yeah, but we learned it from the GW legal team.

 Troike wrote:
No idea about the other ones, but my one does games on thursdays. People book tables and then come in to play. Apart from that, there's the occasional event, like tournaments and such.

Oh, my bad, you're in the UK and they still have gaming space.

 pretre wrote:

Oh, my bad, you're in the UK and they still have gaming space.

I was a bit surprised when one opened 15 minutes away(ish) in MN. Far smaller than the FLGS's I prefer but not a bad spot. Either way I think if you can buy and print the rules off then having printed rules would be fine. Tablets at the gaming table turn into nightmares for the ADHD impaired of us anyway (had a friend who was bad about that with his phone).

@KaryudoDS

Which store? I'm in MN so I'm curious.

Tolkien's Orcs and DnD Orcs are grey/black, my fantasy Orcs are all shaded from grey to black depending on how tough they are. My 40k Orks are green and look far more cartoon like because of it.

I painted my sisters a light blue colour as all of my imperial forces (UM, GK, SoB, IG, Inquisition) are based in Ultramar so I wanted to show that they fit under Calgar's domain. Only time a paint job should give you pause is when the model looks like it has been dipped in house paint.

If I'm right about this, wouldn't there be something in the Apple Book Store if the SoB book was going digital?

There is nothing there.

 S'jet wrote:
"The Orders Militant make use of three main colours in the design of their uniforms; black, white and red."

Argent Shroud, one of the major orders have silver armour.... which presents a little dilemma.

In European heraldry the colours white and argent (silver) are the same. There isn't a colour white, it counts as a metal, called argent. You can paint your design with silver or white and it means the same.

I know some people are totally focussed on the "canon" of the background; would they refuse to play against an army that was painted in non-canon colours?

 Manchu wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
(that's the official 2nd edition Codex in German)

So ... there was a bad translation in 1997? (IIRC the English dex has "Adepta" throughout.) And an editorial slip in 2013. Not seeing how the former justifies the latter

Just checked: Everytime the English GW webstore uses "Sisters of Battle", the German version uses "Adeptus Sororitas", even in the tag for the army. So in Germany, it is still the official name (and not Adepta!). Call it a bad translation, but Adepta Sororitas is one as well (Adepta Sororitatis at least follows Latin grammar, meaning "a (single) female pupil of the sisterhood").

Puscifer wrote:
If I'm right about this, wouldn't there be something in the Apple Book Store if the SoB book was going digital?

There is nothing there.

Not yet, anyway. Let's wait for a bit and see what happens.

Yes but Adeptus is purely masculine. Adepta is Feminine.

..a pupil (male singular) of the sisterhood... is a little wierd.

I wonder if they'll re-jig any points costs since we're getting a 'minor update for 6th. Aside from all the obvious stff (BBS etc) I would like Heavy Flamers to be cheaper so I can actually justify using them.

D

 evildrcheese wrote:
I wonder if they'll re-jig any points costs since we're getting a 'minor update for 6th. Aside from all the obvious stff (BBS etc) I would like Heavy Flamers to be cheaper so I can actually justify using them.

D

Don't get your hopes up on this one. If they make any changes at all it will be the removal of redundant rules like "Seraphim Pistols" (ability to fire 2 pistols at once). There are so many problems with the SoB WD dex and points costs are amongst the biggest. Eviscerator costing 25points was one of the things that really annoyed me, both in the IG and GK codex an Eviscerator costs 15pts, heck a Sister Repentia costs 17 and comes with one.

There will be no points changes, it will be copy paste WD dex and some other stuff with a $50 price sticker slapped onto. Those Warlord Traits took allot of effort, research and playtesting to balance....

Careful Cow... you almost optimistic there.

Has anyone bought a WD to confirm this SoB and BA update is being released?

Puscifer wrote:
Has anyone bought a WD to confirm this SoB and BA update is being released?

Yes, someone upthread posted their own photo of the ad.

In case there is any doubt, it is genuine, I have my WD delivered this morning.

It got edited into the OP, in fact. Check the first post, there's a picture that a member here took of it.

Cheers.

Does WD give us a specific date?

Nope :(

Also at present its only a IPAD edition...........

I have the odd sense we're all about to be massively disappointed.

I am pleased its actually now available to people

 Mr Morden wrote:


Also at present its only a IPAD edition...........

...That sucks if we can't get it any other way. Hope they change that when they release it.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I have the odd sense we're all about to be massively disappointed.

Actually, as SOB players, we are always massively disappointed.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I have the odd sense we're all about to be massively disappointed.

It's not like we've been promised major changes from it anyway. This is just minor re-release with some small updates, made to serve as a stopgap. It's quite cool and all, but I don't think that any of us are expecting anything big.

I'm waiting to see if it pops up on iTunes today as a preview. We'll see if anything is different then.

So as long as I have itunes on my computer, could I in theory obtain the codex? Sorry for all the annoying questions, but most of my digital book knowledge is from the other end, and is extremely limited as it is.

Agreed. I have an android tablet and my pc, this is all new to me and welcome information.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Everytime the English GW webstore uses "Sisters of Battle", the German version uses "Adeptus Sororitas", even in the tag for the army. So in Germany, it is still the official name (and not Adepta!). Call it a bad translation, but Adepta Sororitas is one as well (Adepta Sororitatis at least follows Latin grammar, meaning "a (single) female pupil of the sisterhood").

No no no. "Adepta Sororitas" is not Latin. It is the fictional name of a fictional band of fictional female fanatics of a fictional religion. Don't forget that the name is also written in a fictional language. The Germans writing "Adeptus Sororitas" everywhere is like writing "Spece Marines" or "Dahk Eldar" everywhere. It's Engrish by proxy, sorry German Dakkanauts.

 Manchu wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Everytime the English GW webstore uses "Sisters of Battle", the German version uses "Adeptus Sororitas", even in the tag for the army. So in Germany, it is still the official name (and not Adepta!). Call it a bad translation, but Adepta Sororitas is one as well (Adepta Sororitatis at least follows Latin grammar, meaning "a (single) female pupil of the sisterhood").

No no no. "Adepta Sororitas" is not Latin. It is the fictional name of a fictional band of fictional female fanatics of a fictional religion. Don't forget that the name is also written in a fictional language. The Germans writing "Adeptus Sororitas" everywhere is like writing "Spece Marines" or "Dahk Eldar" everywhere. It's Engrish by proxy, sorry German Dakkanauts.

Actually it is latin, as in the language. They've got the grammar wrong though. The nominative singular should be adeptus sororitas. If they mean it to be plural, it would be adeptus sororitates.

Sorry, 6 years of latin.

They probably took it to make the name sound feminine, but the way I'm justifying it in my headcanon is:

Adept - an individual member of an Adeptus
Adepts - plural of Adept
Adeptus - an organisation of Adepts
Adepta - plural of Adeptus

At least this way it kind of works out with how these terms are used by the writers.

agnosto wrote:Actually it is latin, as in the language. They've got the grammar wrong though.

Manchu's point was, I think, that it is "bastardised latin" because it's a Space Language used in a sci-fi setting set many thousands of years in the future. It's not "grammatically false latin" because it evolved/mutated, quite similar to various languages of today - such as the Italian language that evolved out of vulgar latin, for example.

 Lynata wrote:
They probably took it to make the name sound feminine, but the way I'm justifying it in my headcanon is:

Adept - an individual member of an Adeptus
Adepts - plural of Adept
Adeptus - an organisation of Adepts
Adepta - plural of Adeptus

At least this way it kind of works out with how these terms are used by the writers.

agnosto wrote:Actually it is latin, as in the language. They've got the grammar wrong though.

Manchu's point was that it is "bastardises latin" because it's a Space Language used in a sci-fi setting set many thousands of years in the future. It's not "false latin" because it evolved/mutated.

Kind of makes sense when you consider how an already dead language could morph over the intervening thousands of years; changed by people with no real understanding of the language itself or the history. Oddly fits the setting quite well.

