Hey mates. I am seriously tempted to purchase a copy of the new Imperial Agents Codex, however I've been hearing a lot of negativity and salt surrounding it at this time. Basically, the gist of it is that they didn't really improve anything and it's just a way to have Inquisition, Sisters of Battle, and some other unique units in a book instead of having them on data-slates. With that being the case, did they change the Inquisition and the warbands in any particular way? And are there any formations in the Codex that are worth running, particularly in the case of the Grey Knights and the Deathwatch? Appreciate the help and feedback.
Ironwolf45 wrote: Hey mates. I am seriously tempted to purchase a copy of the new Imperial Agents Codex, however I've been hearing a lot of negativity and salt surrounding it at this time. Basically, the gist of it is that they didn't really improve anything and it's just a way to have Inquisition, Sisters of Battle, and some other unique units in a book instead of having them on data-slates. With that being the case, did they change the Inquisition and the warbands in any particular way? And are there any formations in the Codex that are worth running, particularly in the case of the Grey Knights and the Deathwatch? Appreciate the help and feedback.
What you heard is mostly correct, though I'm not entirely certain it's a bad thing. Here are the major changes, at least to my memory:
Celestine is gone. This is the biggest bad thing, IMO.
Servo-Skulls are also gone.
Warbands are now a formation instead of a unit, with a few noteworthy changes:
First, you have to include a unit of Acolytes, meaning you have at least 3 guardsman statlines in your Warband.
Second, you buy the other types of guys by the unit, instead of by the model, usually limited to one unit of each. This means that if you want any of them you have to take at least two crusaders (but up to 10,) at least 2 DCA, at least 3 Arco-flagellants, you can only bring one Priest or Astropath, etc. (Jaekero and Daemonhosts are 0-6, so you can take them in variable quantities.)
Sisters get a fairly static detachment, it's really not noteworthy. (You don't get ObjSec, you instead get re-rolls on saves of 1 for a full turn, once per game.)
Priests are now an HQ choice, instead of the old "0-5, but can't be your HQ" thing.
None of the formations are particularly noteworthy. Variations of 'Come in sooner/more reliably' for the most part. (Deathwatch get the same Aquilla bonus that they do in the main codex.) Mostly, it just allows you to take tiny extra detachments from other factions.
IMO, if they were looking to cut down on the number of Codices, the first place to start would be the half-dozen or so Space Marine codices in existence with full model ranges.
Pouncey wrote: IMO, if they were looking to cut down on the number of Codices, the first place to start would be the half-dozen or so Space Marine codices in existence with full model ranges.
^This.
I was super excited to purchase the imperial agents codex until I learned that Officio Assassinorum rules were just copy pasted from the White Dwarf. No thanks. I'll just stick with the Culexus until they decide to make the other assassin temples viable.
AnomanderRake wrote: No. Every army in it doesn't actually work as written and the changes to the Inquisition are tremendous nerfs.
This isn't true in the slightest. Inquisition got some nerfs, some buffs, and are ultimately about the same unless you were using them in really cheap, exploity ways (Namely, taking barebones Inquisitors for the 3 Servo Skulls and access to 18-pt psychic batteries.)
Most things work as written, with a few confusing elements that need some clarification, because they've never written a big combo-faction book before.
AnomanderRake wrote: No. Every army in it doesn't actually work as written and the changes to the Inquisition are tremendous nerfs.
This isn't true in the slightest. Inquisition got some nerfs, some buffs, and are ultimately about the same unless you were using them in really cheap, exploity ways (Namely, taking barebones Inquisitors for the 3 Servo Skulls and access to 18-pt psychic batteries.)
Most things work as written, with a few confusing elements that need some clarification, because they've never written a big combo-faction book before.
Given how the Inquisition works in the lore, shouldn't the Inquisition always have been taken as a small command section for a larger force from another Codex, rather than an army in its own right? Isn't that why Inquisition became a standalone dataslate with rules for allying into other Imperial forces after being separated from the Daemonhunters and Witch Hunters codices back about half a decade ago?
AnomanderRake wrote: No. Every army in it doesn't actually work as written and the changes to the Inquisition are tremendous nerfs.
This isn't true in the slightest. Inquisition got some nerfs, some buffs, and are ultimately about the same unless you were using them in really cheap, exploity ways (Namely, taking barebones Inquisitors for the 3 Servo Skulls and access to 18-pt psychic batteries.)
Most things work as written, with a few confusing elements that need some clarification, because they've never written a big combo-faction book before.
Given how the Inquisition works in the lore, shouldn't the Inquisition always have been taken as a small command section for a larger force from another Codex, rather than an army in its own right? Isn't that why Inquisition became a standalone dataslate with rules for allying into other Imperial forces after being separated from the Daemonhunters and Witch Hunters codices back about half a decade ago?
Taking them as a small command section for a larger force is great. Taking stripped-down barebones units for access to one specific piece of wargear isn't how they work in the lore, though. (Ultimately, those 18-pt batteries or cheap servo-skull carriers weren't game breakers, but they didn't really make sense or work as they were intended to, which is why I don't mind that they were changed.
Actually from what i understand the SoB are still in their own codex and thie dex is only for those that want to include small elements from other smaller dexs.
so if you're already running a sisters army (like myself) we still run the current dex BUT if you're running another army and want to include sisters into it you'll need this dex.
AnomanderRake wrote: No. Every army in it doesn't actually work as written and the changes to the Inquisition are tremendous nerfs.
"Every army doesn't work as written"? Care to elaborate? Mechanicus don't really help very much, but their rules work just fine. Astra Telepathica have no problems. Aeronatica are broken, yes. Deathwatch works fine. Grey Knights work fine, with only a minor bit of confusion since they can apparently take choices from their main codex. Sisters of Battle work fine. The only army that has real, major issues are the Inquisition, and they only have two issues, one regarding how Factions work with transports since they're kind of weird, and the other regarding how attaching the Deathwatch, GK, and SoB works.
That's three major problems I can think of. Any others you care to mention?
- it is the only way to have a hard covered book for the armies in it. ( This is huge for inq & sisters)
- it has some extreme msu options such as lone 10 pt daemon hosts.
- it has am option to build an 100 man henchmen squad in it ( made with crusaders death cult assassins and a priest)
- priests are now independent chars and you can add one to any army. On is still allowed me to buy the auto pass relic.
-25 point independent character packers that you can add to any army.
-there is an extremely cheap way to boost canticles of the o in the book.
- it gives renegade in options to the malleus inq.
- it buffs all inq models individually with a free warlord trait.
- power armour has a 50รท discount in the book inq army.
- it has tons of strange small detachment it making it simpler to add things you like to your army.
- allmost all rogue trader RPG player character s can now be represented by independent characters that can be added to any Inc army.
AnomanderRake wrote: No. Every army in it doesn't actually work as written and the changes to the Inquisition are tremendous nerfs.
This isn't true in the slightest. Inquisition got some nerfs, some buffs, and are ultimately about the same unless you were using them in really cheap, exploity ways (Namely, taking barebones Inquisitors for the 3 Servo Skulls and access to 18-pt psychic batteries.)
Most things work as written, with a few confusing elements that need some clarification, because they've never written a big combo-faction book before.
Given how the Inquisition works in the lore, shouldn't the Inquisition always have been taken as a small command section for a larger force from another Codex, rather than an army in its own right? Isn't that why Inquisition became a standalone dataslate with rules for allying into other Imperial forces after being separated from the Daemonhunters and Witch Hunters codices back about half a decade ago?
Taking them as a small command section for a larger force is great. Taking stripped-down barebones units for access to one specific piece of wargear isn't how they work in the lore, though. (Ultimately, those 18-pt batteries or cheap servo-skull carriers weren't game breakers, but they didn't really make sense or work as they were intended to, which is why I don't mind that they were changed.
Ahh, okay.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
captain bloody fists wrote: Actually from what i understand the SoB are still in their own codex and thie dex is only for those that want to include small elements from other smaller dexs.
so if you're already running a sisters army (like myself) we still run the current dex BUT if you're running another army and want to include sisters into it you'll need this dex.
What happened to the Allies matrix and/or Unbound lists that would mandate the Imperial Agents codex being necessary?
To be clear, my problem with the batteries was that they clearly weren't meant to work the way they did - They were created in 6th edition, when Warp Charges didn't exist, and their rules were clearly designed so that you'd need lots of them to be any good. (Their power was a large blast that got stronger the more psykers were in the unit.) When 7th ed came around, they lost their special power, and with it, they lost any reason to take more than one psyker.
AnomanderRake wrote: No. Every army in it doesn't actually work as written and the changes to the Inquisition are tremendous nerfs.
This isn't true in the slightest. Inquisition got some nerfs, some buffs, and are ultimately about the same unless you were using them in really cheap, exploity ways (Namely, taking barebones Inquisitors for the 3 Servo Skulls and access to 18-pt psychic batteries.)
Most things work as written, with a few confusing elements that need some clarification, because they've never written a big combo-faction book before.
Given how the Inquisition works in the lore, shouldn't the Inquisition always have been taken as a small command section for a larger force from another Codex, rather than an army in its own right? Isn't that why Inquisition became a standalone dataslate with rules for allying into other Imperial forces after being separated from the Daemonhunters and Witch Hunters codices back about half a decade ago?
If the Inquisitorial Stormtrooper-substitutes weren't so incredibly terrible and GW didn't insist on making me buy 4+ books to run my army I'd be okay with this development.
But... it's less comforting when you consider the fact that Celestine did not simply go out of stock, she is instead no longer available.
Also, my experience with World of Warcraft recently has led me to be wary of gaming companies promising things like this. I would not be surprised if this were merely an attempt to make Sisters players more comfortable in the meantime, then later the Adepta Sororitas Codex were simply never updated again, and eventually is pulled from sale. Blizzard pulled something similar by promising that old character models would still be available, then only two years later they removed the option to use old models.
Yes i'm a little concerned about her as well. she was one of the best HQ choices for the army. though we do now have canoness Veridyan and her awesome Precision shot and strike trickery. Who knows they may actually be pulling their finger out of their butts and ACTUALLY updating the model/s
But see if you're already a sisters player you have the digital codex and that's still mostly your source of info (though there are formations iirc in IA). i think what might happen is new sisters players will pick this up and then start using this as the source and then eventually the dex will be dropped unbeknownst to old players.
captain bloody fists wrote: Yes i'm a little concerned about her as well. she was one of the best HQ choices for the army. though we do now have canoness Veridyan and her awesome Precision shot and strike trickery. Who knows they may actually be pulling their finger out of their butts and ACTUALLY updating the model/s
But see if you're already a sisters player you have the digital codex and that's still mostly your source of info (though there are formations iirc in IA). i think what might happen is new sisters players will pick this up and then start using this as the source and then eventually the dex will be dropped unbeknownst to old players.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Why/how on earth did that post stuff up so much....?
Veridyan also concerns me a bit. She's a resin model, not a multi-part plastic kit like all of the other character kits to come out recently.
I wonder if maybe people were right to suspect that the metal models might just be replaced by resin ones, perhaps even with a price hike for GW's trouble. I hope not, but you never know.
Also sisters gained inits not lost units since this ia a supplement. Just print out saint c + all the other data sheets you like more in the old codex and you have a hard cover book.
Sister players are no longer limited on the amount of priests they can take.
They can take death cult assassins and crusaders without a priest and can take the cannonness support squad without taking the cannonnones as elite choice.
They have that up to 100 men close combat henchmen squad
And they do have a new cad like detachment option that trades opsec for 1 turn reroll all 1s on saves
captain bloody fists wrote: Hadn't thought of that Pouncey.
i hope not, i really would like to have some sister conversions hit the table...
I was looking forward to doing conversions like this on Sororitas models:
Spoiler:
I should get around to finishing that guy's paint job some day...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
oldzoggy wrote: Also sisters gained inits not lost units since this ia a supplement. Just print out saint c + all the other data sheets you like more in the old codex and you have a hard cover book.
Sister players are no longer limited on the amount of priests they can take.
They can take death cult assassins and crusaders without a priest and can take the cannonness support squad without taking the cannonnones as elite choice.
They have that up to 100 men close combat henchmen squad
And they do have a new cad like detachment option that trades opsec for 1 turn reroll all 1s on saves
I had to print out my entire Codex anyways since I don't have a tablet or eReader to bring my Codex to the tabletop.
I never took enough priests to reach the limit before.
Priests are good enough with a Battle Conclave, and cheap enough, there's little point in not taking one anyways. And I have to question the logic of anyone who decided that a commander's personal squad did not need a commander to be the personal squad of.
That sounds absurd. That's essentially a Green Tide formation.
That sounds like a terrible tradeoff given the number of objective-based games out there.
captain bloody fists wrote: Yes i'm a little concerned about her as well. she was one of the best HQ choices for the army. though we do now have canoness Veridyan and her awesome Precision shot and strike trickery. Who knows they may actually be pulling their finger out of their butts and ACTUALLY updating the model/s
But see if you're already a sisters player you have the digital codex and that's still mostly your source of info (though there are formations iirc in IA). i think what might happen is new sisters players will pick this up and then start using this as the source and then eventually the dex will be dropped unbeknownst to old players.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Why/how on earth did that post stuff up so much....?
Veridyan also concerns me a bit. She's a resin model, not a multi-part plastic kit like all of the other character kits to come out recently.
I wonder if maybe people were right to suspect that the metal models might just be replaced by resin ones, perhaps even with a price hike for GW's trouble. I hope not, but you never know.
You are a passionate veteran sister s player.
How many models do you honestly expect to buy ? It seems to me that models like Berri are exactly what you would be spending your money on, not on the hypothetical train replacements of the sister models you already have. Also the entire new sisters models discussion is I off topic and a good way to steer this thread into a pointless heated discussion.
captain bloody fists wrote: Yes i'm a little concerned about her as well. she was one of the best HQ choices for the army. though we do now have canoness Veridyan and her awesome Precision shot and strike trickery. Who knows they may actually be pulling their finger out of their butts and ACTUALLY updating the model/s
But see if you're already a sisters player you have the digital codex and that's still mostly your source of info (though there are formations iirc in IA). i think what might happen is new sisters players will pick this up and then start using this as the source and then eventually the dex will be dropped unbeknownst to old players.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Why/how on earth did that post stuff up so much....?
Veridyan also concerns me a bit. She's a resin model, not a multi-part plastic kit like all of the other character kits to come out recently.
I wonder if maybe people were right to suspect that the metal models might just be replaced by resin ones, perhaps even with a price hike for GW's trouble. I hope not, but you never know.
You are a passionate veteran sister s player.
How many models do you honestly expect to buy ? It seems to me that models like Berri are exactly what you would be spending your money on, not on the hypothetical train replacements of the s
I was planning on replacing my entire army, so I can make them into furries using Skink parts.
captain bloody fists wrote: Yes i'm a little concerned about her as well. she was one of the best HQ choices for the army. though we do now have canoness Veridyan and her awesome Precision shot and strike trickery. Who knows they may actually be pulling their finger out of their butts and ACTUALLY updating the model/s
But see if you're already a sisters player you have the digital codex and that's still mostly your source of info (though there are formations iirc in IA). i think what might happen is new sisters players will pick this up and then start using this as the source and then eventually the dex will be dropped unbeknownst to old players.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Why/how on earth did that post stuff up so much....?
Veridyan also concerns me a bit. She's a resin model, not a multi-part plastic kit like all of the other character kits to come out recently.
I wonder if maybe people were right to suspect that the metal models might just be replaced by resin ones, perhaps even with a price hike for GW's trouble. I hope not, but you never know.