Huh.

The Dark Elves is up on pre-order and you can get its preview but the Sisters of Battle isn't up.

Maybe next week?

 S'jet wrote:
Yes but Adeptus is purely masculine. Adepta is Feminine.

..a pupil (male singular) of the sisterhood... is a little wierd.

If the phrase is actually based on latin, then the Sororitas is wrong as well (and maybe even more wrong than Adeptus.

The latin for Sisterhood would be germanitas, and sister would be soror or sororis. Looking at Sororitas I assume that they started with Soriris which follows the 3rd declension, which doesn't have the appropriate ending. I think -as endings are usually associated with verb conjugations instead of nouns.

Now Adeptus (n) usually means attainment or an obtaining and it is a masculine noun. But adipisci is also a verb which has the following meanings:

Definitions: arrive at, come up to/into; gain, secure, win, obtain; inherit; overtake

It follows the third conjugation which gives you adeptus as the first person perfect case giving you "I have arrived" "I have come into" "I have gained" I have obtained" "I have inherited".

So the Adeptus portion of the title can easily be more correct portion of the title and could result in an intended meaning of "I have obtained Sisterhood", except for the fact that they used the wrong word for Sisterhood, and the wrong declension for sister.

Or, you know, we could accept that a bunch of nerds in the 80s threw together a game and just used words that sounded cool and used bastardized meanings of words and bastardized grammar to throw together a background for a game they invented and that the words would make a Latin teacher throw up and kick you out of his class.

 agnosto wrote:
Actually it is latin, as in the language.

No, it's High Gothic, as in the fictional language.

 Lynata wrote:
Manchu's point was, I think, that it is "bastardised latin" because it's a Space Language used in a sci-fi setting set many thousands of years in the future. It's not "grammatically false latin" because it evolved/mutated, quite similar to various languages of today - such as the Italian language that evolved out of vulgar latin, for example.

Spot on.

 agnosto wrote:
Kind of makes sense when you consider how an already dead language could morph over the intervening thousands of years; changed by people with no real understanding of the language itself or the history. Oddly fits the setting quite well.

Most of our Latin comes from Caesar and Cicero. Imagine, their idiosyncratic styles have formed our understanding of how everyone spoke the language. Who knows what bizarre game of telephone this has engendered over thousands of years much less tens of thousands.

 Lynata wrote:
They probably took it to make the name sound feminine, but the way I'm justifying it in my headcanon is:

Adept - an individual member of an Adeptus
Adepts - plural of Adept
Adeptus - an organisation of Adepts
Adepta - plural of Adeptus

At least this way it kind of works out with how these terms are used by the writers.

agnosto wrote:Actually it is latin, as in the language. They've got the grammar wrong though.

Manchu's point was, I think, that it is "bastardised latin" because it's a Space Language used in a sci-fi setting set many thousands of years in the future. It's not "grammatically false latin" because it evolved/mutated, quite similar to various languages of today - such as the Italian language that evolved out of vulgar latin, for example.

It is what used to be called "pig Latin". This was common among classically educated British schoolboys in the 1960s and 70s, so it included some of the original 40K writers.

"Illegitimi non carborundum" == Don't let the bastards grind you down.

Something that looks and sounds like Latin but it isn't real Latin.

agnosto wrote:Kind of makes sense when you consider how an already dead language could morph over the intervening thousands of years; changed by people with no real understanding of the language itself or the history. Oddly fits the setting quite well.

Art imitates life.

It's kind of funny how it could apply both to the people in-universe as well as some of the writers and fans who came up with and expanded it.

Kilkrazy wrote:It is what used to be called "pig Latin". This was common among classically educated British schoolboys in the 1960s and 70s, so it included some of the original 40K writers.
"Illegitimi non carborundum" == Don't let the bastards grind you down.
Something that looks and sounds like Latin but it isn't real Latin.

Hah, this is a cool bit of trivia. Thanks.

 pretre wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I have the odd sense we're all about to be massively disappointed.

Actually, as SOB players, we are always massively disappointed.

Someone needs to write a SOB New Players guide entitled "Is Masochism Right For You? The definitive guide to Warhammer 40k's Sisters of Battle"

 S'jet wrote:
Yes but Adeptus is purely masculine. Adepta is Feminine.
..a pupil (male singular) of the sisterhood... is a little wierd.

Male pupil of "Astarte, Egyptian goddess of war and sexual love" isn't much better.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/39661/Astarte
Let's call them Bolter Bitches and be done

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I have the odd sense we're all about to be massively disappointed.

Actually, as SOB players, we are always massively disappointed.

Someone needs to write a SOB New Players guide entitled "Is Masochism Right For You? The definitive guide to Warhammer 40k's Sisters of Battle"

I think 1d4chan (warning for the linguistically sensitive, there is a lot of swearing after the link) has you covered:

Because you're a proud fa/tg/uy who can remember the good old days when the models were pewter, the vehicle armor was Papier-mâché, and the universe was populated by manly motherf****rs instead of whiny power armored mary sues. Whats that? Inquisitors? F*** your gak. Go play Grey Knights. This is second edition Sisters, when everything was ecclesiarchal, the force org chart was 50% HQ, and the Cannoness had a godd*** laser mace. New models? Updates? Real codex? F*** um. You're going to win for the same reason you always have. You're the hardest, beardiest, motherf****r around and you've been pushing these kids' s*** in since they had pokemon lunch boxes. Welcome to the new hard mode.

What a shame sisters was my first army I sold them in hopes of an update someday......well I'll probably be dead by then.

 Manchu wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
Actually it is latin, as in the language.

No, it's High Gothic, as in the fictional language.

 Lynata wrote:
Manchu's point was, I think, that it is "bastardised latin" because it's a Space Language used in a sci-fi setting set many thousands of years in the future. It's not "grammatically false latin" because it evolved/mutated, quite similar to various languages of today - such as the Italian language that evolved out of vulgar latin, for example.

Spot on.

 agnosto wrote:
Kind of makes sense when you consider how an already dead language could morph over the intervening thousands of years; changed by people with no real understanding of the language itself or the history. Oddly fits the setting quite well.

Most of our Latin comes from Caesar and Cicero. Imagine, their idiosyncratic styles have formed our understanding of how everyone spoke the language. Who knows what bizarre game of telephone this has engendered over thousands of years much less tens of thousands.

lol. I had to go back and look it up and Sororitas would be Renaissance Latin, so yeah, I was off. The root for sister though has always been soror (sororis) which is a 3rd declension noun. So yes, it did change a bit in the middle ages and become sororitas to better describe nuns (I suppose).

I'll differ with you on the last point church latin, which is what most people ever have exposure to, yes Cicero had a huge influence on what most people consider latin. Personally, I prefer Pliny the Elder's writing style to Cicero's; the phrase "Fortune favors the bold" (he actually said 'brave') came from him but letters and books have survived the test of time from writers other than Cicero and are available to the general public and provide a much deeper (and sometimes seedier) insight into Roman life, culture and language. The problem with aristocrats is that the Roman Equestrian class spoke and wrote in Greek more than latin which colored their use of the language.

I think I've drug this far enough off topic; I apologize for butting in.

When GW website and GW Codex say, it is Adeptus Sororitas, and Manchu says that it is Adepta Sororitas, then obviously GW is not correct

 Kroothawk wrote:
When GW website and GW Codex say, it is Adeptus Sororitas, and Manchu says that it is Adepta Sororitas, then obviously GW is not correct

I'm wondering if GW is moving to Adeptus to make the terminology easier to keep track of actually.

Or it could be a typo ... as has happened before.

Nice ad hominem, Kroothawk. All fallacies aside: GW is an English company. The English sources reliably use Adpeta. The German translators for the English company went a different route, whether intentionally or by mistake.

 Manchu wrote:
Or it could be a typo ... as has happened before.