You are a passionate veteran sister s player.
How many models do you honestly expect to buy ? It seems to me that models like Berri are exactly what you would be spending your money on, not on the hypothetical train replacements of the sister models you already have. Also the entire new sisters models discussion is I off topic and a good way to steer this thread into a pointless heated discussion.
Me? honestly only a few extra heavy weapon specialist and whatever new vehicles and new named characters they bring out. i already have over 100 infantry models and 6 immolators and 4 exorcists so i think i'm for them
The green tide formation wished it could be this monster.
They are all fearles, have hatred, all have power swords, reroll saves in close combat and can be all 2++ if you add draigo.
The green tide formation wished it could be this monster.
They are all fearles, have hatred, all have power swords, reroll saves in close combat and can be all 2++ if you add draigo.
"Hey, what are you doing with that bucket?"
"It's for my close combat phase. Too many dice to roll by hand, the bucket's faster."
Lol fair enough but I am more interested in getting it for the Inquisition and the possibility to field an allied unit of Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and maybe some Sisters depending. Anyways, in regards to the Inquisition, does anyone know if the FW Inquisitor Solomon Lok is mentioned or how he would be affected with this? And how did the Acolytes change exactly in regards to their wargear, as I am aware their Stats didn't change much at all.
Warbands are now a formation instead of a unit, with a few noteworthy changes:
First, you have to include a unit of Acolytes, meaning you have at least 3 guardsman statlines in your Warband.
Second, you buy the other types of guys by the unit, instead of by the model, usually limited to one unit of each. This means that if you want any of them you have to take at least two crusaders (but up to 10,) at least 2 DCA, at least 3 Arco-flagellants, you can only bring one Priest or Astropath, etc. (Jaekero and Daemonhosts are 0-6, so you can take them in variable quantities.)
I must have missed the clarification on this... there was some discussion as to whether it was 0-1 units or 0-1 models. The wording was a little funky, and "unit" was only used in reference to Acolytes. Did we get a definitive answer at some point? Having multiple DCAs and Crusaders is obviously preferable, so I'm liking the way you explained it... hope it's true!
Ironwolf45 wrote: Lol fair enough but I am more interested in getting it for the Inquisition and the possibility to field an allied unit of Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and maybe some Sisters depending. Anyways, in regards to the Inquisition, does anyone know if the FW Inquisitor Solomon Lok is mentioned or how he would be affected with this? And how did the Acolytes change exactly in regards to their wargear, as I am aware their Stats didn't change much at all.
Mostly their armor just got cheaper. Carapace is now 2ppm, and Power Armor is now 5ppm, making psuedo-Marines only 10ppm, and making psuedo-veterans only 6ppm. Solomon Lok is not mentioned at all. The other Acolyte gear is exactly the same.
GW: "Hey guys buy this book with unneeded, unwanted nerfs for an interesting, not cheesy army respectful of the old style of 40k. Also, we removed an iconic character from an already controversial army list. Please buy it, we need it as an experiment for the AoSification of 40k that you guys are totally going to enjoy. Thanks".
Kaiyanwang wrote: GW: "Hey guys buy this book with unneeded, unwanted nerfs for an interesting, not cheesy army respectful of the old style of 40k. Also, we removed an iconic character from an already controversial army list. Please buy it, we need it as an experiment for the AoSification of 40k that you guys are totally going to enjoy. Thanks".
Kaiyanwang wrote: GW: "Hey guys buy this book with unneeded, unwanted nerfs for an interesting, not cheesy army respectful of the old style of 40k. Also, we removed an iconic character from an already controversial army list. Please buy it, we need it as an experiment for the AoSification of 40k that you guys are totally going to enjoy. Thanks".
Pouncey: "Hi GW, thank you for your helpful suggestion to simply abandon the tabletop game now instead of waiting until my army gets the axe during the AoS40k 'tidying' of minor armies. It's very nice of you to be so up front about it for once, as all that false hope and empty promises were starting to wear thin."
Please, somebody, explain to me: What are all these damned nerfs you're talking about? The cheesy, unfluffy psyker batteries that weren't even an intended squad? (And that still pretty much exist through Astropaths?)
There's only two real "Nerfs" that I can see - Celestine, and Servo Skulls. Yeah, losing Celestine sucks, and Servo Skulls (while responsible for some cheesy spamming) were neat, but we have gotten at least as many useful new rules and gear back, so what the heck is everyone on about?
Chimeras went from the 5 man fire port version to the much more garbage 2 man fire port with lasgun arrays. Henchmen squads can't take 10 point psyker so that hurts things like having a cheap psychic shriek out of that 5 fire port chimera. Servos going away hurts deep strike heavy lists. Also think they upped the cost of some of the inquisitor power weapons but I'm not 100% sure on that. No idea if chimeras lost psy ammo or not but if so then that hurts my heavy bolter chimeras.
Waaaghpower wrote: Please, somebody, explain to me: What are all these damned nerfs you're talking about? The cheesy, unfluffy psyker batteries that weren't even an intended squad? (And that still pretty much exist through Astropaths?)
There's only two real "Nerfs" that I can see - Celestine, and Servo Skulls. Yeah, losing Celestine sucks, and Servo Skulls (while responsible for some cheesy spamming) were neat, but we have gotten at least as many useful new rules and gear back, so what the heck is everyone on about?
In a sense you are kind of right. At the same time as a sisters player, getting a weak 6th edition style codex at the end of 7th edition missing a strong hq choice that ends up nerfing one of your other units sucks.
Some of the acts of faith are worded a little better now, but are less than ideal in most cases still. They need a slight points tweak in places and acts of faith that actually help the units that can use them.
A couple formations, penitent engines to elites section and celestine would be nice( I assume she will be back in a LOW slot with a bigger model at some point).
The rest of the book is a mess of poorly worded rules and stuff you could have done before minus a couple options.
Vankraken wrote: Chimeras went from the 5 man fire port version to the much more garbage 2 man fire port with lasgun arrays. Henchmen squads can't take 10 point psyker so that hurts things like having a cheap psychic shriek out of that 5 fire port chimera. Servos going away hurts deep strike heavy lists. Also think they upped the cost of some of the inquisitor power weapons but I'm not 100% sure on that. No idea if chimeras lost psy ammo or not but if so then that hurts my heavy bolter chimeras.
Psy ammo is still available, and the power weapons are the same cost. I'll admit, I missed the Chimera thing.
You still get a 25pt psyker, by the way - 15pts more, which in my opinion is a great move. Psykers were never meant to be that cheap, it was a janky artifact from the transition into 7th ed.
I think the real problem is that, while things did not get worse, they also didn't get significantly better, which comes as a bit of a shock. If you're expecting steak and you get a hamburger, it's going to be a lot more disappointing than just havinh hamburger all along. Since it seems like a lot of people were expecting significant buffs and didn't get any, then all the minor nerfs seem to hurt a lot more than they really do, and all the buffs don't appear as helpful as they really are.
Vankraken wrote: Chimeras went from the 5 man fire port version to the much more garbage 2 man fire port with lasgun arrays. Henchmen squads can't take 10 point psyker so that hurts things like having a cheap psychic shriek out of that 5 fire port chimera. Servos going away hurts deep strike heavy lists. Also think they upped the cost of some of the inquisitor power weapons but I'm not 100% sure on that. No idea if chimeras lost psy ammo or not but if so then that hurts my heavy bolter chimeras.
Psy ammo is still available,.
It is no longer an upgrade for vehicles in the new book. The only upgrade for the I chimera in the new book is true silver armour. So I greatly prefer the old versions since +1 Str heavy bolters infinitely more useful in casual games than those silly servoskulls. [edit] I was wrong they still have the option it is just not listed under equipment in the appendix
Automatically Appended Next Post:
koooaei wrote: Did i get it wrong or inq still get cheaper chimeras? like 55 pt, right? A steal for such a transport.
I Chimera's are 55 points in the new book.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I am totally fine with the fire point thing since it wasn't clear at all where those 5 fire points where located. This was questioned quite a lot, in recent games.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vankraken wrote: Also think they upped the cost of some of the inquisitor power weapons but I'm not 100% sure on that.
Power weapons cost 10 points in the codex and cost 15 in the new book.
Waaaghpower wrote: Please, somebody, explain to me: What are all these damned nerfs you're talking about? The cheesy, unfluffy psyker batteries that weren't even an intended squad? (And that still pretty much exist through Astropaths?)
There's only two real "Nerfs" that I can see - Celestine, and Servo Skulls. Yeah, losing Celestine sucks, and Servo Skulls (while responsible for some cheesy spamming) were neat, but we have gotten at least as many useful new rules and gear back, so what the heck is everyone on about?
In a sense you are kind of right. At the same time as a sisters player, getting a weak 6th edition style codex at the end of 7th edition missing a strong hq choice that ends up nerfing one of your other units sucks.
Some of the acts of faith are worded a little better now, but are less than ideal in most cases still. They need a slight points tweak in places and acts of faith that actually help the units that can use them.
A couple formations, penitent engines to elites section and celestine would be nice( I assume she will be back in a LOW slot with a bigger model at some point).
The rest of the book is a mess of poorly worded rules and stuff you could have done before minus a couple options.
Dude our codex is still valid. GW have said so themselves. This book is purely for other players to include sisters in their armies.
captain bloody fists wrote: Dude our codex is still valid. GW have said so themselves. This book is purely for other players to include sisters in their armies.
Is the Allies Matrix going somewhere in the next edition?
And what if you want to ally your Sisters with Imperial Guard?
captain bloody fists wrote: Dude our codex is still valid. GW have said so themselves. This book is purely for other players to include sisters in their armies.
Is the Allies Matrix going somewhere in the next edition?
And what if you want to ally your Sisters with Imperial Guard?
ugh, just ask your local chaos player how to handle multiple books with different rules.
Hint you will like the answer a lot ; )
captain bloody fists wrote: Dude our codex is still valid. GW have said so themselves. This book is purely for other players to include sisters in their armies.
Is the Allies Matrix going somewhere in the next edition?
And what if you want to ally your Sisters with Imperial Guard?
Wouldn't have the foggiest.
Well you would use the IA book to ally sisters to IG. I would say.
captain bloody fists wrote: Dude our codex is still valid. GW have said so themselves. This book is purely for other players to include sisters in their armies.
Is the Allies Matrix going somewhere in the next edition?
And what if you want to ally your Sisters with Imperial Guard?
Wouldn't have the foggiest.
Well you would use the IA book to ally sisters to IG. I would say.
I fail to see how C:IA is a superior option to simply relegating each of its codices to a 20 dollar softcover mini-dex, if you wanted to make allying different forces together easy. Simply have the Allies Matrix dictate Imperium is Battle Brothers with Imperium, then in each Imperium codex indicate that the Codex is an Imperium Codex.
Also, I subscribe to the theory that if you want to play four different armies at once, owning, updating, and carrying four books is an acceptable price.
Vankraken wrote: Chimeras went from the 5 man fire port version to the much more garbage 2 man fire port with lasgun arrays. Henchmen squads can't take 10 point psyker so that hurts things like having a cheap psychic shriek out of that 5 fire port chimera. Servos going away hurts deep strike heavy lists. Also think they upped the cost of some of the inquisitor power weapons but I'm not 100% sure on that. No idea if chimeras lost psy ammo or not but if so then that hurts my heavy bolter chimeras.
Psy ammo is still available,.
It is no longer an upgrade for vehicles in the new book. The only upgrade for the I chimera in the new book is true silver armour.
So I greatly prefer the old versions since +1 Str heavy bolters infinitely more useful in casual games than those silly servoskulls.
I was wrong. Looked again and they still have the Psy ammo upgrade .
I vehicle equipment options of the new book are.
Storm bolters.
Dozer blades
Psy blot ammo
Extra armour
Hunter killer missiles
True silver armour
Vankraken wrote: Chimeras went from the 5 man fire port version to the much more garbage 2 man fire port with lasgun arrays. Henchmen squads can't take 10 point psyker so that hurts things like having a cheap psychic shriek out of that 5 fire port chimera. Servos going away hurts deep strike heavy lists. Also think they upped the cost of some of the inquisitor power weapons but I'm not 100% sure on that. No idea if chimeras lost psy ammo or not but if so then that hurts my heavy bolter chimeras.
Psy ammo is still available,.
It is no longer an upgrade for vehicles in the new book. The only upgrade for the I chimera in the new book is true silver armour.
So I greatly prefer the old versions since +1 Str heavy bolters infinitely more useful in casual games than those silly servoskulls.
I was wrong. Looked again and they still have the Psy ammo upgrade .
I vehicle equipment options of the new book are.
Storm bolters.
Dozer blades
Psy blot ammo
Extra armour
Hunter killer missiles
True silver armour
Are the Sisters of Battle vehicle options in a different section of vehicle equipment?
I fail to see how C:IA is a superior option to simply relegating each of its codices to a 20 dollar softcover mini-dex, if you wanted to make allying different forces together easy. Simply have the Allies Matrix dictate Imperium is Battle Brothers with Imperium, then in each Imperium codex indicate that the Codex is an Imperium Codex.
Also, I subscribe to the theory that if you want to play four different armies at once, owning, updating, and carrying four books is an acceptable price.
yes they are. This book is not a single codex its multiple codexes in a single cover with everything in them including their own equipment list, warlord traits appendixes etc.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Sister vehicle exuipment.
Storm bolter
Dozer blade
Extra armour
Hunter killer missile
Laud hailer
oldzoggy wrote: yes they are. This book is not a single codex its multiple codexes in a single cover with everything in them including their own equipment list, warlord traits appendixes etc.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Sister vehicle exuipment.
Storm bolter
Dozer blade
Extra armour
Hunter killer missile
Laud hailer
Cool.
Can we get this idea applied to Space Marines next?
Smotejob wrote: It's also full of poorly written rules that don't really make sense.
Pretty much this. I like the idea, I like most of the content of the book, but the rules are written poorly, even by GW standards. A Valkyrie detachment that can only ever bring in a single model thanks to the official BRBFAQ is just the tip of the iceberg. Having what looks like a replacement for the Inquisitors, removing Servo Skulls on all three datasheets but still allowing the old datasheets - with the servo skulls - is just as ridiculous. It's the same name, same everything except for that one stupid option they clearly wanted to get rid of. But they didn't. The Henchman Warband is now available as both a formation AND a unit. There's so much wrong with this book on a mechanical level it's just unbelievable.
And even stuff like the Chamber Militant - sure, the idea is really cool. But can someone please explain to me why I'd EVER use that rule if there's a detachment option available with literally the same units in each of them, but with a command benefit on top of that? Chamber Militants gain nothing from being Chamber Militant, all it does is "you loose the benefits of their one-unit-detachment". If you have an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor, just bring that Kill Team detachment. It's literally the same units on the table, but better.
The book summed up: Good ideas written down by someone who has basically no clue on how to design rules both in general and specific to 40k. Asked whether or not he'd taken the FAQ into account resulted in an angry shout of "Did you just call me a faq?!".
One might also look on Page 37 of the codex to see that it's intended to be used in conjunction with previously existing armies of the imperium army books.
One wouldn't argue that the Deathwatch Veterans replace the existing Deathwatch Veterans unit profile in Codex: Deathwatch, would you? Because if so, where are the people screaming and crowing about how Deathwatch lost access to rhinos razorbacks and drop pod dedicated transports, and that all Deathwatch players just have to get over it?