True. It was just a thought is all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A thought that just crossed my mind:

At Enter the Citadel Kelly was stated as saying it was odd that the Inquisition was removed from the Sisters codex...I wonder if he plans on putting them back in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Go-Go-Powerchair?

Here's hoping their update has alot more power chair... Like dreadknight sized.... Sarcasm off. When that's the best center piece GW can think up, is it any wonder they can't get excited?

I'm sure if we ever get an update, we'll be able to get a giant robot of our very own.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm sure if we ever get an update, we'll be able to get a giant robot of our very own.

Somebody on /tg/ did draw one, in fact.

Something like that would certainly look cool, but I would want a good fluff explanation/background to go with it,

 Troike wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm sure if we ever get an update, we'll be able to get a giant robot of our very own.

Somebody on /tg/ did draw one, in fact.

Spoiler:

Something like that would certainly look cool, but I would want a good fluff explanation/background to go with it,

No. Please just no...

Valete,

JohnS

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm sure if we ever get an update, we'll be able to get a giant robot of our very own.

Not "giant" I suppose, but still a pretty cool robot.
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat660002a&prodId=prod1300077a&rootCatGameStyle=

 nolzur wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm sure if we ever get an update, we'll be able to get a giant robot of our very own.

Not "giant" I suppose, but still a pretty cool robot.
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat660002a&prodId=prod1300077a&rootCatGameStyle=

A giant version with several Penitents hooked up to it might work, but then that'd just be rehashing something we already have, really.

I dunno, think that a big tank of some kind might suit the Sisters more as a "super unit". Lynata has also suggested something like a big holy symbol on wheels, which would also be very appropriate. It could provide massive buffs.

I'd love to see something along the lines of the Star Wars sand crawlers, enormous APC style vehicle with several decks and gun emplacements that lumbers towards the enemy front line, something fortress like and gothic which is then able to disgorge a hideously large amount of troops into combat.
It'd be like a creeping doom coming at you across the table as you try to frantically disable it.

There's probably something like this on Forgeworld already but as big a fan of giant stompy robots as I am, I'm starting to feel that 40k is getting a bit saturated with the bloody things!

Release date of these Codice?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
yay, I get to spent $450 to keep up with flipping rules... and get the occasional freeby how to paint a space monkey...

ok that was very negative of me.

Running to Best Buy tomorrow for my new iPad... FETHING SON OF A NURGLE TAINTED TAU! Why can't I just have a book in my grubby paws?

 Kelly502 wrote:
Release date of these Codice?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
yay, I get to spent $450 to keep up with flipping rules... and get the occasional freeby how to paint a space monkey...

ok that was very negative of me.

Running to Best Buy tomorrow for my new iPad... FETHING SON OF A NURGLE TAINTED TAU! Why can't I just have a book in my grubby paws?

.epubs (the Black Library digital books) don't need an iPad. Just a free reader. That's been covered a couple times now.

And I'm guessing next week. No pre-order at least.

Yeah the thread was huge for such a recent release of the WD. I was being lazy, so thank you for answering that.

iPad is easier for me, already have accounts established for iPhone and iPod. Teach fitness classes so I have music on one, and the phone is a phone. Been shopping and reading about these readers and it boils down to ease of suffering.

So if you are going to buy an iPad anyway, why are you bitching at GW?

I do wish that Apple would make a desktop iBook reader.

 d-usa wrote:
So if you are going to buy an iPad anyway, why are you bitching at GW?

I do wish that Apple would make a desktop iBook reader.

Because this is Dakka/the internet, presumably.

And I agree entirely with the second point. despite having an ipad, they would be able to make so so so so so much money if people could get ibooks on devices that weren't apple. The main issue I can see with the idea is that ibooks generally focus on touch interface (being hosted on idevices and all) so maybe we won't see a desktop ibooks until touch PCs become more common?

 d-usa wrote:
So if you are going to buy an iPad anyway, why are you bitching at GW?

I do wish that Apple would make a desktop iBook reader.

Grumbling old timer who likes books... However, I downloaded the Citadel How to Paint a Tactical Marine on my kid's iPad, I likey! You can zoom in, rotate pictures of models, and so forth. So a digital "book" may not be so bad. I'd rather spend my hobby money on kits and figures...

 Troike wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm sure if we ever get an update, we'll be able to get a giant robot of our very own.

Somebody on /tg/ did draw one, in fact.

Spoiler:

Something like that would certainly look cool, but I would want a good fluff explanation/background to go with it,

The Sisters are not Orks or Adeptus Mechanicus, and I do not think they should be trying to build a surrogate god like they do. I'd stick to the war church idea - a superheavy tank like the Stormlord whose carrying capacity is actually a small church ripped out of the ground and built into the tank's superstructure.

As far as exo-armored suits I'm more inclined to believe we'd see something like centurions or more penitent engines before we see a dreadknight or an SoB "Mega Maid"

 Scrub wrote:
I'd love to see something along the lines of the Star Wars sand crawlers, enormous APC style vehicle with several decks and gun emplacements that lumbers towards the enemy front line, something fortress like and gothic which is then able to disgorge a hideously large amount of troops into combat.
It'd be like a creeping doom coming at you across the table as you try to frantically disable it.

Its such an established bit of imagery in a number of pieces of SoB artwork... It strikes me as something GW needs to tap into. Mobile shrines and cathedrals are distinctive and would go a long way to further seperate SoB from Marines and IG.

I can't even see Ward sticking a penitent engine inside a larger penitent engine for the super sisters ndk so they may remain free of a super sized Mc, but I would see penitent engines becoming a mc stat wise.

I could see a giant shrine on wheels being pulled by repentia or penitent engines with vehicles or mc stats.

I can also see sisters being a year or so out after gw gets people to buy the digital copy.

Meanwhile at Games Workshop:
"Copy....paste...done. Hey, guys! I think I did it. We now have the 6th edition codex for SOB!"
"The who?"
"You know, the...um...the girls. The girls with armor and things."
"Oh. Don't know them."
"I think I read about them once. Doesn't matter because I just finished their codex!"
"Yay!"
"Now let's go give Space Marines chapter specific terminators just to stick it to the chaos players."
"Great idea!"

Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

Praise be! The God-Emperor has not forsaken us!

We hope.

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

The chance of it making it to a physical book is good a bit sad in one way,

it probably suggests that any chance of a full new codex/model release is a long way off: Plenty of time taken to see if the digital one sells, plus time to print, plus time for the print run to sell out before they'ed even consider something really new

The problem with Sisters is the scale of their release. Things like IG and Orks are mostly plastic now. So require minimal releases to go with the book. Sisters are like DE and Necrons were before relaunch, primarily metal and that means a huge release of product. And they've already done their huge product release of the year in the form of the Dark Elf models for fantasy. so expect them in the 2014-2015 fiscal year.

I'm going to remain forlorn and skeptical till I have a brand new SOB plastic infantry box in my hands. We've been waiting for new models for a very long time now.

Points tweaks, and scaling faith points. Glad to hear things changed, hopefully, for the better.

Pretty happy about this, gives me hope we're not gonna be 'squatted'. I'm probably in a minority in that I actually don't think we need a plastic model update. I love the current metal Sisters range, not one thing I don't like. A new codex is all I want, that makes more of the units viable and perhaps rolls in some of the more ignored factions such as Arbites and Sisters of Silence. This will do for now though I suppose.

I like the metal models too, I just wish they had the full array of options, like, say, freaking inferno pistols for our seraphim, and power sword/plasma pistol combo for our Superiors, and condemnor boltguns would be nice, too.

At that point we may as well be transferred to finecast, and I'd prefer we skip that step if we can.

Hoitash wrote:
I like the metal models too, I just wish they had the full array of options, like, say, freaking inferno pistols for our seraphim, and power sword/plasma pistol combo for our Superiors, and condemnor boltguns would be nice, too.

At that point we may as well be transferred to finecast, and I'd prefer we skip that step if we can.

Was just looking through the GW website and the new Space Marine prices make Sisters seem like a bargain too! Been trying to 'Fine'cast proof myself by slowly buying stuff up

Thats 'Good news!' (TM) from Games Day. Even if we don't get actual points changes to units (cheaper sisters, etc) we hopefully get 10pt Heavy Flamers and 'Razorback' prices in line with the new Space Marine codex, that kind of thing. Oh and 15pt Eviscerators, that was always one of my main bugbears! If we get those changes my 1850 list will be about 100pts cheaper. Not earthshaking,but nice nontheless.

I will be purchasing this A) Because I will use it and B) To show support to the SoB line.

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
I'm probably in a minority in that I actually don't think we need a plastic model update. I love the current metal Sisters range, not one thing I don't like.

Are you forgetting the price? The Witch Elves and Dire Avengers are recognised as being obscenely overpriced, but that's the situation the Sisters have been in for years now.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
I'm probably in a minority in that I actually don't think we need a plastic model update. I love the current metal Sisters range, not one thing I don't like.

Are you forgetting the price? The Witch Elves and Dire Avengers are recognised as being obscenely overpriced, but that's the situation the Sisters have been in for years now.

£32.25 for 10 lovely looking metal troops as opposed to £25 for 10 plastic tactical marines isn't too bad in comparison, plus an £18 plastic captain makes our HQs look cheap! Seraphims and special/heavy weapons are where it gets expensive although Ebay helps mitigate this [got 30 SIsters for about £50 and paid around £5 a piece for my Seraphim].

Not justifying GW crazy prices just saying that they aren't bad in comparison.

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

Thanks for the update - much appreciated

Scrub wrote:I'd love to see something along the lines of the Star Wars sand crawlers, enormous APC style vehicle with several decks and gun emplacements that lumbers towards the enemy front line, something fortress like and gothic which is then able to disgorge a hideously large amount of troops into combat.
It'd be like a creeping doom coming at you across the table as you try to frantically disable it.

Fortress-Abbey on tracks? The Ecclesiarchy has you covered.



However, I have a feeling that something like this would sadly be too big for both selling and deployment on a table ...

Troike wrote:Lynata has also suggested something like a big holy symbol on wheels, which would also be very appropriate. It could provide massive buffs.

I got that idea from the movie "Kingdom of Heaven" where the crusader army showed up with this huge golden cross on wheels: [movie image] [TW:M2 unit screenshot]

Obviously it'd have to get the usual 40k treatment - "dial up to eleven". Perhaps something like a huge golden skull that shoots a mega-melta out of its mouth, turning all heretics into slag regardless where they hide. A combination between high technology and relic; an ancient artefact from the Dark Age of Technology, recovered by the Orders Pronatus, that has been turned into a mobile shrine to the God-Emperor, complete with the must-have array of tubes and levers, and pulled by a dozen penitents - either human slaves, or chained Repentia. The latter you could cut loose in order to have them engage the enemy, but in this case the shrine would become stationary. Something like that?
... I should draw a sketch some day.

In the SoB superheavies thread, someone also posted this mini from Warmachine - but as cool as it looks, it'd be "another chair" like Karamazov, and it would be more of a Church unit than an SoB thing, with a Cardinal sitting on top. The chained serf is a good example of how I think the above "skull shrine" would be moved, tho.

tyrannosaurus wrote:I'm probably in a minority in that I actually don't think we need a plastic model update. I love the current metal Sisters range, not one thing I don't like.

You're not alone.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't actually think plastic minis would be cheaper - if GW were to just price metal SoB like they price metal Guardsmen. The only real advantage would be the ability to convert, but we'd sacrifice the weight for it. Not to mention a risk that any redesigns might feature changes we might not wish to see. Such as ... high heels, for example.

evildrcheese wrote:Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks.

Mhm. Well, this means the Warlord Traits will be something new and unique then, at least. Also interested to see what they did about the points and faith scaling.

I don't want plastic sisters for the price, I want them for convertability. Building and converting models is the most important thing in this hobby for me, and multi-part plastics are great for that.

And that's a valid point.

It's just that I often see posts about people supposedly waiting for Sisters to go plastic because "then they'd become affordable". I think those gamers would be in for a rude awakening.

Yeah, someone crunched the numbers and figured price wise they'll be about the same either way.

As I said, I just want weapon options and maybe some convertibility; I have orks for when I wanna really go nuts, after all

I will miss the ease of painting the metal models though, even if it did take time.

 d-usa wrote:

I do wish that Apple would make a desktop iBook reader.

the next OSX is going to be ale to, so if you have a mac with with the ability to get the OS, then you will be able to.

 Lynata wrote:
And that's a valid point.

It's just that I often see posts about people supposedly waiting for Sisters to go plastic because "then they'd become affordable". I think those gamers would be in for a rude awakening.

Very true - the new Witch Elves are lovely and £35 for 10

 Breotan wrote:

 Brother SRM wrote:
It's the 5th ed codex with a Warlord table, re-released.

Sadly, I can see this being the case.

With a $45 price tag

Mr Morden wrote:Very true - the new Witch Elves are lovely and £35 for 10

Wow. Crazy.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Lynata wrote:
And that's a valid point.

It's just that I often see posts about people supposedly waiting for Sisters to go plastic because "then they'd become affordable". I think those gamers would be in for a rude awakening.

Very true - the new Witch Elves are lovely and £35 for 10

$70 Canadian... holy fething gak....

So it looks like it'll be just a slight points adjustment and additional warlord traits... Sounds pretty good to me. Although a more wide ranging update would be nice I'll be happy with this as I'm happy with how the codex works at present, and we can't expect too much anyway!

On the models front I am perfectly happy with the sculpts available at the moment. All the standard sisters and seraphim are fantastic models. I'd love some differentiation for celestians with a new sculpt and possibly an update for the repentia and some of the command models (sister dialogus springs to mind as probably the worst sculpt in the sister line). But hey I'm old school and love metal figures a hell of a lot more than plastic ones.

Looking forward to this update a lot now.

 AlexHolker wrote:
The Sisters are not Orks or Adeptus Mechanicus, and I do not think they should be trying to build a surrogate god like they do. I'd stick to the war church idea - a superheavy tank like the Stormlord whose carrying capacity is actually a small church ripped out of the ground and built into the tank's superstructure.

Hey, I said it'd look cool, not that it'd make sense.

Yeah, some sort of Cathedral tank would be more fitting. And very in line with the Exorcist.

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

Awesome! Thanks for doing this. We're getting more than expected, it seems. Nice to see them putting in the effort.

Well then, I'll certianly be purchasing this, and I hope that lots of others do too. I would just love to get a hardback SoB codex, even if it is just a stopgap.

 Crimson wrote:
I don't want plastic sisters for the price, I want them for convertability. Building and converting models is the most important thing in this hobby for me, and multi-part plastics are great for that.

Bloody this! I've had to give my Canoness a Phobos pattern bolter, since Godwyn-De'az pattern boltguns aren't exactly easy to get ahold of on their own. The ease with which one can work with plastics is just such a huge issue, for me. They'd also give us posability, which would be nice.

I'm curious about the SOB updated fluff. I wonder how many battles did they get curb stomped in this time around?

 l0k1 wrote:
I'm curious about the SOB updated fluff. I wonder how many battles did they get curb stomped in this time around?

lolbud. Their 5e codex isn't like that at all. They're the ones who do the curbstomping in that, Sanctuary 101 aside.

It's not even as bad as it's made out to be, anyway. Theyre usually portrayed as fighting well. The stuff about them constantly being slaughtered is just the usual Internet hyperbole.

With GW finally proving themselves able to make a good female kit (New Witch Elves) i'm actually quite excited when we finally get plastics.

 S'jet wrote:
With GW finally proving themselves able to make a good female kit (New Witch Elves) i'm actually quite excited when we finally get plastics.

The prices on the other hand have me worried.

Price wise I'd expect everything as normal tbh. (Price per figure any way). All the other armies have been moving towards our per figure price level, not getting cheaper.