No. And if you own Codex: IA, and you want to run your Deathwatch Vets with a drop pod transport, you can just take them in the new Kill Team detachment but use the troop choice present in Codex: Deathwatch if you'd like.
Exactly the same situation with Celestine. Did you purchase and pay money for the digital codex with Celestine in it? Feel free to use her as an HQ choice for the Sisters of Battle faction...which she is. Just like you can take the new Grey Knights detachment from the book and use any Grey Knights troops, Fast Attack and Heavy Support choice you want that has Faction: Grey Knights.
the_scotsman wrote: One might also look on Page 37 of the codex to see that it's intended to be used in conjunction with previously existing armies of the imperium army books.
One wouldn't argue that the Deathwatch Veterans replace the existing Deathwatch Veterans unit profile in Codex: Deathwatch, would you? Because if so, where are the people screaming and crowing about how Deathwatch lost access to rhinos razorbacks and drop pod dedicated transports, and that all Deathwatch players just have to get over it?
No. And if you own Codex: IA, and you want to run your Deathwatch Vets with a drop pod transport, you can just take them in the new Kill Team detachment but use the troop choice present in Codex: Deathwatch if you'd like.
Exactly the same situation with Celestine. Did you purchase and pay money for the digital codex with Celestine in it? Feel free to use her as an HQ choice for the Sisters of Battle faction...which she is. Just like you can take the new Grey Knights detachment from the book and use any Grey Knights troops, Fast Attack and Heavy Support choice you want that has Faction: Grey Knights.
So basically I should feel free to completely ignore C:IA's existence since I bought the Sisters of Battle eBook codex like 3-4 years ago, it gets free updates, and I don't want to play any other faction in C:IA?
Okay then. I'm not mad, I'm just kinda wondering why Codex: Imperial Agents was even a thing that was created if it's not intended to replace any of the Codices in it but instead provide a slightly-worse version of all the armies in it for people who want to play a combination of them for some reason.
It's a supplement. You don't need it. You can use it, however, if you feel like it. Nobody forces a Space Marine player to use Angels of Death. You can buy and use it, but it's not required of you.
It's a supplement. You don't need it. You can use it, however, if you feel like it. Nobody forces a Space Marine player to use Angels of Death. You can buy and use it, but it's not required of you.
Supplements normally add extra units. This really doesn't, and the formations could've been done as dataslates.
I like owning a codex that I for the army I play to show my opponent. This book does just that. Do I need it of course I do not need it. But the ebup on my phone and those printed hand outs of the same book are just not the same as a book you can actually hand over. I only need to print a few pages if I want to use things out of the codex. All the strange rules like the daemon sword, the daemon host table and the warlord traits are all in the book.
Yeah, it says as much right in the rules for the book. Use the new detachment too if you want to, it might be more useful than a CAD, I don't know.
If you're not interested in the other factions, I don't know what to tell you other than it's not intended for you? I don't know why Codex: Dark Angels exists because I don't find Dark Angels compelling, that doesn't mean I think it should be deleted because I think other people who like other things shouldn't have those nice things. That seems petty and jerky.
I love having the rules for the factions here at my fingertips in one volume, because my imperial army DOES tend to combine a crap-ton of different minifactions. It makes things more interesting. I don't find the rules updates a significant down-grade in any way (much more interested in codex: inquisition than codex: servo skulls and minimum henchman squads) and it was annoying to have to carry around increasingly tattered loose pages from a white dwarf to play my assassins.
It contains pretty much only minor upgrades for Sisters (people were only whining over the loss of celestine, which, thanks to page 37 which is an actual passage in the codex and not just an email from customer service, didn't actually happen), some upgrades and some nerfs for inquisition, and then mostly just either rules the same or slight improvements for every other faction present.
To me, the only real headscratcher is the valkyries...but I don't own valkyries, and if I did want to use one, oh look i've got this codex: Astra Militarum right here, and now I have a unit entry for the flyer in my book that has the DFTS stats without me needing to buy DFTS.
This book basically gave me exactly what I wanted to add a little flavor to my existing imperium armies, and others where I play are doing the exact same thing. I'm buying a box of deathwatch vets, I know someone else is buying inquisitors, someone else is finally painting up their assassins...it's just fun to have variety. Why begrudge people that? You don't like something, don't buy it, and play the way you like - that's how GW has been operating in 7th and people are still tearing their hair out over every change like GW's going to sneak in at night and steal your existing codexes.
I like owning a codex that I for the army I play to show my opponent. This book does just that. Do I need it of course I do not need it. But the ebup on my phone and those printed hand outs of the same book are just not the same as a book you can actually hand over. I only need to plint a few pages if I want to use things out of the codex. All the strange rules like the daemon sword, the daemon host table and the warlord traits are all in the book.
So it is intended to replace the books we already own?
Why remove units then?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, it says as much right in the rules for the book. Use the new detachment too if you want to, it might be more useful than a CAD, I don't know.
If you're not interested in the other factions, I don't know what to tell you other than it's not intended for you? I don't know why Codex: Dark Angels exists because I don't find Dark Angels compelling, that doesn't mean I think it should be deleted because I think other people who like other things shouldn't have those nice things. That seems petty and jerky.
I love having the rules for the factions here at my fingertips in one volume, because my imperial army DOES tend to combine a crap-ton of different minifactions. It makes things more interesting. I don't find the rules updates a significant down-grade in any way (much more interested in codex: inquisition than codex: servo skulls and minimum henchman squads) and it was annoying to have to carry around increasingly tattered loose pages from a white dwarf to play my assassins.
It contains pretty much only minor upgrades for Sisters (people were only whining over the loss of celestine, which, thanks to page 37 which is an actual passage in the codex and not just an email from customer service, didn't actually happen), some upgrades and some nerfs for inquisition, and then mostly just either rules the same or slight improvements for every other faction present.
To me, the only real headscratcher is the valkyries...but I don't own valkyries, and if I did want to use one, oh look i've got this codex: Astra Militarum right here, and now I have a unit entry for the flyer in my book that has the DFTS stats without me needing to buy DFTS.
This book basically gave me exactly what I wanted to add a little flavor to my existing imperium armies, and others where I play are doing the exact same thing. I'm buying a box of deathwatch vets, I know someone else is buying inquisitors, someone else is finally painting up their assassins...it's just fun to have variety. Why begrudge people that? You don't like something, don't buy it, and play the way you like - that's how GW has been operating in 7th and people are still tearing their hair out over every change like GW's going to sneak in at night and steal your existing codexes.
Oh.
So basically it doesn't offer anything that my already-existing Codex did and it's just a new detachment type for a third to half of the Imperium's armies, but not all of them?
So I can keep saying that Sisters of Battle don't actually have a printed Codex then. Good to know, thanks.
Also, I dunno why you're downplaying the loss of Celestine like she doesn't matter.
And I STILL don't know why you couldn't just ally all your armies together using Unbound without this Codex.
I like owning a codex that I for the army I play to show my opponent. This book does just that. Do I need it of course I do not need it. But the ebup on my phone and those printed hand outs of the same book are just not the same as a book you can actually hand over. I only need to plint a few pages if I want to use things out of the codex. All the strange rules like the daemon sword, the daemon host table and the warlord traits are all in the book.
So it is intended to replace the books we already own?
Why remove units then?
It's intended to replace the pile of books for people who want to stick an Inquisitor or a Grey Knight squad into another army. For those of us who played the Inquisition books of yore it's just a middle finger.
I like owning a codex that I for the army I play to show my opponent. This book does just that. Do I need it of course I do not need it. But the ebup on my phone and those printed hand outs of the same book are just not the same as a book you can actually hand over. I only need to plint a few pages if I want to use things out of the codex. All the strange rules like the daemon sword, the daemon host table and the warlord traits are all in the book.
So it is intended to replace the books we already own?
Why remove units then?
It's intended to replace the pile of books for people who want to stick an Inquisitor or a Grey Knight squad into another army. For those of us who played the Inquisition books of yore it's just a middle finger.
I kinda feel like giving the middle finger to GW, actually, since I'm sure they'll now point to Imperial Agents as proof that Sisters of Battle have a proper Codex now.
So it is intended to replace the books we already own?
Why remove units then?
You know that I do not think that this book is a replacement and that I don't really mind if it did since my army is still valid, we all know that you hate the book, haven't read it jet and will never use it. So could you please stop repeating yourself / bugging me / hijacking the feth out off any thread that has anything to do with the new codex ?
So it is intended to replace the books we already own?
Why remove units then?
You know that I do not think that this book is a replacement and that I don't really mind if it did since my army is still valid, we all know that you hate the book and will never use it.
So could you please stop repeating yourself / bugging me / hijacking the feth out off any thread that has anything to do with the new codex ?
Sorry, it's just that you seem to be flip-flopping between, "There's no need to ever buy this Codex unless you want to play a combination of the armies therein," and "This Codex is just a better version of your army and doesn't get rid of anything important, you should buy it," and those are diametrically opposed stances.
Also, for your information, I was actually planning on buying and using C:IA until I heard it basically doesn't offer anything new for me. Which was about ten minutes ago.
Initially: Rumors where bad really bad, it would potentially invalidate my entire army. This made me sad and angy.
Once I read the book, realized that this was not a replacement and that the early rumors had omitted some all important formations and unit entries: - Nothing is lost since this is not a replacement so this book only adds things to the book I already own. - Tons of stuff is added in all sorts of obscure ways, that actually affect me a lot such as being able to summon daemons with my radical inquisitor and being able to field lone daemon hosts or indep character priest. - Some stuff is left out in the INQ codex. But I don't mind about this because: *I never used them any ways in casual games, and the abuse of them by tournament players gave my army a bad name resulting in harsh codex specific penalties in most tournament rules ( servo skulls) * They used to fire up rules discussions ( Chimera fire points ) * They where a bit cheesy, and a left over of an old rule system (10 point psykers) .
Also the need of this book isn't purely based on if it is better than your digital codex. It is the only way to show the special rules to your opponent without giving them some dubious printout or digital file. This makes this book quite essential for any sisters and INQ player at the moment if you ask me, even if you plan to use the digital codex next to it.
Initially: Rumors where bad really bad, it would potentially invalidate my entire army. This made me sad and angy.
Once I read the book, realized that this was not a replacement and that the early rumors had omitted some all important formations and unit entries:
- Nothing is lost since this is not a replacement so this book only adds things to the book I already own.
- Tons of stuff is added in all sorts of obscure ways, that actually affect me a lot such as being able to summon daemons with my radical inquisitor and being able to field lone daemon hosts or indep character priest.
- Some stuff is left out in the INQ codex. But I don't mind about this because:
*I never used them any ways in casual games ( servo skulls)
* They used to fire up rules discussions ( Chimera fire points )
* They where a bit cheesy, and a left over of an old rule system (10 point psykers) .
Also the need of this book isn't purely based on if it is better than your digital codex. It is the only way to show the special rules to your opponent without giving them some dubious printout or digital file.
This makes this book quite essential for any sisters and INQ player at the moment if you ask me, even if you plan to use the digital codex next to it.
If my opponent won't accept my digital codex on its own, why would they accept the Celestine entry for my Codex?
Really though, I've wanted to not have to print out my own Codices for a long time. What does this Codex offer me to offset the fact it doesn't let me use one of my favorite models and I don't care about minor upgrades enough to swap Codices for one model? Sell me on it.
I like owning a codex that I for the army I play to show my opponent. This book does just that. Do I need it of course I do not need it. But the ebup on my phone and those printed hand outs of the same book are just not the same as a book you can actually hand over. I only need to plint a few pages if I want to use things out of the codex. All the strange rules like the daemon sword, the daemon host table and the warlord traits are all in the book.
So it is intended to replace the books we already own?
Why remove units then?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, it says as much right in the rules for the book. Use the new detachment too if you want to, it might be more useful than a CAD, I don't know.
If you're not interested in the other factions, I don't know what to tell you other than it's not intended for you? I don't know why Codex: Dark Angels exists because I don't find Dark Angels compelling, that doesn't mean I think it should be deleted because I think other people who like other things shouldn't have those nice things. That seems petty and jerky.
I love having the rules for the factions here at my fingertips in one volume, because my imperial army DOES tend to combine a crap-ton of different minifactions. It makes things more interesting. I don't find the rules updates a significant down-grade in any way (much more interested in codex: inquisition than codex: servo skulls and minimum henchman squads) and it was annoying to have to carry around increasingly tattered loose pages from a white dwarf to play my assassins.
It contains pretty much only minor upgrades for Sisters (people were only whining over the loss of celestine, which, thanks to page 37 which is an actual passage in the codex and not just an email from customer service, didn't actually happen), some upgrades and some nerfs for inquisition, and then mostly just either rules the same or slight improvements for every other faction present.
To me, the only real headscratcher is the valkyries...but I don't own valkyries, and if I did want to use one, oh look i've got this codex: Astra Militarum right here, and now I have a unit entry for the flyer in my book that has the DFTS stats without me needing to buy DFTS.
This book basically gave me exactly what I wanted to add a little flavor to my existing imperium armies, and others where I play are doing the exact same thing. I'm buying a box of deathwatch vets, I know someone else is buying inquisitors, someone else is finally painting up their assassins...it's just fun to have variety. Why begrudge people that? You don't like something, don't buy it, and play the way you like - that's how GW has been operating in 7th and people are still tearing their hair out over every change like GW's going to sneak in at night and steal your existing codexes.
Oh.
So basically it doesn't offer anything that my already-existing Codex did and it's just a new detachment type for a third to half of the Imperium's armies, but not all of them?
So I can keep saying that Sisters of Battle don't actually have a printed Codex then. Good to know, thanks.
Also, I dunno why you're downplaying the loss of Celestine like she doesn't matter.
And I STILL don't know why you couldn't just ally all your armies together using Unbound without this Codex.
You're obviously just determined to whine, given that you're taking dual stances of "Celestine is gone waaaah" and "why does this book exist waaaaah" so you can have your complaints both ways.
So, one more time:
-Celestine is not gone. Celestine IS a legal HQ choice with the sisters of battle faction.
-This is an in print book with rules for sisters of battle. You can use a full, game-legal sisters army using this book.
-Other people that are not you might like this book because they like including small detachments of minor factions. God forbid someone like something you don't like, or have fun some way you don't approve of.
you can keep saying whatever the heck you want. It doesn't have to be true. You can say that GW hates you personally, spies on your house to find out what you like and takes it away from you out of pure malice - it doesn't make it true and it doesn't require everyone or anyone to agree with you. This book, like DFTS, like Planetary Assault, like any and all of the supplementary materials that have come out recently, change NOTHING for you if you don't want them to. You have NO reason to whine, but I'm sure you're going to anyway, because that's what people do to get imaginary internet points. I'm done discussing it, feel free to go on your merry way saying and thinking anything you like.
the_scotsman wrote: You're obviously just determined to whine, given that you're taking dual stances of "Celestine is gone waaaah" and "why does this book exist waaaaah" so you can have your complaints both ways.
I'm taking multiple stances as this thread goes on because I haven't bought this Codex yet so literally everything I know about it is coming from you guys, so my opinion keeps wavering based on new information.
So, one more time:
-Celestine is not gone. Celestine IS a legal HQ choice with the sisters of battle faction.
1. So her rules are included in C:IA?
2. If so, why exactly are so many people saying she's not included in C: IA?
-This is an in print book with rules for sisters of battle. You can use a full, game-legal sisters army using this book.
Yes, that's enough to sell me on it, but not if I can't use my favorite model, and people are telling me two different things about the book, the Celestine model is now out-of-production, and I don't know who to believe anymore.