Sisters are the only army i'd overlook price for. Especially if they came out something like this -

Lose the heels and we're on the right track.

 Crimson wrote:
I don't want plastic sisters for the price, I want them for convertability. Building and converting models is the most important thing in this hobby for me, and multi-part plastics are great for that.

And plastics give us more options, and they are WAY easier to transport. No weight issues, no pinning, no shattering when they tip over, etc.

That's kinda depressing. New digital codex is pretty much the same as the WD dex but with warlord traits, and way more expensive. Sales of the overpriced digital codex will determine whether or not Sisters get any future attention, which at the moment purely seems to be a physical version of the digital codex and not necessarily a real update. Not only that, but if they ever did get a real update, judging from newer kits like the SM release and the DE witch elves especially, it won't actually make collecting them any easier and if anything will make them more expensive than they currently are, not to mention that there's a very strong chance the replacement sculpts will be even worse, with much stupider design decisions.

Kinda makes you think it isn't worth bothering with at all then. I definitely can't afford to start a new army with $60 and $85 kits being the norm.

The sales aren't influencing whether they get any further attention, just if this gets made into a physical book. They've still got the plastics (which they've been trying to make) to come, that'll be the real update. This really is just a stopgap in preparation for the actual update.

 brassangel wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I don't want plastic sisters for the price, I want them for convertability. Building and converting models is the most important thing in this hobby for me, and multi-part plastics are great for that.

And plastics give us more options, and they are WAY easier to transport. No weight issues, no pinning, no shattering when they tip over, etc.

No more using your army to beat off muggers, or to crush people who mock it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sidstyler wrote:
That's kinda depressing. New digital codex is pretty much the same as the WD dex but with warlord traits, and way more expensive. Sales of the overpriced digital codex will determine whether or not Sisters get any future attention, which at the moment purely seems to be a physical version of the digital codex and not necessarily a real update. Not only that, but if they ever did get a real update, judging from newer kits like the SM release and the DE witch elves especially, it won't actually make collecting them any easier and if anything will make them more expensive than they currently are, not to mention that there's a very strong chance the replacement sculpts will be even worse, with much stupider design decisions.

Kinda makes you think it isn't worth bothering with at all then. I definitely can't afford to start a new army with $60 and $85 kits being the norm.

If you were any more depressing I'd have to recommend you call the Suicide Hotline.

 Lynata wrote:

Scrub wrote:I'd love to see something along the lines of the Star Wars sand crawlers, enormous APC style vehicle with several decks and gun emplacements that lumbers towards the enemy front line, something fortress like and gothic which is then able to disgorge a hideously large amount of troops into combat.
It'd be like a creeping doom coming at you across the table as you try to frantically disable it.

Fortress-Abbey on tracks? The Ecclesiarchy has you covered.

Spoiler:

However, I have a feeling that something like this would sadly be too big for both selling and deployment on a table ...

I'd no idea it was actually a 'fluff thing'! Awesome!

I'd better go read up on some Sisters background, methinks.
As for a potential mode, It could be the size of that recent Khornemower for tabletop representation maybe? Either way, I'd love to see them as a viable force on the table again with some updated models to do 'em some justice

 S'jet wrote:
Sisters are the only army i'd overlook price for. Especially if they came out something like this -

Spoiler:

Sisters Of Battle Katrina by ~hoxiaowei @deviantart

If the new plastics (or frankly finecast) has this amount of detail then i'd be totally ok with the price. Just means that i'll buy a figure a month and have an updated unit every year or so. Will definitely give me the time to paint them.

 Scrub wrote:

 Lynata wrote:

Scrub wrote:I'd love to see something along the lines of the Star Wars sand crawlers, enormous APC style vehicle with several decks and gun emplacements that lumbers towards the enemy front line, something fortress like and gothic which is then able to disgorge a hideously large amount of troops into combat.
It'd be like a creeping doom coming at you across the table as you try to frantically disable it.

Fortress-Abbey on tracks? The Ecclesiarchy has you covered.

Spoiler:

However, I have a feeling that something like this would sadly be too big for both selling and deployment on a table ...

I'd no idea it was actually a 'fluff thing'! Awesome!

I'd better go read up on some Sisters background, methinks.
As for a potential mode, It could be the size of that recent Khornemower for tabletop representation maybe? Either way, I'd love to see them as a viable force on the table again with some updated models to do 'em some justice

I think that'd be a unit for Epic, if we still had Epic. Failing that, something for unusually large Armageddon games, say a gym floor for a playing surface and 50,000 points a side....

 Troike wrote:
Lose the heels and we're on the right track.

Quite right, they are totally inappropriate for battle, no one would consider such heels for a fighty-space-nun.

No one except Blanche, that is. And he puts heels even on Space Marine Primarchs.

Anyways, the amount of detail on that fanart is awesome and I do like some of its ideas. Overall it almost looks too "filigree", though that may simply be due to all the detail itself rather than our current armour which still looks sufficiently rugged to appear battle-worthy rather than something that may appear more like a uniform for parades (see also: Blood Angels Nipple Armour). That being said, I am very conservative when it comes to designs anyways, so any significant change to the established design which I've known for more than a decade now will have a very hard time convincing me...

So what, they waited an entire edition to finally actually sell the codex they released in fifth?

Lazy bastards.

Now, now. This way, they can say that SoB have a 6th Edition Codex and are thus "up to date" until 7E shows up.

In a perfidious way, it is rather smart.

The White Dwarf article does say "ALL updated for 6th Edition". That technically makes this codex a 6th Edition codex.

 SisterSydney wrote:

 Scrub wrote:

 Lynata wrote:

Scrub wrote:I'd love to see something along the lines of the Star Wars sand crawlers, enormous APC style vehicle with several decks and gun emplacements that lumbers towards the enemy front line, something fortress like and gothic which is then able to disgorge a hideously large amount of troops into combat.
It'd be like a creeping doom coming at you across the table as you try to frantically disable it.

Fortress-Abbey on tracks? The Ecclesiarchy has you covered.

Spoiler:

However, I have a feeling that something like this would sadly be too big for both selling and deployment on a table ...

I'd no idea it was actually a 'fluff thing'! Awesome!

I'd better go read up on some Sisters background, methinks.
As for a potential mode, It could be the size of that recent Khornemower for tabletop representation maybe? Either way, I'd love to see them as a viable force on the table again with some updated models to do 'em some justice

I think that'd be a unit for Epic, if we still had Epic. Failing that, something for unusually large Armageddon games, say a gym floor for a playing surface and 50,000 points a side....

Even still I don't think it'd be too far fetched to see it influence the design of say a land raider sized vehicle. Some sort of mobile chapel. Proselytizing the masses... You can't show up to every remote part of a planet with one of those full sized Abbeys.

TiamatRoar wrote:
The White Dwarf article does say "ALL updated for 6th Edition". That technically makes this codex a 6th Edition codex.

Calling it now, it'll take less than a week for people to start claiming Sisters are the most recent Codex as to why Codex X needs an update first.

I'll admit I'm getting a little excited now. At first I was all MEH and wouldn't bother buying, just find the warlord traits somewhere. Now though the prospect of minor points adjustments is giving me second thoughts.

Well, I'm hoping that the plastics will come before 7th. 7th is quite some time away, yet, so I think there's a good chance of that anyway.

And I still say that this is quite clearly a stopgap. I don't think it's intended as a real codex because they haven't changed a great deal, and it's just a digital release (for now).

 Vain wrote:


Quite right, they are totally inappropriate for battle, no one would consider such heels for a fighty-space-nun.

Spoiler:

I think I'll trust the model's representation of the SoB rather than Blanche's, thanks.

Ironically, high heels were originally a guy thing, in fact a cavalry thing, because they keep your shoes from slipping out of your stirrups when you're riding your horse to, say, go murder some people for their religious beliefs.

But yes, they are ridiculous for infantry of either gender. I guess Saint Celestine could get away with them because her feet never touch the ground...

How skinny is she, if she can fit into that power armor!?

 SisterSydney wrote:
Ironically, high heels were originally a guy thing, in fact a cavalry thing, because they keep your shoes from slipping out of your stirrups when you're riding your horse to, say, go murder some people for their religious beliefs.

But yes, they are ridiculous for infantry of either gender. I guess Saint Celestine could get away with them because her feet never touch the ground...

Yup! I always figured that Khan's boots there were more based off of cowboy boots than high heels:

In a way, it certainly fits. I mean, it's the Khan. He's supposed to ride things. Right?

Guardsmen Bob wrote:How skinny is she, if she can fit into that power armor!?

Twist: anything aside from the head is bionics.

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

Excellent to hear!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
From BOK. THe whole page:

Link doesnt work for me pretre

It ain't working for me either.

http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2013/09/27/network-news-codex-updates-my/

So we still have to wait, until we get simplified square jaw / big hand plastic version of our metal miniatures, for a 50% price hike

Seems that way, but there is always hope that the line will be awesome.

Yes, for some reason I apparently still have hope GW will do it right... I think i'm insane

I personally, would love to see plastic sisters, primarily to give by noise sisters blastmasters.The other plus is my regular sisters won't chip when they fall over. I'd like to see the update happen, even if it is just a holding pattern.

 Dude_I_Suck wrote:
I personally, would love to see plastic sisters, primarily to give by noise sisters blastmasters.The other plus is my regular sisters won't chip when they fall over. I'd like to see the update happen, even if it is just a holding pattern.

I'm tired of the holding pattern myself. I already own the codex, so I'd rather not wait another few years for a real codex. I suppose given the update schedule that Sisters could be up soon, but I no longer have any faith that GW will give Sisters a true update. If and when it does occur,I will happily recant that stance but until its in my hands I won't believe that it will occur.

 Guardsmen Bob wrote:
How skinny is she, if she can fit into that power armor!?

As skinny as all of John Blanche's freakishly anorexic fantasies.

Seriously the man is disturbed and his art sucks, let's move on to better art.

Lets hope that the points adjustment is not up!

Dude_I_Suck wrote:The other plus is my regular sisters won't chip when they fall over

Rumour has it varnish helps nicely with that problem.

Mr Morden wrote:Lets hope that the points adjustment is not up!

The SCs may well deserve it, maybe then not taking the Canoness isn't such a no-brainer anymore. Though ideally this should be addressed by actually making her more useful rather than just creating a bigger gap in costs.

Yeah, the Canoness needs more than just a price change.

Some more options would be nice - jump pack and a Few "special items" :

May replace boltgun and/or bolt pistol with
Chainsword free
Storm Bolter 3pts
Power axe, Power sword, Power maul, Combi-flamer,-melta, or plasma 10pts
Condemnor Boltgun, Plasma, Inferno Pistol or Storm Shield 15pts
Eviscerator or Preasidium Protectiva 25pts
Blessed Weapon 30pts
May take Melta Bombs 5pts
May take Roserius 25pts
May take Jump Pack 25pts
May take psyocculum 25pts

Blessed Weapons would be better, but sadly those are gone.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Eviscerator or Preasidium Protectiva 25pts

Why does SoB have to pay 10pts more for the exact same wargear that other codicies pay 15pts for? Eviscerators are 15pts in the IG and GK codex, what makes the SoB so superior they have to pay 10pts more?

But it's better than a powerfist and those are 25pts... SoB are S3.
S8 Ap2 is allot scarier than S6 Ap2 Armourbane...

But they are better at destroying vehicles! A Meltabomb does a better job for only 5 pts...

Eviscerators should be 15pts! It's the only way to deal dmg in assault for a Sister, if you are lucky enough to even get to swing.

 MadCowCrazy wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Eviscerator or Preasidium Protectiva 25pts

Why does SoB have to pay 10pts more for the exact same wargear that other codicies pay 15pts for? Eviscerators are 15pts in the IG and GK codex, what makes the SoB so superior they have to pay 10pts more?

I think the difference to the designers is the super awesomeness that is power armor. Yes, that was sarcasm in case that needs to be said. it ups the price of some weapons.

andrewm9 wrote:

 MadCowCrazy wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Eviscerator or Preasidium Protectiva 25pts

Why does SoB have to pay 10pts more for the exact same wargear that other codicies pay 15pts for? Eviscerators are 15pts in the IG and GK codex, what makes the SoB so superior they have to pay 10pts more?

I think the difference to the designers is the super awesomeness that is power armor. Yes, that was sarcasm in case that needs to be said. it ups the price of some weapons.

While you might be sarcastic, there is actually a truth in that. There is not just the difference of power armor but also with other mechanics in the army(Faith as an example).

Gambling on a minor resurgence of SOB and buying up some lots of metal for resale.

Also, there's a wishlist thread over in Proposed Rules for those of you who insist on doing do.

Links:

General wishlist thread

Spin-off thread discussing specific mechanics for new Faith Points system & new Acts of Faith

 Melissia wrote:

 Guardsmen Bob wrote:
How skinny is she, if she can fit into that power armor!?

As skinny as all of John Blanche's freakishly anorexic fantasies.

Seriously the man is disturbed and his art sucks, let's move on to better art.

Could be worse.

Games Workshop Art Direction Team Representative: "Well, we're not using John Blanche as our art director for Sisters of Battle anymore. We've decided to go in a slightly different direction."

Sisters of Battle Player: "The Sisters all look kind of small... underaged... and frilly."

GWADTR: "Yes! We've gone with CLAMP as our new art direction team for Sisters of Battle. Instead of Servo-Skulls and Cherubim, we're getting cute stuffed animal familiars instead!"

SoBP: "I hate you, Games Workshop Art Direction Team Representative."

 Mr Morden wrote:
Lets hope that the points adjustment is not up!

Don't even think it!

Jokes aside, it's a valid point. I also hope Celestine doesn't get a nerf bat to the face with a jump in cost, I've only recently finished painting her and it's probably the best thing I've painted.

D

God. If CLAMP designed Sisters everyone would have legs 6' long!

PaperworkNinja wrote:Sisters of Battle Player: "The Sisters all look kind of small... underaged... and frilly."

wat

Between putting 17 year old girls into power armour, having a possibly rather high rate of attrition, and using rejuvenation treatments, one could almost argue they're looking too old. nodontchangethem!

A bit more variety would be cool, though. More Sisters with bionics or scars like this Badass Canoness, or different ethnicities. I admit that on some images they almost look like clones - but that may well be intentional, mind you. All in all, I'm rather satisfied with the last images we got.

(Badass Canoness is from the same artist who drew the majority of SoB in the 3E Codex, btw)

So... anyone know when we actually get this thing?

Best answer ...

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

 Melissia wrote:

Seriously the man is disturbed and his art sucks, let's move on to better art.

He is probably perfectly well adjusted even if his art may be sometimes disturbing. Also, his art is awesome, it is what defines 40K.

 Manchu wrote:
Best answer ...

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

Ah... drat, was hoping for like 'oct 1st' or something along those lines... but then again, I've never known GW to put actual dates to things.

Hmmm....
Stand alone SOB codex may be code for stand alone SOB porn?

 master of ordinance wrote:
Hmmm....
Stand alone SOB codex may be code for stand alone SOB porn?

No. Now go stand in thy corner with the Cone of Shame upon ye head!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

I think 1d4chan (warning for the linguistically sensitive, there is a lot of swearing after the link) has you covered:

Haven't been there in a long while and the language I want to hear from my kids, but very funny.

I've missed this:

Another fun thing to note, in 2000+ games (IE when the army starts to become unreliable) is that you can take a second detachment of Sisters. Yeah you'll have to take a second HQ choice (and more problematically, 2 more squads of Battle Sisters). This can be slightly unwieldy, but it does mean you get D6 more points of Faith, as it's D6 per detachment.