-Other people that are not you might like this book because they like including small detachments of minor factions. God forbid someone like something you don't like, or have fun some way you don't approve of.
No, I'm saying it doesn't offer a benefit to me personally and the question about the book existing at all is a separate question that comes from the book not including all IoM factions, so when I want to ally my Sisters of Battle with my Space Marines, I still need two Codices anyways.
you can keep saying whatever the heck you want. It doesn't have to be true. You can say that GW hates you personally, spies on your house to find out what you like and takes it away from you out of pure malice - it doesn't make it true and it doesn't require everyone or anyone to agree with you. This book, like DFTS, like Planetary Assault, like any and all of the supplementary materials that have come out recently, change NOTHING for you if you don't want them to. You have NO reason to whine, but I'm sure you're going to anyway, because that's what people do to get imaginary internet points. I'm done discussing it, feel free to go on your merry way saying and thinking anything you like.
I would very much appreciate if you would refrain from saying I believe things which I do not.
If my opponent won't accept my digital codex on its own, why would they accept the Celestine entry for my Codex?
It isn't about accepting it is about making the game experience fun.
They sure do accept my rules about a daemon host when they read my phone, but I and my opponent do not like to look at my phone during the game and I do not like to show up in a gaming store with a 100% home printed codex even if I would include the GW mail that said I could do so. Having an actual book fixes this for me, and I can just print out that single page for saint c if I really wanted to. This doesn't make me that guy who promotes pirated books in a gaming store nor that guy who has all sorts of obscure rules hidden in his buggy phone, and this makes me happy.
But hey you aren't me, I never claimed that you had to buy the book. If you don't want to just be happy with the codex you already have and the money you can now spend on other stuff.
It's a supplement. You don't need it. You can use it, however, if you feel like it. Nobody forces a Space Marine player to use Angels of Death. You can buy and use it, but it's not required of you.
Supplements normally add extra units. This really doesn't, and the formations could've been done as dataslates.
Do they really, though? How many units were added in Angels of Death? Mont'ka?
AoD technically added two, but both existed beforehand. All AoD did was limit(!) their equipment options and present them to you as regular units (instead of using that Relic special rule to limit their numbers in a 40k detachment).
C:IA added completely new units, even if it uses existing models. You couldn't run an astropath on it's own at all, and it didn't have the options it has now - it just couldn't be turned into a ML2 psyker, for example.
If my opponent won't accept my digital codex on its own, why would they accept the Celestine entry for my Codex?
It isn't about accepting it is about making the game experience fun.
They sure do accept my rules about a daemon host when they read my phone, but I and my opponent do not like to look at my phone during the game and I do not like to show up in a gaming store with a 100% home printed codex even if I would include the GW mail that said I could do so. Having an actual book fixes this for me, and I can just print out that single page for saint c if I really wanted to. This doesn't make me that guy who promotes pirated books in a gaming store nor that guy who has all sorts of obscure rules hidden in his buggy phone, and this makes me happy.
But hey you aren't me, I never claimed that you had to buy the book. If you don't want to just be happy with the codex you already have and the money you can now spend on other stuff.
See, there's my confusion. I'm legitimately confused what your stance is. You say that it's fine if anyone wants to stick with the eBook Codex if they don't care about the new stuff in C:IA.
But you're basically saying there that the new Codex is supposed to push people into the new versions of the rules because a hardcopy Codex is more legitimate.
You're saying people would accuse you of pirating if you had all your armies as eBooks (all Codices are available as eBooks, by the way), but then you say people wouldn't care if you just had one page for Celestine not in the actual book.
You're saying two different things, and it's confusing me.
-Celestine is not gone. Celestine IS a legal HQ choice with the sisters of battle faction.
1. So her rules are included in C:IA?
2. If so, why exactly are so many people saying she's not included in C: IA?
I am getting the impression that you might be one of the slower kids in the class. Do not worry here is how it works.
1.All of the unit entries in your old codex are of the same faction as the sisters in the new book.
2.The old unit entries aren't invalidated. The new ones are just piled on top of the older ones.
3.Detachment do not have restrictions based on books but based on factions.
=>This makes it so that you can just take the new detachment or any old detachment that allowed you to take sisters and fill it up with any combination of old and new unit entries,
It's a supplement. You don't need it. You can use it, however, if you feel like it. Nobody forces a Space Marine player to use Angels of Death. You can buy and use it, but it's not required of you.
Supplements normally add extra units. This really doesn't, and the formations could've been done as dataslates.
Do they really, though? How many units were added in Angels of Death? Mont'ka?
AoD technically added two, but both existed beforehand. All AoD did was limit(!) their equipment options and present them to you as regular units (instead of using that Relic special rule to limit their numbers in a 40k detachment).
C:IA added completely new units, even if it uses existing models. You couldn't run an astropath on it's own at all, and it didn't have the options it has now - it just couldn't be turned into a ML2 psyker, for example.
Okay, that's what I concluded a few hours ago. C:IA is just a new detachment and my own Codex will work just fine on its own since I don't care about the detachment.
I won't question why it needs to exist anymore, but... why is Celestine out-of-production now?
See, there's my confusion. I'm legitimately confused what your stance is. You say that it's fine if anyone wants to stick with the eBook Codex if they don't care about the new stuff in C:IA.
But you're basically saying there that the new Codex is supposed to push people into the new versions of the rules because a hardcopy Codex is more legitimate.
You're saying people would accuse you of pirating if you had all your armies as eBooks (all Codices are available as eBooks, by the way), but then you say people wouldn't care if you just had one page for Celestine not in the actual book.
You're saying two different things, and it's confusing me.
If you step away from the whole black-and-white thingy, you'll notice there're at least 48 other shades of that colour spectrum
The new codex is more convenient since it's printed. It appears as more "legitimate" as compared to a stack of paper you printed at home to others.
Having a single page printed plus a hardcover book with a pretty good reason as to why you had to print that page is also much more acceptable to other players than having a wholly home-printed codex.
He's not saying it is less or more legitimate, just that people percieve it as such. And since 40k requires social contact to arrange and play a game, that's a huge plus. "That guy with the printed codex where we don't know if he actually bought it or might have even modified it" sounds much worse than "that guy who still plays Celestine, but brings in the printed Codex that contains Sisters, too".
Pouncey wrote: Okay, that's what I concluded a few hours ago. C:IA is just a new detachment and my own Codex will work just fine on its own since I don't care about the detachment.
I won't question why it needs to exist anymore, but... why is Celestine out-of-production now?
"Celestine the Living Saint
$30
Availability: No Longer Available"
Who knows? Maybe they've run out of stock now and don't want to do another batch of her before a possible relaunch of the entire faction. But that's really off-topic to this thread, isn't it?
The most likely answer to her specifically going out of production is that the new sisters models in development currently contain a drastically different iteration of celestine. I'd guess it's physically a much larger model with rules more in line with GW's tendency to make large, centerpiece models. If GW releases a new sisters codex with the plastics, which DOES invalidate the current digital book, they can include the rules for the new celestine and then there aren't two versions of the same character legal in the rules, one a smallish beefy IC and one a large centerpiece model.
You have no reason to buy CIA if you have no interest in any faction in it besides sisters. Continue to use your digital codex as before with the FAQ and you have pretty much exactly the same rules. There is nothing in the book to "sell you on" - the book basically exists to get people to add small sisters contingents to their existing armies so more people will have small sisters collections when the new kits drop.
nekooni wrote: If you step away from the whole black-and-white thingy, you'll notice there're at least 48 other shades of that colour spectrum
The new codex is more convenient since it's printed. It appears as more "legitimate" as compared to a stack of paper you printed at home to others.
Having a single page printed plus a hardcover book with a pretty good reason as to why you had to print that page is also much more acceptable to other players than having a wholly home-printed codex.
He's not saying it is less or more legitimate, just that people percieve it as such. And since 40k requires social contact to arrange and play a game, that's a huge plus. "That guy with the printed codex where we don't know if he actually bought it or might have even modified it" sounds much worse than "that guy who still plays Celestine, but brings in the printed Codex that contains Sisters, too".
If my gaming group suddenly questions my honesty when I bring in a Codex I printed up for the one army I play that doesn't have a printed Codex, even knowing that I don't own a tablet, phone or e-reader, and even though I bought every single one of my models direct from my local GW or its order point, which happens to be one of the most expensive armies that I've played for a full decade, the past 5 years of which have been me bringing in the same Codex with updates...
Frankly, they can go to hell and I'll get a new gaming group with people who actually use their brains and don't call me a liar and thief for playing a grossly-neglected army.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nekooni wrote: Who knows? Maybe they've run out of stock now and don't want to do another batch of her before a possible relaunch of the entire faction. But that's really off-topic to this thread, isn't it?
That historically has not been the case when Sisters models go OOP. They don't tend to come back.
nekooni wrote: If you step away from the whole black-and-white thingy, you'll notice there're at least 48 other shades of that colour spectrum
The new codex is more convenient since it's printed. It appears as more "legitimate" as compared to a stack of paper you printed at home to others.
Having a single page printed plus a hardcover book with a pretty good reason as to why you had to print that page is also much more acceptable to other players than having a wholly home-printed codex.
He's not saying it is less or more legitimate, just that people percieve it as such. And since 40k requires social contact to arrange and play a game, that's a huge plus. "That guy with the printed codex where we don't know if he actually bought it or might have even modified it" sounds much worse than "that guy who still plays Celestine, but brings in the printed Codex that contains Sisters, too".
If my gaming group suddenly questions my honesty when I bring in a Codex I printed up for the one army I play that doesn't have a printed Codex, even knowing that I don't own a tablet, phone or e-reader, and even though I bought every single one of my models direct from my local GW or its order point, which happens to be one of the most expensive armies that I've played for a full decade, the past 5 years of which have been me bringing in the same Codex with updates...
Frankly, they can go to hell and I'll get a new gaming group with people who actually use their brains and don't call me a liar and thief for playing a grossly-neglected army.
Not everyone has a fixed gaming group. Many people just go to their local FLGS or GW and pick up a random dude to play against. It's for situations like that. And not everyone plays just one army, too. You asked for HIS reasons, not YOURS. Just because they don't apply to you, specifically, doesn't invalidate them for him or others.
the_scotsman wrote: The most likely answer to her specifically going out of production is that the new sisters models in development currently contain a drastically different iteration of celestine. I'd guess it's physically a much larger model with rules more in line with GW's tendency to make large, centerpiece models. If GW releases a new sisters codex with the plastics, which DOES invalidate the current digital book, they can include the rules for the new celestine and then there aren't two versions of the same character legal in the rules, one a smallish beefy IC and one a large centerpiece model.
You have no reason to buy CIA if you have no interest in any faction in it besides sisters. Continue to use your digital codex as before with the FAQ and you have pretty much exactly the same rules. There is nothing in the book to "sell you on" - the book basically exists to get people to add small sisters contingents to their existing armies so more people will have small sisters collections when the new kits drop.
Can you link me to the new Celestine model? I'd like to see it.
nekooni wrote: If you step away from the whole black-and-white thingy, you'll notice there're at least 48 other shades of that colour spectrum
The new codex is more convenient since it's printed. It appears as more "legitimate" as compared to a stack of paper you printed at home to others.
Having a single page printed plus a hardcover book with a pretty good reason as to why you had to print that page is also much more acceptable to other players than having a wholly home-printed codex.
He's not saying it is less or more legitimate, just that people percieve it as such. And since 40k requires social contact to arrange and play a game, that's a huge plus. "That guy with the printed codex where we don't know if he actually bought it or might have even modified it" sounds much worse than "that guy who still plays Celestine, but brings in the printed Codex that contains Sisters, too".
If my gaming group suddenly questions my honesty when I bring in a Codex I printed up for the one army I play that doesn't have a printed Codex, even knowing that I don't own a tablet, phone or e-reader, and even though I bought every single one of my models direct from my local GW or its order point, which happens to be one of the most expensive armies that I've played for a full decade, the past 5 years of which have been me bringing in the same Codex with updates...
Frankly, they can go to hell and I'll get a new gaming group with people who actually use their brains and don't call me a liar and thief for playing a grossly-neglected army.
Not everyone has a fixed gaming group. Many people just go to their local FLGS or GW and pick up a random dude to play against. It's for situations like that. And not everyone plays just one army, too. You asked for HIS reasons, not YOURS. Just because they don't apply to you, specifically, doesn't invalidate them for him or others.
I'm pretty sure I asked him to sell me on this new Codex and tell me why I personally should buy it, since he's very dead-set on convincing me to update to C:IA given that he's been ignoring every time I say, "Fine, so it's not for me, whatever, I'll stick with my current Codex" and immediately launching into an argument for buying the new C: IA.
the_scotsman wrote: The most likely answer to her specifically going out of production is that the new sisters models in development currently contain a drastically different iteration of celestine. I'd guess it's physically a much larger model with rules more in line with GW's tendency to make large, centerpiece models. If GW releases a new sisters codex with the plastics, which DOES invalidate the current digital book, they can include the rules for the new celestine and then there aren't two versions of the same character legal in the rules, one a smallish beefy IC and one a large centerpiece model.
You have no reason to buy CIA if you have no interest in any faction in it besides sisters. Continue to use your digital codex as before with the FAQ and you have pretty much exactly the same rules. There is nothing in the book to "sell you on" - the book basically exists to get people to add small sisters contingents to their existing armies so more people will have small sisters collections when the new kits drop.
Can you link me to the new Celestine model? I'd like to see it.
You really don't get the difference between speculation and fact, don't you? Where's your proof that Celestine is OOP for good? Where's your proof that she's not getting a revamp? All we're doing right now is speculating.
the_scotsman wrote: The most likely answer to her specifically going out of production is that the new sisters models in development currently contain a drastically different iteration of celestine. I'd guess it's physically a much larger model with rules more in line with GW's tendency to make large, centerpiece models. If GW releases a new sisters codex with the plastics, which DOES invalidate the current digital book, they can include the rules for the new celestine and then there aren't two versions of the same character legal in the rules, one a smallish beefy IC and one a large centerpiece model.
You have no reason to buy CIA if you have no interest in any faction in it besides sisters. Continue to use your digital codex as before with the FAQ and you have pretty much exactly the same rules. There is nothing in the book to "sell you on" - the book basically exists to get people to add small sisters contingents to their existing armies so more people will have small sisters collections when the new kits drop.
Can you link me to the new Celestine model? I'd like to see it.
You really don't get the difference between speculation and fact, don't you? Where's your proof that Celestine is OOP for good? Where's your proof that she's not getting a revamp? All we're doing right now is speculating.
You're offering speculation while demanding proof from me? Do you even argue, brah?
Then I'm speculating that the likelihood is that Celestine is going OoP and likely will not be replaced, and Sisters of Battle players will be steered into C:IA. The current Sisters eBook will eventually vanish from existence and Celestine will disappear forever.
It's not like our special characters and units haven't been removed from existence before.
the_scotsman wrote: The most likely answer to her specifically going out of production is that the new sisters models in development currently contain a drastically different iteration of celestine. I'd guess it's physically a much larger model with rules more in line with GW's tendency to make large, centerpiece models. If GW releases a new sisters codex with the plastics, which DOES invalidate the current digital book, they can include the rules for the new celestine and then there aren't two versions of the same character legal in the rules, one a smallish beefy IC and one a large centerpiece model.
You have no reason to buy CIA if you have no interest in any faction in it besides sisters. Continue to use your digital codex as before with the FAQ and you have pretty much exactly the same rules. There is nothing in the book to "sell you on" - the book basically exists to get people to add small sisters contingents to their existing armies so more people will have small sisters collections when the new kits drop.