Is this in the WD dex or in the FAQ?

Would go perfect with my current SOB list!

It is not in the codex nor the 1 page FAQ. And it hardly matters for long with possibly different faith point generation rules coming out.

whats a CLAMP?

A Japanese group of comic artists, know for their very exaggerated female forms (and I don't mean in the American way).

Google it if you dare.

Well, it'd make the sisters really stand out, at least.

 Shandara wrote:
A Japanese group of comic artists, know for their very exaggerated female forms (and I don't mean in the American way).

Google it if you dare.

They're also known for being a group entirely composed of women. They take turns leading different parts of projects from writing to drawing to inking to tone work.

Seems like they are behind Chobits, I thought that looked like a pretty standard anime.

Then again they did xxxHolic which has a rather strange art style.
This comes to mind...
http://www.gabpproperty.com/files/imagesGABPprop/product/300/KIDM4.jpg

I guess you could say the artstyle is similar to many "grays" (typical alien) I've seen.
Like this:
http://3d-stuff.ru/wp-content/uploads2/2013/08/SoftgoodImage26805a.jpg

That'd be a horrible art style for the SoB imo.

They also did Angelic Layer and I think Cardcaptor Sakura, both of which feature spunky little girl protagonists.

And no, I don't want an army of little girls. That moves from being awesome to coming off as creepy and pedophiliac.

Having the sisters carrying CLAMP weasels around would be annoying too.

Please no anime in my SOB army. I like anime, heck, I live in Japan, but SOB is something completely aesthetically different.

 MadCowCrazy wrote:

That'd be a horrible art style for the SoB imo.

I'm pretty sure that was the intended meaning/joke.

MWHistorian wrote:Please no anime in my SOB army. I like anime, heck, I live in Japan, but SOB is something completely aesthetically different.

Unless it's Motoko?

 Lynata wrote:

MWHistorian wrote:Please no anime in my SOB army. I like anime, heck, I live in Japan, but SOB is something completely aesthetically different.

Unless it's Motoko?

No thanks. That just leads to drug use, orgies, boobs and fans making even MORE porn.

Let's stick to the current design thanks.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
No thanks. That just leads to drug use, orgies, boobs and fans making even MORE porn.

Let's stick to the current design thanks.

It's like you hate fun.

 Manchu wrote:
Best answer ...

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

I don't find that reassuring at all seeing he wrote the lousy rules for the WD Codex Sisters of Battle. Perhaps he's realize the damage he's done and hoping to redeem himself. It will take more than minor tweeks to make codex SoB viable in a competitive tournament. I bet this will be another rush job with minimal play testing and the editor once again unable to distinguish a Multimelta from a Heavy Bolter.

 Snrub wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
No thanks. That just leads to drug use, orgies, boobs and fans making even MORE porn.

Let's stick to the current design thanks.

It's like you hate fun.

Not really. One of the things I like about the Sisters is their ability to be completely awesome without needing to be done up for to appeal to horny 12 year old boys. I LIKE strong female characters (mostly because they're few and far between and the really good ones just make me marvel in how pure badass they are) and the fact that they don't pander to people through sex is awesome!

Not to mention they're the army that best fits the entire setting. If they aren't baroque and gothic when they make plastics I may have to write a sternly worded letter!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SabrX wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Best answer ...

 evildrcheese wrote:
Spoke to Cruddence @ Games Day re SoB asking if the digital version is his WD dex. He confirmed it is, hes been involved in the writing of the warlord traits was the impression I got. He also told me they'velooked at the scaling issue for faith points and that there's been 'minor' point tweaks. Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

I don't find that reassuring at all seeing he wrote the lousy rules for the WD Codex Sisters of Battle. Perhaps he's realize the damage he's done and hoping to redeem himself. It will take more than minor tweeks to make codex SoB viable in a competitive tournament. I bet this will be another rush job with minimal play testing and the editor once again unable to distinguish a Multimelta from a Heavy Bolter.

Cruddace doesn't excite me, but his balance in the Space Marine codex is looking a lot better than his older work, so perhaps he's starting to get better.

That or he had a lot of help. In which case I hope Matt Ward was ghost writing as Cruddace on this update.

 Snrub wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
No thanks. That just leads to drug use, orgies, boobs and fans making even MORE porn.

Let's stick to the current design thanks.

It's like you hate fun.

No, no, it's more like he is exhibiting good taste and decency...

 Manchu wrote:
Best answer ...

 evildrcheese wrote:
Release date is for next month (October). Interestingly he said it'll probably be treat like a supplement in that if it sells well as a digital it's probably get a physical release. Spoke to someone from the digital editions stand and they confirmed it'll be for Android aswell as Ipad.

D

Sells? Are they now going to charge us for the digitalized version of a White Dwarf list? I guess I shouldn't be surprised but I was anyway.

The more I play the WD dex the more I like it. People are often surprised by how much hurt my Sisters can put out, so I'm not fussed that it's getting a revamp until we get our proper codex (as long as we do get a proper dex at some point).

D

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Hmmm....
Stand alone SOB codex may be code for stand alone SOB porn?

No. Now go stand in thy corner with the Cone of Shame upon ye head!

Yes sir

How can a boring copy paste digital release of a boring WD Codex (that basically just halved the Codex' choices) bring about a discussion of wishlisted anime miniatures for wishlisted new Codex rules?

 Kroothawk wrote:
How can a boring copy paste digital release of a boring WD Codex (that basically just halved the Codex' choices) bring about a discussion of wishlisted anime miniatures for wishlisted new Codex rules?

Did you forget which site you're reading posts on?

 Kroothawk wrote:
How can a boring copy paste digital release of a boring WD Codex (that basically just halved the Codex' choices) bring about a discussion of wishlisted anime miniatures for wishlisted new Codex rules?

Internet.

More on topic: I really wish GW would put a release date on this so I would have to check iTunes everyday in anticipation.

Personally i'll probably get the codex even if it is just a WD rework like i expect it to be. I don't have the WD codex so ...

But i fear like many that this will push an actual sister release with new models even further back in the line. (But that gives me reason to move forward with my own custom sculpted sisters project.)

And regarding the design of the models and the whole army style - i rather like them. And while i have no problem with the metal models i don't like them from a converter standpoint. Those are nearly impossiblem to properly repose and i like to make each of my models something special.

Kroothawk wrote:How can a boring copy paste digital release of a boring WD Codex (that basically just halved the Codex' choices) bring about a discussion of wishlisted anime miniatures for wishlisted new Codex rules?

We're desperate.

ClockworkZion wrote:

Lynata wrote:

MWHistorian wrote:Please no anime in my SOB army. I like anime, heck, I live in Japan, but SOB is something completely aesthetically different.

Unless it's Motoko?

No thanks. That just leads to drug use, orgies, boobs and fans making even MORE porn.
Let's stick to the current design thanks.

As if that didn't have the same effect...

 btldoomhammer wrote:
But i fear like many that this will push an actual sister release with new models even further back in the line. (But that gives me reason to move forward with my own custom sculpted sisters project.)

See, this is a thing I don't get. There is no sign of the Sisters shifting anywhere and we've got panic about them being moved back? If we were tracking them on the release schedule (instead of my speculation for instance) then I'd understand, but we don't even know when GW wants to release them anyways so I don't know how we can worry about them moving "back". Back from what? Potentially never?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
See, this is a thing I don't get. There is no sign of the Sisters shifting anywhere and we've got panic about them being moved back? If we were tracking them on the release schedule (instead of my speculation for instance) then I'd understand, but we don't even know when GW wants to release them anyways so I don't know how we can worry about them moving "back". Back from what? Potentially never?

Well the way i meant it is more in a way of GW thinking: "Well we gave them a codex to get the sisters out of the way and don't need to think about a potential release in the near future". But you are also right in your statement. If something doesn't have an already set release date there is nothing to be pushed back.