Can you link me to the new Celestine model? I'd like to see it.
You really don't get the difference between speculation and fact, don't you? Where's your proof that Celestine is OOP for good? Where's your proof that she's not getting a revamp? All we're doing right now is speculating.
You're offering speculation while demanding proof from me? Do you even argue, brah?
Dude. Really? YOU asked for proof, I was just ... you know what - forget it. Yes, just take it literally - I totally told you that we're speculating but you, specifically you, have to provide facts. That's exactly what the intention of this was, no way was there a rethorical question hidden inside that text block. Or two.
Then I'm speculating that the likelihood is that Celestine is going OoP and likely will not be replaced, and Sisters of Battle players will be steered into C:IA. The current Sisters eBook will eventually vanish from existence and Celestine will disappear forever.
It's not like our special characters and units haven't been removed from existence before.
Yupp, and just like you're speculating this way, others think the signs are leading elsewhere. That's just a matter of interpretation of what little information we have.
I'm pretty sure I asked him to sell me on this new Codex and tell me why I personally should buy it, since he's very dead-set on convincing me to update to C:IA given that he's been ignoring every time I say, "Fine, so it's not for me, whatever, I'll stick with my current Codex" and immediately launching into an argument for buying the new C: IA.
If my opponent won't accept my digital codex on its own, why would they accept the Celestine entry for my Codex?
I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
I'm just hoping the new Saint Celestine model will look like a cross between the Celestant Prime from Age of Sigmar and the Saint Celestine from DOW Soulstorm. All huge wings, angel motif and illusion of flying, not a small model that could be mistake for a Sanguinary Guard.
If my opponent won't accept my digital codex on its own, why would they accept the Celestine entry for my Codex?
That was the question he replied to.
Then his answer did not satisfy the question. The Celestine entry would be from the exact same digital codex that my opponent would be willing to dismiss if it were presented in its entirety.
So I ask you this.
You have an opponent who brings a fully legitimate, hardcopy Codex, and a few printed-out sheets detailing a powerful special character.
In what way is that less suspicious than a fully-printed-out Codex for the entire army and the explanation, "GW doesn't sell a hardcopy Sisters of Battle Codex. You know that, man."?
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
You and me both.
Anyway, to answer the OP, it's worth it in my opinion. You get a lot of neat formation shenanigans to pull off with an Inquisition force or supplement into any of their Battle Brothers. The only major drawback I saw in the book is that it relies heavily on spamming small detachments and most tournaments limit those. If you're not playing in a tournament: great! If you are, it's harder to pull use out of the book though the Grey Knight formation and the Ad Mech one open up some very good options even there.
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
I'm just hoping the new Saint Celestine model will look like a cross between the Celestant Prime from Age of Sigmar and the Saint Celestine from DOW Soulstorm. All huge wings, angel motif and illusion of flying, not a small model that could be mistake for a Sanguinary Guard.
Same here - I'm still waiting on my Erzebel off of the TGG2 Kickstarter, she's sitting on a 40mm base with huge wings and everything.
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
You and me both.
Sisters of Battle get their first proper semblance of a Codex since the 2003 Witch Hunters Codex and you weren't expecting it to be the most-discussed thing in threads about the Codex it's in?
Same here - I'm still waiting on my Erzebel off of the TGG2 Kickstarter, she's sitting on a 40mm base with huge wings and everything.
That looks amazing! That entire range of Sisters from that Kickstarter is going to be more fallback Sisters army if GW either mess up the new Sisters or don't even bother. Probably won't be able to play in a GW store, but I'll just keep them for private games
If my opponent won't accept my digital codex on its own, why would they accept the Celestine entry for my Codex?
That was the question he replied to.
Then his answer did not satisfy the question. The Celestine entry would be from the exact same digital codex that my opponent would be willing to dismiss if it were presented in its entirety.
So I ask you this.
You have an opponent who brings a fully legitimate, hardcopy Codex, and a few printed-out sheets detailing a powerful special character.
In what way is that less suspicious than a fully-printed-out Codex for the entire army and the explanation, "GW doesn't sell a hardcopy Sisters of Battle Codex. You know that, man."?
I've already responded to that in a generic way:
The new codex is more convenient since it's printed. It appears as more "legitimate" as compared to a stack of paper you printed at home to others.
Having a single page printed plus a hardcover book with a pretty good reason as to why you had to print that page is also much more acceptable to other players than having a wholly home-printed codex.
He's not saying it is less or more legitimate, just that people percieve it as such. And since 40k requires social contact to arrange and play a game, that's a huge plus. "That guy with the printed codex where we don't know if he actually bought it or might have even modified it" sounds much worse than "that guy who still plays Celestine, but brings in the printed Codex that contains Sisters, too".
Personally I've got no issue with it either way, I've got a Codex: Inquisition army that's in the same weird spot, so obviously I wouldn't go "nah mate feth off with yer self-printed crap or im gunna bash yer head in!" while playing an army where I had to bring in a home-printed codex myself.
If my opponent won't accept my digital codex on its own, why would they accept the Celestine entry for my Codex?
That was the question he replied to.
Then his answer did not satisfy the question. The Celestine entry would be from the exact same digital codex that my opponent would be willing to dismiss if it were presented in its entirety.
So I ask you this.
You have an opponent who brings a fully legitimate, hardcopy Codex, and a few printed-out sheets detailing a powerful special character.
In what way is that less suspicious than a fully-printed-out Codex for the entire army and the explanation, "GW doesn't sell a hardcopy Sisters of Battle Codex. You know that, man."?
I've already responded to that in a generic way:
The new codex is more convenient since it's printed. It appears as more "legitimate" as compared to a stack of paper you printed at home to others.
Having a single page printed plus a hardcover book with a pretty good reason as to why you had to print that page is also much more acceptable to other players than having a wholly home-printed codex.
He's not saying it is less or more legitimate, just that people percieve it as such. And since 40k requires social contact to arrange and play a game, that's a huge plus. "That guy with the printed codex where we don't know if he actually bought it or might have even modified it" sounds much worse than "that guy who still plays Celestine, but brings in the printed Codex that contains Sisters, too".
Personally I've got no issue with it either way, I've got a Codex: Inquisition army that's in the same weird spot, so obviously I wouldn't go "nah mate feth off with yer self-printed crap or im gunna bash yer head in!" while playing an army where I had to bring in a home-printed codex myself.
And personally my only opponent has zero issues with my printed-out Sisters of Battle Codex.
So I'm fine with not updating to Codex: Imperial Agents, thanks.
As an extra layer of FUN (TM) we've now got an 'Aquila Kill-Team' detachment that's distinct from the 'Aquila Kill-Team' formation, and yet another entry on the entirely overlong list of things 'Kill-Team' means (a novel, six formations, a non-formation element of the Black Spear Strike Force, an alternate game mode, historical and fanmade variants on that game mode, at least one video game, and a lore concept. To make things even more fun the detachment, six formations, and non-formation element of the Black Spear Strike Force can't be used in the game mode. So my Kill-Team isn't a Kill-Team.)
With C:IA you can take Priests and Daemonhosts in the same unit. You can give the Priest a Mace of Valaan. The Daemonhost gives the Mace Fleshbane and Armourbane. The Priest can use prayers to get Smash. It's not a competitive thing to do, but I find the idea of Father John Cena beating some almighty IC to death amusing enough to justify the cost of the book.
With C:IA you can take Priests and Daemonhosts in the same unit. You can give the Priest a Mace of Valaan. The Daemonhost gives the Mace Fleshbane and Armourbane. The Priest can use prayers to get Smash. It's not a competitive thing to do, but I find the idea of Father John Cena beating some almighty IC to death amusing enough to justify the cost of the book.
You know you could take Priests and Daemonhosts in the Inquisition book without getting capped at one Priest and needing to have a rules-lawyerey argument to use your Dedicated Transport, right?
BBAP wrote: The Hosts weren't Daemons then though, so they didn't activate the Mace of Valaan.
Hey, that's right! I can cart around my Bone Shard trigger now, and have a Storm Shield on a Grey Knight character...
Oh. Right. I have to buy another Codex and use an entire new detachment to do this, and I still can't actually deliver it to melee.
Really? I can. I have a land raider with both the Grey Knights and inquisition faction that I can grant Scout.
Two detachments. 500+pts. Seven T3/4+ wounds and a Space Marine Captain profile in Terminator armour. Move over, Smashf***er, there's a new King of the Deathstars in town!
(Secondary note: the Page 120 sidebar gives no indication on whether the unit's faction is added to the transport's or replaces it. It's entirely possible that you can't put the Grey Knights in the vehicle and it has to go Scouting off without them.)
My goalposts are different from your goalposts, neither have moved. Yours are set at "technically possible." Mine are set at "could field them in a non-joke game."
You can technically field Pyrovores. You can technically play Bloodbrides.
I wonder if it's ironic or not that your name is a reference to a very common logical fallacy.
Really, I have no serious issue with Codex: Imperial Agents other than I can't imagine why people couldn't simply have used Unbound to do the same thing. Honestly, if you're going to insist on playing half a dozen different armies at once, lugging around half a dozen books is a worthy price for the fluffiness, isn't it?
I wonder if it's ironic or not that your name is a reference to a very common logical fallacy.
Really, I have no serious issue with Codex: Imperial Agents other than I can't imagine why people couldn't simply have used Unbound to do the same thing. Honestly, if you're going to insist on playing half a dozen different armies at once, lugging around half a dozen books is a worthy price for the fluffiness, isn't it?
Given that Imperial Agents makes it harder, more annoying, and worse to play an army you could easily have just run as bound under the current set of books? More Codexes is annoying, but it's preferable to this tripe.
I wonder if it's ironic or not that your name is a reference to a very common logical fallacy.
Really, I have no serious issue with Codex: Imperial Agents other than I can't imagine why people couldn't simply have used Unbound to do the same thing. Honestly, if you're going to insist on playing half a dozen different armies at once, lugging around half a dozen books is a worthy price for the fluffiness, isn't it?
Given that Imperial Agents makes it harder, more annoying, and worse to play an army you could easily have just run as bound under the current set of books? More Codexes is annoying, but it's preferable to this tripe.
To compound the issue, only the "lesser" armies were included in Imperial Agents, so if you want your Salamanders and Imperial Guard to join in on the fun, you still have to carry more books around.
An all-in-one Megadex for the entire Imperium faction would be one thing, I could see the value in that easily... but why only the least popular factions?
To me, the answer is simple, they plan on removing support for the individual codices later on, and Imperial Agents will become the only up-to-date Codex for these factions in 8e. They're letting you use your own Dex in the meantime to mitigate backlash over a longer period and get people so used to the idea that when they do finally drop support for the standalone codices, anyone who complains will be shouted down.
It honestly doesn't bode well for my favorite army, as I cannot see any other reason for this Codex.
Do I hope I'm wrong? Absolutely, and I may very well be.
But I really don't think I am. I think GW's just cutting down on the number of playable armies by rolling the least popular ones into the same book, and I think my own army will suffer in the long run for it.
I wish GW would just go for free rules like every other tabletop game is doing these days.
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
You and me both.
Sisters of Battle get their first proper semblance of a Codex since the 2003 Witch Hunters Codex and you weren't expecting it to be the most-discussed thing in threads about the Codex it's in?
"Discussed" isn't really the term I'd use. Regardless, the Adepta Sororitas makes up less than half the book. The cacophony over it is literally drowning out discussion on the majority of C:IA.
To the OP, I would just reiterate the_scotsman, who summarized it pretty well: "This book basically gave me exactly what I wanted to add a little flavor to my existing imperium armies, and others where I play are doing the exact same thing. I'm buying a box of deathwatch vets, I know someone else is buying inquisitors, someone else is finally painting up their assassins...it's just fun to have variety".
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
You and me both.
Sisters of Battle get their first proper semblance of a Codex since the 2003 Witch Hunters Codex and you weren't expecting it to be the most-discussed thing in threads about the Codex it's in?
"Discussed" isn't really the term I'd use. Regardless, the Adepta Sororitas makes up less than half the book. The cacophony over it is literally drowning out discussion on the majority of C:IA.
First hardcopy Codex for a hugely neglected army in 13-14 years, discussion overwhelms the rest of the armies in the book which all got one or more updates within the past half-decade.
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
Yes well what did you expect? GW hinted at new stuff for them but we got a codex that combines all of the small factions but hardly gave anything to the sisters.
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
You and me both.
Sisters of Battle get their first proper semblance of a Codex since the 2003 Witch Hunters Codex and you weren't expecting it to be the most-discussed thing in threads about the Codex it's in?
"Discussed" isn't really the term I'd use. Regardless, the Adepta Sororitas makes up less than half the book. The cacophony over it is literally drowning out discussion on the majority of C:IA.
First hardcopy Codex for a hugely neglected army in 13-14 years, discussion overwhelms the rest of the armies in the book which all got one or more updates within the past half-decade.
Again, this surprises you?
I'm angrier about my Inquisitorial Stormtroopers, honestly. They haven't had an entry in a hardcopy Codex for just as long, but GW isn't coming out and squatting them, they're shaving away their game presence and excising them from the lore bit by sorry bit until we're left with 'Acolyte' squads who can't figure out which way to point a gun, may or may not know how to use their transports, and generally just sit around being wastes of space.
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
You and me both.
Sisters of Battle get their first proper semblance of a Codex since the 2003 Witch Hunters Codex and you weren't expecting it to be the most-discussed thing in threads about the Codex it's in?
"Discussed" isn't really the term I'd use. Regardless, the Adepta Sororitas makes up less than half the book. The cacophony over it is literally drowning out discussion on the majority of C:IA.
First hardcopy Codex for a hugely neglected army in 13-14 years, discussion overwhelms the rest of the armies in the book which all got one or more updates within the past half-decade.
Again, this surprises you?
I'm angrier about my Inquisitorial Stormtroopers, honestly. They haven't had an entry in a hardcopy Codex for just as long, but GW isn't coming out and squatting them, they're shaving away their game presence and excising them from the lore bit by sorry bit until we're left with 'Acolyte' squads who can't figure out which way to point a gun, may or may not know how to use their transports, and generally just sit around being wastes of space.
At least Sisters have rules and sort of work.
Uhh... Stormtroopers are called Militarum Tempestus now. They have their own Codex. Why aren't you just allying them with Inquisitors?
TheoreticalFish wrote: I for one was looking forward to a discussion about the C:IA that didn't involve complaints about Sisters of Battle....
Oh well
You and me both.
Sisters of Battle get their first proper semblance of a Codex since the 2003 Witch Hunters Codex and you weren't expecting it to be the most-discussed thing in threads about the Codex it's in?
"Discussed" isn't really the term I'd use. Regardless, the Adepta Sororitas makes up less than half the book. The cacophony over it is literally drowning out discussion on the majority of C:IA.
First hardcopy Codex for a hugely neglected army in 13-14 years, discussion overwhelms the rest of the armies in the book which all got one or more updates within the past half-decade.
Again, this surprises you?
I'm angrier about my Inquisitorial Stormtroopers, honestly. They haven't had an entry in a hardcopy Codex for just as long, but GW isn't coming out and squatting them, they're shaving away their game presence and excising them from the lore bit by sorry bit until we're left with 'Acolyte' squads who can't figure out which way to point a gun, may or may not know how to use their transports, and generally just sit around being wastes of space.
At least Sisters have rules and sort of work.
Uhh... Stormtroopers are called Militarum Tempestus now. They have their own Codex. Why aren't you just allying them with Inquisitors?
Because they're terrible, can't do any of the things my Stormtroopers could, and as of this FAQ it's debatable whether I'm allowed to use the same transports or not.
AnomanderRake wrote: Because they're terrible, can't do any of the things my Stormtroopers could, and as of this FAQ it's debatable whether I'm allowed to use the same transports or not.
I played the Witch Hunters Codex. What exactly can't they do now that they could before, other than be re-equipped to be Arbites?
AnomanderRake wrote: Because they're terrible, can't do any of the things my Stormtroopers could, and as of this FAQ it's debatable whether I'm allowed to use the same transports or not.
I played the Witch Hunters Codex. What exactly can't they do now that they could before, other than be re-equipped to be Arbites?
Be in the same transport as the Inquisitor. Be in a normal one-detachment army that makes any sense at all. Have boltguns, Null Rods, Eviscerators, or otherwise anything cool that made them feel like they were a bit of the Inquisition army instead of another army stapled on as an afterthought. Interact with the Inquisitorial elements of the list beyond being different psychic targets.
Just having the ability to take a CAD with units from different 'sub-lists' in different slots would be an incredible step forward. One of the things that's killing the Grey Knights is that they were designed to be an elite melee unit in a larger book, and somewhere along the line some moron said "Why don't we cut out the rest of this book and make a Codex for just them?", which is the moral equivalent of deleting the rest of the Space Marines Codex so you can write Codex: Terminators. It's tiny, one-dimensional, barely functional, and can't do a lot of incredibly basic things like 'hold objectives'. This newfangled 'fill-minimum-detachments-from-multiple-books' horrorshow makes everything clunkier, worse, and a lot more sensitive to the fact that a lot of the basic line units are steaming garbage.
(I had written 'Infiltrate', but apparently I've started conflating my homebrew book (which takes a lot from the 5e Guard book's Special Operations mechanic) with my memory of the original books.)
Because someone in 5e decided the 'Armoury' was a dumb thing to have and they're being really, really slow about reintroducing them.
(Edit: You CAN have an Inquisitor with an Invulnerable save! If he's an Ordo Malleus Inquisitor he can get Terminator armour! And if he's a psyker he can roll on Divination and get Forewarning! Yay! [/sarcasm])
master of ordinance wrote: Woo. Ah well, still no invun toting Xenos Inquisitor for my Sisters of Silence deathstar then.
And still no good delivery mechanism. Though if the IC-joined-to-unit ruling comes down saying a multi-faction unit can deploy in a transport that matches any of its factions you will...wait...the Imperial Agents Codex won't help at all, but you will be able to put a Sisters of Silence squad in a Blackstar with a Watch-Captain along for the ride. (You might be able to port them across the board with the Beacon Angelis too, just to make your opponent sweat.)
AnomanderRake wrote: Because they're terrible, can't do any of the things my Stormtroopers could, and as of this FAQ it's debatable whether I'm allowed to use the same transports or not.
I played the Witch Hunters Codex. What exactly can't they do now that they could before, other than be re-equipped to be Arbites?
Be in the same transport as the Inquisitor. Be in a normal one-detachment army that makes any sense at all. Have boltguns, Null Rods, Eviscerators, or otherwise anything cool that made them feel like they were a bit of the Inquisition army instead of another army stapled on as an afterthought. Interact with the Inquisitorial elements of the list beyond being different psychic targets.
Just having the ability to take a CAD with units from different 'sub-lists' in different slots would be an incredible step forward. One of the things that's killing the Grey Knights is that they were designed to be an elite melee unit in a larger book, and somewhere along the line some moron said "Why don't we cut out the rest of this book and make a Codex for just them?", which is the moral equivalent of deleting the rest of the Space Marines Codex so you can write Codex: Terminators. It's tiny, one-dimensional, barely functional, and can't do a lot of incredibly basic things like 'hold objectives'. This newfangled 'fill-minimum-detachments-from-multiple-books' horrorshow makes everything clunkier, worse, and a lot more sensitive to the fact that a lot of the basic line units are steaming garbage.
(I had written 'Infiltrate', but apparently I've started conflating my homebrew book (which takes a lot from the 5e Guard book's Special Operations mechanic) with my memory of the original books.)
AnomanderRake wrote: Because they're terrible, can't do any of the things my Stormtroopers could, and as of this FAQ it's debatable whether I'm allowed to use the same transports or not.
I played the Witch Hunters Codex. What exactly can't they do now that they could before, other than be re-equipped to be Arbites?
Be in the same transport as the Inquisitor. Be in a normal one-detachment army that makes any sense at all. Have boltguns, Null Rods, Eviscerators, or otherwise anything cool that made them feel like they were a bit of the Inquisition army instead of another army stapled on as an afterthought. Interact with the Inquisitorial elements of the list beyond being different psychic targets.
Just having the ability to take a CAD with units from different 'sub-lists' in different slots would be an incredible step forward. One of the things that's killing the Grey Knights is that they were designed to be an elite melee unit in a larger book, and somewhere along the line some moron said "Why don't we cut out the rest of this book and make a Codex for just them?", which is the moral equivalent of deleting the rest of the Space Marines Codex so you can write Codex: Terminators. It's tiny, one-dimensional, barely functional, and can't do a lot of incredibly basic things like 'hold objectives'. This newfangled 'fill-minimum-detachments-from-multiple-books' horrorshow makes everything clunkier, worse, and a lot more sensitive to the fact that a lot of the basic line units are steaming garbage.
(I had written 'Infiltrate', but apparently I've started conflating my homebrew book (which takes a lot from the 5e Guard book's Special Operations mechanic) with my memory of the original books.)
...Your Stormtroopers had Eviscerators?
Yours didn't?
(It was in the armoury available to Stormtrooper Sergeants. The whole squad didn't, no, and I played the Daemonhunters book more than the Witch Hunters so I didn't run them much, but it was certainly there.)
(It was in the armoury available to Stormtrooper Sergeants. The whole squad didn't, no, and I played the Daemonhunters book more than the Witch Hunters so I didn't run them much, but it was certainly there.)
Hm.
Maybe it was different for Daemonhunters, but my understanding of lore suggests that an Eviscerator is more a tool of the Ecclesiarchy than the highly-disciplined Stormtroopers.
Waaaghpower wrote: Please, somebody, explain to me: What are all these damned nerfs you're talking about? The cheesy, unfluffy psyker batteries that weren't even an intended squad? (And that still pretty much exist through Astropaths?)
There's only two real "Nerfs" that I can see - Celestine, and Servo Skulls. Yeah, losing Celestine sucks, and Servo Skulls (while responsible for some cheesy spamming) were neat, but we have gotten at least as many useful new rules and gear back, so what the heck is everyone on about?
In a sense you are kind of right. At the same time as a sisters player, getting a weak 6th edition style codex at the end of 7th edition missing a strong hq choice that ends up nerfing one of your other units sucks.
Some of the acts of faith are worded a little better now, but are less than ideal in most cases still. They need a slight points tweak in places and acts of faith that actually help the units that can use them.
A couple formations, penitent engines to elites section and celestine would be nice( I assume she will be back in a LOW slot with a bigger model at some point).
The rest of the book is a mess of poorly worded rules and stuff you could have done before minus a couple options.
Dude our codex is still valid. GW have said so themselves. This book is purely for other players to include sisters in their armies.
It's them backtracking on a job not well done. All of their original posting were that it over wrote the old book. Internet backlash is all that fixed that. Everyone is still out 40 bucks wasted on a book full of things they could have done already in a better way.
Waaaghpower wrote: Please, somebody, explain to me: What are all these damned nerfs you're talking about? The cheesy, unfluffy psyker batteries that weren't even an intended squad? (And that still pretty much exist through Astropaths?)
There's only two real "Nerfs" that I can see - Celestine, and Servo Skulls. Yeah, losing Celestine sucks, and Servo Skulls (while responsible for some cheesy spamming) were neat, but we have gotten at least as many useful new rules and gear back, so what the heck is everyone on about?
In a sense you are kind of right. At the same time as a sisters player, getting a weak 6th edition style codex at the end of 7th edition missing a strong hq choice that ends up nerfing one of your other units sucks.
Some of the acts of faith are worded a little better now, but are less than ideal in most cases still. They need a slight points tweak in places and acts of faith that actually help the units that can use them.
A couple formations, penitent engines to elites section and celestine would be nice( I assume she will be back in a LOW slot with a bigger model at some point).
The rest of the book is a mess of poorly worded rules and stuff you could have done before minus a couple options.
Dude our codex is still valid. GW have said so themselves. This book is purely for other players to include sisters in their armies.
It's them backtracking on a job not well done. All of their original posting were that it over wrote the old book. Internet backlash is all that fixed that. Everyone is still out 40 bucks wasted on a book full of things they could have done already in a better way.
Put the tinfoil hat away. There is no backtracking because they always intended both to be valid? How do we know this? Because the named canonness in the book literally states she is available in both books. So no none of thier original postings stated nothing about the sisters codex being invalidated.
afk1sec wrote: It's them backtracking on a job not well done. All of their original posting were that it over wrote the old book. Internet backlash is all that fixed that. Everyone is still out 40 bucks wasted on a book full of things they could have done already in a better way.
Honestly, I'm just gonna wait for plastic Sisters of Battle before I get back into 40k tabletop. This new Codex is unimpressive and caters only to a small niche, of which I am not, and our one new model is resin, not plastic. I'm also getting the feeling that GW's attitude of neglect toward my army hasn't really been ameliorated, instead they obviously just intend to do the bare minimum to say they aren't neglecting them anymore.
I'm expecting the "update" to actually just be casting the existing sculpts in resin instead of metal now more than ever, if anything at all. Maybe they'll just replace Celestine with Veridyan and leave everything else unchanged. If I'm wrong, I'll rejoin the playerbase, buy the new models, but I currently feel like I was wrong to get my hopes up that maybe things would be different this time.
And this is more of a side note, but at this point I simply will not be grateful when plastic Sisters of Battle are released. They are overdue in the extreme, and GW's conduct toward the army does not inspire any gratitude on my part. If I go into my GW on plastic Sisters of Battle launch day, and the clerk asks if I'm glad plastic Sisters of Battle are out, I won't snap at her, but I'll give her a sad look and say, "5+ years ago, I might've been. It's hard to get excited at this point though, given how much your company dragged their heels on this," or something similar. I'm too socially-anxious to ever be the slightest bit impolite in public, but I could not feign excitement at this point if I tried.
It's a supplement. You don't need it. You can use it, however, if you feel like it. Nobody forces a Space Marine player to use Angels of Death. You can buy and use it, but it's not required of you.
Does it do anything though? I fail to see any reason this book exists. There's practically nothing you can't already do without it.
Hey here's a book that lets you combine armies of the imperium together! Yeah could already do that with this thing called allies.
They could have gotten slightly creative and made detachments with a core of some kind, and then various aux formations, each of which represented the different arm if the imperium. As it is it's telling you that you can take an army of 17 Allied detachments, which you could already do. I put no stock in the AoS fear at all, I wrote it off as rumor fearmongering until this book. But this does really look like "just plonk down whatever models you think look cool and make pew pew noises, why do you care about creating a cohesive army? You think we actually write wargame rules here at GW?"
Clearly another example of GW having rules written by people who've never read the rule book, played a game, or had the foggiest idea what they were doing.
*also wtf, a Valkyrie that can't transport your units because it's an "ally" and not actually part of your main force, thanks.
It's a supplement. You don't need it. You can use it, however, if you feel like it. Nobody forces a Space Marine player to use Angels of Death. You can buy and use it, but it's not required of you.
Does it do anything though? I fail to see any reason this book exists. There's practically nothing you can't already do without it.
Hey here's a book that lets you combine armies of the imperium together! Yeah could already do that with this thing called allies.
They could have gotten slightly creative and made detachments with a core of some kind, and then various aux formations, each of which represented the different arm if the imperium. As it is it's telling you that you can take an army of 17 Allied detachments, which you could already do. I put no stock in the AoS fear at all, I wrote it off as rumor fearmongering until this book. But this does really look like "just plonk down whatever models you think look cool and make pew pew noises, why do you care about creating a cohesive army? You think we actually write wargame rules here at GW?"
Clearly another example of GW having rules written by people who've never read the rule book or played a game. I
*also wtf, a Valkyrie that can't transport your units because it's an "ally" and not actually part of your main force, thanks.
I've actually done the "just plunk models down and make pew pew noises" thing before.
It was pretty fun. Didn't need any rulebooks, the only rule I needed was "On a 4+, this model dies" and then it was like I was a child playing with really expensive plastic army men.
Most fun I had in 40k in years though. Kids know how to have fun, and they're probably right about us adults needing to complicate everything and make it all super-serious.
afk1sec wrote: Has anybody had a chance to look a the digital sisters or inquisition books to see if any of the datasheets have been changed or updated?
I haven't updated my Codex in years. Kinda stopped playing during 6th.
-Celestine is not gone. Celestine IS a legal HQ choice with the sisters of battle faction.
1. So her rules are included in C:IA?
2. If so, why exactly are so many people saying she's not included in C: IA?
I am getting the impression that you might be one of the slower kids in the class. Do not worry here is how it works.
1.All of the unit entries in your old codex are of the same faction as the sisters in the new book.
2.The old unit entries aren't invalidated. The new ones are just piled on top of the older ones.
3.Detachment do not have restrictions based on books but based on factions.
=>This makes it so that you can just take the new detachment or any old detachment that allowed you to take sisters and fill it up with any combination of old and new unit entries,
Actually detachments have restrictions on exact units not faction, they tend to not say "includes space marine faction units" they say "1+ tactical squads, 0-2 bike squads etc." if they did restrict based on faction that would actually be decently smart and stop all this bs where your army is a hodgepodge of disparate elements duct taped together because every new release cant be slotted in to be cohesive with previous releases or dataslates for the same faction.
I mean hell, my shampoo bottle could write better rules.
Danny slag wrote: Actually detachments have restrictions on exact units not faction, they tend to not say "includes space marine faction units" they say "1+ tactical squads, 0-2 bike squads etc." if they did restrict based on faction that would actually be decently smart and stop all this bs where your army is a hodgepodge of disparate elements duct taped together because every new realease cant be slotted in to be cohesive with previous releases or dataslates for the same faction.
It sounds like an Imperial army drawn from multiple factions would actually be more clear if you just used standard rules for using multiple Codices in your force instead of relying on Codex: Imperial Agents. Admittedly I don't have Imperial Agents in hand to check.
Danny slag wrote: Actually detachments have restrictions on exact units not faction, they tend to not say "includes space marine faction units" they say "1+ tactical squads, 0-2 bike squads etc." if they did restrict based on faction that would actually be decently smart and stop all this bs where your army is a hodgepodge of disparate elements duct taped together because every new realease cant be slotted in to be cohesive with previous releases or dataslates for the same faction.
It sounds like an Imperial army drawn from multiple factions would actually be more clear if you just used standard rules for using multiple Codices in your force instead of relying on Codex: Imperial Agents. Admittedly I don't have Imperial Agents in hand to check.
It would, which is why this book makes no sense and is pointless
But the problem there is they're still just allies with all the restrictions that come with that. This book should have provided fun rules for making any Army of the Imperium, instead it did, well I don't even know what it did, waste paper I guess.