Everything we talk about here is guesswork. The only true fact is that there will be a digital codex. We can't even be sure if there actually will be further SoB codices or not. But what i read into GW releasing a digital codex is that they haven't forgotten about the sisters but won't do another update in the near future. Pushing money into developing two codices for the same army in a short time is unrealistic. And with the way GW has published models recently i don't expect a full plastic sister release not accompanied with a codex. But like i said this is all guesswork and GW already did the fliers outside of the codex release schedule. We just have to wait and see.

 btldoomhammer wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
See, this is a thing I don't get. There is no sign of the Sisters shifting anywhere and we've got panic about them being moved back? If we were tracking them on the release schedule (instead of my speculation for instance) then I'd understand, but we don't even know when GW wants to release them anyways so I don't know how we can worry about them moving "back". Back from what? Potentially never?

Well the way i meant it is more in a way of GW thinking: "Well we gave them a codex to get the sisters out of the way and don't need to think about a potential release in the near future". But you are also right in your statement. If something doesn't have an already set release date there is nothing to be pushed back.

Everything we talk about here is guesswork. The only true fact is that there will be a digital codex. We can't even be sure if there actually will be further SoB codices or not. But what i read into GW releasing a digital codex is that they haven't forgotten about the sisters but won't do another update in the near future. Pushing money into developing two codices for the same army in a short time is unrealistic. And with the way GW has published models recently i don't expect a full plastic sister release not accompanied with a codex. But like i said this is all guesswork and GW already did the fliers outside of the codex release schedule. We just have to wait and see.

I'm betting Sisters have had a set date before even this digital release was done honestly. I see this as being basically the same as what GW was doing in the past with new kits and updated rules in the WD before releases: they're trying to drum up interest in the army and say "don't worry, we haven't forgotten about them" to the players.

But then again I never agree with the assessment that just because GW does something that it means the army is obviously going to get screwed over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Honestly this is GW we're talking about and I don't know of anything they do that doesn't have some kind of plan behind it. This isn't a company that does things haphazardly or just throws things against the wall (okay, they do that inside codexes, but the point is more about the general business plans here).

If GW is putting the focus on Sisters again and taking the time to tweak and update the rules, even a little then I'm betting that they have a plan for the army in mind and what they're going to try and do with them.

Especially with things like the plastic kits being viable now, and Kelly saying he's got ideas for the army (though I'm wondering if those ideas are just from that feedback letter I sent regarding stuff we currently have...) I don't see GW pushing the army anywhere but prepping for a release and perhaps even using this digital release (and the possible paper release) to gauge what their production goals for models, codexes and so on should be.

It's been years since they've had reliable sales data for the army and they are in desperate need of some if they're going to do anything with it in the future while avoiding the mistakes that occurred with Tau and Eldar (namely not having enough ready for the release)

 ClockworkZion wrote:

But then again I never agree with the assessment that just because GW does something that it means the army is obviously going to get screwed over.

I agree. I am looking forward positively for what GW will come up with in regard of sisters - whenever this will happen. And even if GW should decide to drops them this just gives me the possibility to create my own version of the sisters played with another codex or even a community created fandex.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I really wish GW would put a release date on this so I would have to check iTunes everyday in anticipation.

From their Facebook page: "We haven't announced the release dates for these yet, but I can say that Sisters of Battle and Sentinels of Terra will be released in October, and Blood Angels will be in November" (which isn't much help...)

beast_gts wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I really wish GW would put a release date on this so I would have to check iTunes everyday in anticipation.

From their Facebook page: "We haven't announced the release dates for these yet, but I can say that Sisters of Battle and Sentinels of Terra will be released in October, and Blood Angels will be in November" (which isn't much help...)

Exactly, as today is October. Flippin' hell GW, quit teasing us!

Come on guys, don't you know that vengeance is not the only dish best served cold ? Disappointment is too ! If we don't have time to fantasize about this new release, if we don't get to feverishly check if it's available, how are we going to get sufficiently disappointed when it finally turns out ?

beast_gts wrote:
From their Facebook page: "We haven't announced the release dates for these yet, but I can say that Sisters of Battle and Sentinels of Terra will be released in October, and Blood Angels will be in November" (which isn't much help...)

Well that's standard GW practice, isn't it? Announce everything at the lastest possible moment, to maximise impulse buys?

Doesn't matter, anyway. I'm poised to buy it whenever it comes out. I just hope that it comes out soon.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 btldoomhammer wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
See, this is a thing I don't get. There is no sign of the Sisters shifting anywhere and we've got panic about them being moved back? If we were tracking them on the release schedule (instead of my speculation for instance) then I'd understand, but we don't even know when GW wants to release them anyways so I don't know how we can worry about them moving "back". Back from what? Potentially never?

Well the way i meant it is more in a way of GW thinking: "Well we gave them a codex to get the sisters out of the way and don't need to think about a potential release in the near future". But you are also right in your statement. If something doesn't have an already set release date there is nothing to be pushed back.

Everything we talk about here is guesswork. The only true fact is that there will be a digital codex. We can't even be sure if there actually will be further SoB codices or not. But what i read into GW releasing a digital codex is that they haven't forgotten about the sisters but won't do another update in the near future. Pushing money into developing two codices for the same army in a short time is unrealistic. And with the way GW has published models recently i don't expect a full plastic sister release not accompanied with a codex. But like i said this is all guesswork and GW already did the fliers outside of the codex release schedule. We just have to wait and see.

I'm betting Sisters have had a set date before even this digital release was done honestly. I see this as being basically the same as what GW was doing in the past with new kits and updated rules in the WD before releases: they're trying to drum up interest in the army and say "don't worry, we haven't forgotten about them" to the players.

But then again I never agree with the assessment that just because GW does something that it means the army is obviously going to get screwed over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Honestly this is GW we're talking about and I don't know of anything they do that doesn't have some kind of plan behind it. This isn't a company that does things haphazardly or just throws things against the wall (okay, they do that inside codexes, but the point is more about the general business plans here).

If GW is putting the focus on Sisters again and taking the time to tweak and update the rules, even a little then I'm betting that they have a plan for the army in mind and what they're going to try and do with them.

Especially with things like the plastic kits being viable now, and Kelly saying he's got ideas for the army (though I'm wondering if those ideas are just from that feedback letter I sent regarding stuff we currently have...) I don't see GW pushing the army anywhere but prepping for a release and perhaps even using this digital release (and the possible paper release) to gauge what their production goals for models, codexes and so on should be.

It's been years since they've had reliable sales data for the army and they are in desperate need of some if they're going to do anything with it in the future while avoiding the mistakes that occurred with Tau and Eldar (namely not having enough ready for the release)

Exalted. I think that the pessimism surrounding the SoB really can get unreasonable sometimes, it's good to realise that things don't always point towards the worst outcome, there's plenty of evidence that we'll get a good outcome.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Come on guys, don't you know that vengeance is not the only dish best served cold ? Disappointment is too ! If we don't have time to fantasize about this new release, if we don't get to feverishly check if it's available, how are we going to get sufficiently disappointed when it finally turns out ?

I was fine with the WD dex (and actually win with with it more than I did with C:WH honestly) so this update isn't likely to dissapoint, especially if BSS go down to 10ppm. Heck, I'd even settle for 11ppm if it meant we had cheaper heavy flamers and eviscerators (which should be available to every unit!).

Basically as long at this doesn't make my iPad burst into flames upon download I'll be happy.

And even if it does, then I'll know it's a proper Sisters update because it was burning a non-Mechanicus approved machine (tech heresy!).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Troike wrote:
Exalted. I think that the pessimism surrounding the SoB really can get unreasonable sometimes, it's good to realise that things don't always point towards the worst outcome, there's plenty of evidence that we'll get a good outcome.

Thank you!

Yeah, I've been making a ruckus for a while whenever anyone tries to claim that the only hope for the Sisters is something negative.

Additionally I'm usually pretty quick to cut the heart out of arguments that claim they need to get rolled into an Inquisition book or dropped.