Makes even less sense coming right off traitor legions which while it didn't fix the fact that points have decreased and power skyrocketed in codexes since CSM, it gave you cool new ways to build cohesive armies to your flavor that actually have structure and make sense both rule and fluff wise. Traitor legions was how to do a supplement, imperial agents is how not to do one.
Danny slag wrote: Actually detachments have restrictions on exact units not faction, they tend to not say "includes space marine faction units" they say "1+ tactical squads, 0-2 bike squads etc." if they did restrict based on faction that would actually be decently smart and stop all this bs where your army is a hodgepodge of disparate elements duct taped together because every new realease cant be slotted in to be cohesive with previous releases or dataslates for the same faction.
It sounds like an Imperial army drawn from multiple factions would actually be more clear if you just used standard rules for using multiple Codices in your force instead of relying on Codex: Imperial Agents. Admittedly I don't have Imperial Agents in hand to check.
It would, which is why this book makes no sense and is pointless
But the problem there is they're still just allies with all the restrictions that come with that. This book should have provided fun rules for making any Army of the Imperium, instead it did, well I don't even know what it did, waste paper I guess.
Danny slag wrote: Actually detachments have restrictions on exact units not faction, they tend to not say "includes space marine faction units" they say "1+ tactical squads, 0-2 bike squads etc." if they did restrict based on faction that would actually be decently smart and stop all this bs where your army is a hodgepodge of disparate elements duct taped together because every new realease cant be slotted in to be cohesive with previous releases or dataslates for the same faction.
It sounds like an Imperial army drawn from multiple factions would actually be more clear if you just used standard rules for using multiple Codices in your force instead of relying on Codex: Imperial Agents. Admittedly I don't have Imperial Agents in hand to check.
It would, which is why this book makes no sense and is pointless
But the problem there is they're still just allies with all the restrictions that come with that. This book should have provided fun rules for making any Army of the Imperium, instead it did, well I don't even know what it did, waste paper I guess.
I'm glad I didn't buy it then. : D
Definitely. I'm salty because my favorite army is skitarii, which also got hosed by this asinine mind bogglingly stupid army construction decisions of splitting it into two books that don't work together for no logical reason. I thought maybe this was going to fix that and let you make a fully fleshed out imperial army. But alas, I should learn better.
Danny slag wrote: Definitely. I'm salty because my favorite army is skitarii, which also got hosed by this asinine mind bogglingly stupid army construction decisions of splitting it into two books that don't work together for no logical reason. I thought maybe this was going to fix that and let you make a fully fleshed out imperial army. But alas, I should learn better.
At least Coteaz remembered he is the lord of Formosa, and his acolytes are objective secured again. BUT given lack of other reworkings I suspect some kind of unintentional copypasta.
Servo skulls being out is a good thing. For such low tax they gave too much of a hard counter to certain armies.
But overall the lack of the inquisitorial decurion, bugged inquisitorial and aeronautica sections makes this book rated (on a scale from 1 to 10) a pile of cowpoo.
Even for GW this book smells incompetency and lack of effort too much.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And I will not forgive they killed my jokaero army list.
Fan67 wrote: At least Coteaz remembered he is the lord of Formosa, and his acolytes are objective secured again. BUT given lack of other reworkings I suspect some kind of unintentional copypasta.
Servo skulls being out is a good thing. For such low tax they gave too much of a hard counter to certain armies.
But overall the lack of the inquisitorial decurion, bugged inquisitorial and aeronautica sections makes this book rated (on a scale from 1 to 10) a pile of cowpoo.
Even for GW this book smells incompetency and lack of effort too much.
I agree on the general disparagement and the "copypasta" part, but why on Earth would you think the copy/paste is not completely intentional?
Danny slag wrote: Definitely. I'm salty because my favorite army is skitarii, which also got hosed by this asinine mind bogglingly stupid army construction decisions of splitting it into two books that don't work together for no logical reason. I thought maybe this was going to fix that and let you make a fully fleshed out imperial army. But alas, I should learn better.
:: frownysads ::
:: comfort hugs ::
We can be mistreated army buddies together, okay?
Two words for your new friend: War Convocation
It is a patch rather than solution, but the followers of the Omnissiah at least have couple lists that both fluffy and competitive.
Danny slag wrote: Definitely. I'm salty because my favorite army is skitarii, which also got hosed by this asinine mind bogglingly stupid army construction decisions of splitting it into two books that don't work together for no logical reason. I thought maybe this was going to fix that and let you make a fully fleshed out imperial army. But alas, I should learn better.
:: frownysads ::
:: comfort hugs ::
We can be mistreated army buddies together, okay?
Two words for your new friend: War Convocation
It is a patch rather than solution, but the followers of the Omnissiah at least have couple lists that both fluffy and competitive.
I... uh...
Why not quote him instead of me if you're going to tell him that?
I agree on the general disparagement and the "copypasta" part, but why on Earth would you think the copy/paste is not completely intentional?
I think they have some kind of a rules data base (I bet in MS Word), and the new guy didn't have a late inquisition codex around.
So he looked at the grey knights codex for coteaz entry, spotted lord of Formosa and copy pasted from a database.
Editor later probably fixed obvious out-of-edition phrasing to more suitable objsec.
Still I am sure we are to thank some outsourcer copy paster from india for this boost.
I agree on the general disparagement and the "copypasta" part, but why on Earth would you think the copy/paste is not completely intentional?
I think they have some kind of a rules data base (I bet in MS Word), and the new guy didn't have a late inquisition codex around.
So he looked at the grey knights codex for coteaz entry, spotted lord of Formosa and copy pasted from a database.
Editor later probably fixed obvious out-of-edition phrasing to more suitable objsec.
Still I am sure we are to thank some outsourcer copy pasted from india for this boost.
I've heard the most recent iteration of Sisters of Battle rules is a direct copy/paste of our WD Dex rules from 2011.
Seriously, I wouldn't be surprised if they literally just copy/paste stuff without reading sometimes.
Yeah, unless this is a fairly elaborate hoax, I'd say the answer to the thread title just became "if you're using this as an allies dex, maybe. if you're using it as a sisters codex, you want to wait a couple of months to see what happens".
TheWaspinator wrote: Yeah, unless this is a fairly elaborate hoax, I'd say the answer to the thread title just became "if you're using this as an allies dex, maybe. if you're using it as a sisters codex, you want to wait a couple of months to see what happens".
Well I'll be using it for my Inquisition. But yeah, the other army list just became redundant and probably very short-lifed.
afk1sec wrote: It's them backtracking on a job not well done. All of their original posting were that it over wrote the old book. Internet backlash is all that fixed that. Everyone is still out 40 bucks wasted on a book full of things they could have done already in a better way.
Honestly, I'm just gonna wait for plastic Sisters of Battle before I get back into 40k tabletop. This new Codex is unimpressive and caters only to a small niche, of which I am not, and our one new model is resin, not plastic. I'm also getting the feeling that GW's attitude of neglect toward my army hasn't really been ameliorated, instead they obviously just intend to do the bare minimum to say they aren't neglecting them anymore.
I'm expecting the "update" to actually just be casting the existing sculpts in resin instead of metal now more than ever, if anything at all. Maybe they'll just replace Celestine with Veridyan and leave everything else unchanged. If I'm wrong, I'll rejoin the playerbase, buy the new models, but I currently feel like I was wrong to get my hopes up that maybe things would be different this time.
And this is more of a side note, but at this point I simply will not be grateful when plastic Sisters of Battle are released. They are overdue in the extreme, and GW's conduct toward the army does not inspire any gratitude on my part. If I go into my GW on plastic Sisters of Battle launch day, and the clerk asks if I'm glad plastic Sisters of Battle are out, I won't snap at her, but I'll give her a sad look and say, "5+ years ago, I might've been. It's hard to get excited at this point though, given how much your company dragged their heels on this," or something similar. I'm too socially-anxious to ever be the slightest bit impolite in public, but I could not feign excitement at this point if I tried.
afk1sec wrote: Plastic sisters of battle pics from jan. white dwarf going around on 4chan tonight. Looks like we can forget about this book by Feb.
Awesome! : D
Though I want to point out that due to the hat, the first image is in fact an Inquisitor.
Skip about 80s into the video to see my reaction:
I am puzzled by your comments as of late. You say you quit about 2 years ago or so, you don't play 40K anymore will never believe anything, spent a lot of energy and time on how this will never happen and you say you don't care and now all of a sudden you change?
Davor wrote: I am puzzled by your comments as of late. You say you quit about 2 years ago or so, you don't play 40K anymore will never believe anything, spent a lot of energy and time on how this will never happen and you say you don't care and now all of a sudden you change?
Because this time there are pictures to go along with the rumours. That's never happened before.
What bugs me is the video says "St Celestine leading a Black Templars crusade". Given the propensity of Spess Mehrens to steal things from the Witch Hunters/ Sisters of Battle wargear list (Inferno Pistols, Eviscerators...) I'm slightly worried they might've stolen St Celestine as well. Either that or she'll end up as a Special Character in a campaign supplement or something, like the dudes from Codex: Eye of Terror. She's the only "plastic Sisters" we're seen so far - still plenty of scope for a full-scale Squatting or another year of neglect.
EDIT: Seems like there's a new supplement coming out covering the fall of Cadia. Smells like a "Codex: Eye of Terror"-style campaign book to me...
Davor wrote: I am puzzled by your comments as of late. You say you quit about 2 years ago or so, you don't play 40K anymore will never believe anything, spent a lot of energy and time on how this will never happen and you say you don't care and now all of a sudden you change?
Because this time there are pictures to go along with the info. That's never happened before.
Pictures from WD.
I believe those.
I don't believe vague promises with zero proof offered, because "Sisters are getting new plastics!" rumors with no proof cropped up at least once a year for the past decade or so.
I DO believe photographs of a White Dwarf magazine like these.
I've said, "I'll believe it when I see it." I meant that literally. Now I am actually seeing it. And thus I believe it, like I said I would.
Davor wrote: I am puzzled by your comments as of late. You say you quit about 2 years ago or so, you don't play 40K anymore will never believe anything, spent a lot of energy and time on how this will never happen and you say you don't care and now all of a sudden you change?
Because this time there are pictures to go along with the rumours. That's never happened before.
What bugs me is the video says "St Celestine leading a Black Templars crusade". Given the propensity of Spess Mehrens to steal things from the Witch Hunters/ Sisters of Battle wargear list (Inferno Pistols, Eviscerators...) I'm slightly worried they might've stolen St Celestine as well. Either that or she'll end up as a Special Character in a campaign supplement or something, like the dudes from Codex: Eye of Terror. She's the only "plastic Sisters" we're seen so far - still plenty of scope for a full-scale Squatting or another year of neglect.
EDIT: Seems like there's a new supplement coming out covering the fall of Cadia. Smells like a "Codex: Eye of Terror"-style campaign book to me...
Uhh, the picture of Celestine contains two other, different models that are obviously Seraphim of some sort.
They're designing new sculpts. Maybe they're resin, and if they are I will be EXTREMELY disappointed. But these models look like plastic kits to my eyes (I dunno how they look like that, they just kinda do), so now there is actual, REAL optimism to be had.
Davor wrote: I am puzzled by your comments as of late. You say you quit about 2 years ago or so, you don't play 40K anymore will never believe anything, spent a lot of energy and time on how this will never happen and you say you don't care and now all of a sudden you change?
Because this time there are pictures to go along with the info. That's never happened before.
Pictures from WD.
I believe those.
I don't believe vague promises with zero proof offered, because "Sisters are getting new plastics!" rumors with no proof cropped up at least once a year for the past decade or so.
I DO believe photographs of a White Dwarf magazine like these.
I've said, "I'll believe it when I see it." I meant that literally. Now I am actually seeing it. And thus I believe it, like I said I would.
But you said it with such negativity. Even the people who had hope and were trying to stay positive you were telling them they were wrong for doing so. Also you said you didn't care with such passion. So even if it did show up, you shouldn't have been so excited for this when you were very negative, even more negative than me. You boasted how you quit over two years ago, don't play no more, show no interest, and you said you didn't care.
Just saying it doesn't seem you. I swear you account got hacked and it was someone else. That said, I am glad to see you happy and I hope the rules you can have fun with and you will be content what ever this "release" is.
Davor wrote: I am puzzled by your comments as of late. You say you quit about 2 years ago or so, you don't play 40K anymore will never believe anything, spent a lot of energy and time on how this will never happen and you say you don't care and now all of a sudden you change?
Because this time there are pictures to go along with the info. That's never happened before.
Pictures from WD.
I believe those.
I don't believe vague promises with zero proof offered, because "Sisters are getting new plastics!" rumors with no proof cropped up at least once a year for the past decade or so.
I DO believe photographs of a White Dwarf magazine like these.
I've said, "I'll believe it when I see it." I meant that literally. Now I am actually seeing it. And thus I believe it, like I said I would.
But you said it with such negativity. Even the people who had hope and were trying to stay positive you were telling them they were wrong for doing so. Also you said you didn't care with such passion. So even if it did show up, you shouldn't have been so excited for this when you were very negative, even more negative than me. You boasted how you quit over two years ago, don't play no more, show no interest, and you said you didn't care.
Just saying it doesn't seem you. I swear you account got hacked and it was someone else. That said, I am glad to see you happy and I hope the rules you can have fun with and you will be content what ever this "release" is.
I'm remembering an episode of Stargate SG-1 right now that seems relevant. The characters were fleeing a swarm of Replicators and needed to get their own ship far away from Apophis' flagship that the enemy flagship's self-destruct wouldn't destroy them too. During the tense moments, General Carter yelled, "We're not gonna make it!" but of course they do, so after the danger is clear, and they're safe and sound, Col. O'Neill made a big issue out of the fact that Carter declared the team would not survive, to which Carter, now calm and content, replied, "I'm sorry, but at the time it looked very much like we weren't going to make it."
Given what was going on with Sisters of Battle over the past 5 years since I first became negative about it (the 5 years before that I was actually one of the most positive people regarding the Sisters of Battle, including my early months on Dakka, and you can go check my early posts if you want to confirm that) and given what the past 3 months or so have changed about how GW treats the army, I am now going to tell you this,
When I was pessimistic and foreseeing the end of the army, it looked very much like the situation was hopeless.
Given the information available at the time, it was the correct way to view the army.
Now the information available suggests that hope and optimism is the correct way to view it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Seriously, why is it so hard to believe that seeing picture proof of what I have wanted most for my army for years imminently coming within the next few months prompts me to act differently?
I'll readily say that I've been far more optimistic than Pouncey, but I do see where they are coming from. (After all, I have my Orks and Space Marines to fall back on, I got Sisters of Battle as my third army.) It's been over a decade since Sisters got ANY new sculpts, and right now the only new one is an incredibly limited resin model. Plastics are going to be awesome, but I can see how this can be met with a "Oh, FINALLY", rather than a "Awesome!"
Also, imagine how pessimistic any other faction might've been if they were still using their original metal sculpts from the 1990s while watching their selection of available models slowly slip away after having been removed from GW store shelves, and GW invents entirely new factions and games with all-plastic models.
Like, imagine how IG fans would feel if they never got any model updates after the 1990s ranges and still had to rely on the all-metal model ranges now in the "Legacy" section of the webstore. Imagine how Dark Eldar players would feel if they never got their plastic range during 5e.
The reason fans of other armies don't understand how Sisters of Battle fans can be so pessimistic is because the only army that's been more mistreated than Sisters of Battle is freaking SQUATS.
I dont have the book yet. Will most certainly order it.
So From what im reading its basically a supplement that allows you to ally sisters, deathwatch, greyknights with their respective order of inquisition.
Now that's some pretty neato stuff right there.
Xenos inquisitor with his almighty Deathwatch marines.
Maleus with his big meaty templar greyknights
And hereticus with his bolter babes.
That sounds pretty sweet. If im reading this correctly it means that all of the weak points the specific armies had can be filled in with inquisition.
Greyknights and marines lack bodies and cheap fire support. Inq has loads.
Sisters lacks plasma and survivable melee threats. Inq has some.
It could easily be done before via allies but now its all in one handy book.
drunken0elf wrote: I dont have the book yet. Will most certainly order it.
So From what im reading its basically a supplement that allows you to ally sisters, deathwatch, greyknights with their respective order of inquisition.
Now that's some pretty neato stuff right there.
Xenos inquisitor with his almighty Deathwatch marines.
Maleus with his big meaty templar greyknights
And hereticus with his bolter babes.
That sounds pretty sweet. If im reading this correctly it means that all of the weak points the specific armies had can be filled in with inquisition.
Greyknights and marines lack bodies and cheap fire support. Inq has loads.
Sisters lacks plasma and survivable melee threats. Inq has some.
It could easily be done before via allies but now its all in one handy book.
I still don't know what was wrong with the idea of just owning multiple books and using the existing Allies rules if you want to play multiple factions.
I mean, I like to ally my personal army with my partner's personal army, so should I ask GW for a book that lets me ally my Sisters of Battle with vanilla Space Marines more easily based on the precedent of Codex: Imperial Agents?
drunken0elf wrote: I dont have the book yet. Will most certainly order it.
So From what im reading its basically a supplement that allows you to ally sisters, deathwatch, greyknights with their respective order of inquisition.
Now that's some pretty neato stuff right there.
Xenos inquisitor with his almighty Deathwatch marines.
Maleus with his big meaty templar greyknights
And hereticus with his bolter babes.
That sounds pretty sweet. If im reading this correctly it means that all of the weak points the specific armies had can be filled in with inquisition.
Greyknights and marines lack bodies and cheap fire support. Inq has loads.
Sisters lacks plasma and survivable melee threats. Inq has some.
It could easily be done before via allies but now its all in one handy book.
I still don't know what was wrong with the idea of just owning multiple books and using the existing Allies rules if you want to play multiple factions.
I mean, I like to ally my personal army with my partner's personal army, so should I ask GW for a book that lets me ally my Sisters of Battle with vanilla Space Marines more easily based on the precedent of Codex: Imperial Agents?
There's no issue. Just it was annoying for me to have printouts. No biggy if it doesn't bother you.
But the 5pts for power armor on the acolytes is what I'm all about tho
Pouncey wrote: Uhh, the picture of Celestine contains two other, different models that are obviously Seraphim of some sort.
They're designing new sculpts. Maybe they're resin, and if they are I will be EXTREMELY disappointed. But these models look like plastic kits to my eyes (I dunno how they look like that, they just kinda do), so now there is actual, REAL optimism to be had.
So St Celestine and "models who go with St Celestine" are the only things we've seen so far. Those models are very... ornate, I think it's more likely they're some kind of bodyguard for Celestine than an average everyday Seraphim.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but there's still plenty of scope for this to **not** be a Sisters update or even plastic kits. My money is on "special character in a Codex: Eye of Terror-style supplement", but we'll see, I suppose.
Don't throw your Codex: Imperial Agents in the bin just yet.
Pouncey wrote: Uhh, the picture of Celestine contains two other, different models that are obviously Seraphim of some sort.
They're designing new sculpts. Maybe they're resin, and if they are I will be EXTREMELY disappointed. But these models look like plastic kits to my eyes (I dunno how they look like that, they just kinda do), so now there is actual, REAL optimism to be had.
So St Celestine and "models who go with St Celestine" are the only things we've seen so far. Those models are very... ornate, I think it's more likely they're some kind of bodyguard for Celestine than an average everyday Seraphim.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but there's still plenty of scope for this to **not** be a Sisters update or even plastic kits. My money is on "special character in a Codex: Eye of Terror-style supplement", but we'll see, I suppose.
Don't throw your Codex: Imperial Agents in the bin just yet.
The two sidekicks are called the "Geminae Superia", so it's unlikely they're your regular Seraphim. If they do a regular Seraphim I could imagine they'd be slightly less ornate and without the wings and power swords.
Oh. And they explicitly say they're made of plastic, "the first plastic sisters" or something similar.
Pouncey wrote: Uhh, the picture of Celestine contains two other, different models that are obviously Seraphim of some sort.
They're designing new sculpts. Maybe they're resin, and if they are I will be EXTREMELY disappointed. But these models look like plastic kits to my eyes (I dunno how they look like that, they just kinda do), so now there is actual, REAL optimism to be had.
So St Celestine and "models who go with St Celestine" are the only things we've seen so far. Those models are very... ornate, I think it's more likely they're some kind of bodyguard for Celestine than an average everyday Seraphim.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but there's still plenty of scope for this to **not** be a Sisters update or even plastic kits. My money is on "special character in a Codex: Eye of Terror-style supplement", but we'll see, I suppose.
Don't throw your Codex: Imperial Agents in the bin just yet.
I never bought C: IA actually. If it came down to it, I would use C: IA for my Sisters of Battle despite the loss of Celestine (honestly, I'm not a huge fan of using special characters, mostly I use Celestine as much as I do because she's powerful and I really like my conversion/kitbash made by giving her old metal model a Sanguinary Guard backpack instead of the shroud and cherubs.
Regarding the Celestine model, yeah, I did consider that. I don't think they'd go to the trouble of designing Seraphim plastic models and not use a similar design for a plastic Seraphim kit though.
There's definitely reason to be hopeful now though. We're getting new models for the first time in 13 years, and that's absolutely a strong sign for hope where there wasn't one before. The fact our entire model range wasn't updated in the first go may not mean much anymore, since GW moved away from the huge splurge of releases with a Codex thing at least a year or two ago, and now they do small updates of a few kits slowly over time. I guess it lets fans of armies spread out their purchases over time, which sounds like it'd be a decent way of doing things instead of overwhelming people with a flood of new models and forcing us to decide what we want to go without in the meantime.
I mean, if you want to convince me to be pessimistic at all, you could point out that there are no plastic infantry yet, just a resin special character and a plastic Seraphim/Celestine kit, so my dream of kitbashing/converting my army is still not technically here yet.
However, I do want to be hopeful, and getting actual model updates is definitely a reason to be hopeful. I fully acknowledge that GW may not carry through on converting the model range to plastics, but there's a LOT more reason now to believe that they plan to do that than there has been for years, and I choose to be happy and hopeful now.
I mean, really, I'm not someone who gets off on complaining and whining all day. I complain and whine only when I feel I have valid reasons to be upset.
AnomanderRake wrote: I'm angrier about my Inquisitorial Stormtroopers, honestly. They haven't had an entry in a hardcopy Codex for just as long, but GW isn't coming out and squatting them, they're shaving away their game presence and excising them from the lore bit by sorry bit until we're left with 'Acolyte' squads who can't figure out which way to point a gun, may or may not know how to use their transports, and generally just sit around being wastes of space.
At least Sisters have rules and sort of work.
Yeah, it sucks. I really hope GW will give the Inquisition suite some real love, with access to at least Guard veterans equivalent!
Pouncey wrote: I mean, if you want to convince me to be pessimistic at all, you could point out that there are no plastic infantry yet, just a resin special character and a plastic Seraphim/Celestine kit, so my dream of kitbashing/converting my army is still not technically here yet.
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything - just saying, based on what we've got so far there's no reason to think there'll be any plastics beyond Celestine and the bodyguards, and none whatsoever to suppose a Sisters update is forthcoming.
It might well be, but I personally want a bit more info before I start getting excited. The new kits are cool and I'll probably drop a few quid on them regardless.
Pouncey wrote: I mean, if you want to convince me to be pessimistic at all, you could point out that there are no plastic infantry yet, just a resin special character and a plastic Seraphim/Celestine kit, so my dream of kitbashing/converting my army is still not technically here yet.
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything - just saying, based on what we've got so far there's no reason to think there'll be any plastics beyond Celestine and the bodyguards, and none whatsoever to suppose a Sisters update is forthcoming.
It might well be, but I personally want a bit more info before I start getting excited. The new kits are cool and I'll probably drop a few quid on them regardless.
Uhh...
What exactly do you call Celestine being remodeled as a plastic kit if not the very definition of a model being updated in plastic?
And yeah, I guess you're right, there's nothing specifically stating that more are to follow, but given that GW got rid of Kirby six months ago and have been turning over a new leaf in how they do things, there's reason for me to be hopeful for the future that I am comfortable assuming that they will not simply update one kit, create a new special character, then mysteriously stop there.
My pessimism was because there were no updates previously. Now there factually are updates.
It took me a bit to realize this too, but the last time Sisters of Battle got new models is no longer 2003. Now the most recent Sisters of Battle models were released in December 2016 (Canoness Veridian) and there is a White Dwarf advertising a plastic Celestine kit coming in January 2017.
Pouncey wrote: What exactly do you call Celestine being remodeled as a plastic kit if not the very definition of a model being updated in plastic?
Jesus fething... If you want to be obtuse then Celestine is **technically** a Sisters of Battle model redone in plastic, but unless you're planning to buy 50 of them and convert them extensively to serve as Battle Sistser/ Dominions/ etc then "plastic Sisters of Battle" it ain't.
Don't get me wrong - it's way, way too early to write anything off or start whining or anything, because this is the first leak we've had, but everyone's crowing about updates and "plastic Sisters of Battle" and we just haven't seen any evidence that points to that.
Pouncey wrote: What exactly do you call Celestine being remodeled as a plastic kit if not the very definition of a model being updated in plastic?
Jesus fething... If you want to be obtuse then Celestine is **technically** a Sisters of Battle model redone in plastic, but unless you're planning to buy 50 of them and convert them extensively to serve as Battle Sistser/ Dominions/ etc then "plastic Sisters of Battle" it ain't.
Don't get me wrong - it's way, way too early to write anything off or start whining or anything, because this is the first leak we've had, but everyone's crowing about updates and "plastic Sisters of Battle" and we just haven't seen any evidence that points to that.
I guess I can't fault you. I'm sorry. Personally, I just don't believe they'd update only one character and then not touch the rest of the army, so the lack of confirmation on more to come doesn't mean as much to me. The fact that these are not simply rumormongers promising an update, but what could easily be the very beginning of an army-wide transition to plastic models with the first kits being displayed in White Dwarf helps my optimism, and it means a lot more to me, personally.
I also noticed that they don't do the splurge of releases to go with a new Codex anymore, instead they do small updates over a longer period of time, so the fact Celestine's the only model to be updated in January isn't really a reason to believe nothing more is coming to me, and I expect that if the rest of the army is updated, it will be done one or two kits per month over the period of most of 2017.
However, I can fully recognize that your doubts are valid, and I am willing to drop the matter and promise not to make an issue out of you sticking with the mantra of "I'll believe it when I see it," and simply waiting until the kits are actually on pre-order to get excited. Finding fault with that reasoning would be very hypocritical of me, wouldn't it?
Pouncey wrote:I also noticed that they don't do the splurge of releases to go with a new Codex anymore, instead they do small updates over a longer period of time, so the fact Celestine's the only model to be updated in January isn't really a reason to believe nothing more is coming to me
I'm not even saying that - just "Celestine announcement =/= plastic Sisters and a new Codex". Something might be coming - but we don't know, and this isn't confirmation of anything beyond a Celestine re-issue (which, if I'm honest, is pretty cool all by itself).
It comes from an XKCD comic wondering what to call the decade starting in 0, like we call the 1920s the "twenties". Naught is a term that means zero.
Naughties was suggested because of the rise of the Internet and the flood of easily-accessible lewd material that came with it. It was thus said to be "appropriate" in the comic.
Pouncey wrote:I also noticed that they don't do the splurge of releases to go with a new Codex anymore, instead they do small updates over a longer period of time, so the fact Celestine's the only model to be updated in January isn't really a reason to believe nothing more is coming to me
I'm not even saying that - just "Celestine announcement =/= plastic Sisters and a new Codex". Something might be coming - but we don't know, and this isn't confirmation of anything beyond a Celestine re-issue (which, if I'm honest, is pretty cool all by itself).
If you're suggesting that I have no factual basis for my assumption that more is to come, I do agree. My belief that more models will follow has no factual evidence to substantiate it, merely that I cannot fathom why GW would bother to update one model without intending to update the rest of the range as well.
It comes from my inability to imagine a reason they might have for doing something, and thus I do acknowledge that it is merely an unsubstantiated belief, but the worst-case scenario is that no more models follow. At which point I will sigh and return to my former state of negativity. In the meantime I get to be happy and optimistic about my army in 40k. I like being happy, and there's really no downside for me believing in this.
I have dealt with someone with some pretty wacky beliefs and flimsy reasons for believing them. Upon finding out about them, I tried to dissuade him from them, to improve his rationality.
All that really happened though, was that I made his life worse by trying to take away one of the few reasons he had to be happy. I saw how sad he became, and realized that his beliefs harmed no one in any way, they weren't causing him to do anything harmful, he wasn't trying to convince anyone they were even true, but they brought him happiness anyways. I realized that I was undoubtedly the bad guy in that situation, and I've made an effort to be more accepting of harmless beliefs that don't hurt anyone since then. The realization that a superstitious belief could harm no one but still bring happiness and meaning to people's lives anyways even gave me a new tolerance for religion and belief in deities, which I had been sorely lacking in those years.
Besides the SoB (wichbI have. I bought my army for a really good price off a witchhunter player who hasn't played since his codex got gutted (polr soul)).
It's great to see possible updates for the lack of sister love. Not because I'm still new to them that i don't care about them, but that's besides the point.
How's the general feel of inquisition in this book? Other then the loss of 10pt batteries and the cheap 5 firingport chimera?
So I'm not sure if I missed this question or not but.... did they update the digital inquisition codex with the imperial agents changes? Because they still sell the digital version and if these changes didn't carry over it sounds like the superior version.
drunken0elf wrote: Besides the SoB (wichbI have. I bought my army for a really good price off a witchhunter player who hasn't played since his codex got gutted (polr soul)).
It's great to see possible updates for the lack of sister love. Not because I'm still new to them that i don't care about them, but that's besides the point.
How's the general feel of inquisition in this book? Other then the loss of 10pt batteries and the cheap 5 firingport chimera?
The whole book is written to try and sell people on splashing one or two squads of another army into a big Imperial list. If you played one of the armies within as a primary force you'll be sorely disappointed.
drunken0elf wrote: Besides the SoB (wichbI have. I bought my army for a really good price off a witchhunter player who hasn't played since his codex got gutted (polr soul)).
It's great to see possible updates for the lack of sister love. Not because I'm still new to them that i don't care about them, but that's besides the point.
How's the general feel of inquisition in this book? Other then the loss of 10pt batteries and the cheap 5 firingport chimera?
The whole book is written to try and sell people on splashing one or two squads of another army into a big Imperial list. If you played one of the armies within as a primary force you'll be sorely disappointed.
Did the writers forget that they made things like Unbound part of the game's rules?
It is an Allies codex with rules to make them battle forged.
This codex presents background and rules for a number of smaller Imperial factions, whose forces fight alongside other armies of the Emperor. Use the rules, datasheets, wargear and detachments included to add members of these organisations to any army of the Imperium.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The following text was added to the Sisters digital codex page:
The rules in this eBook are also available in Codex: Imperial Agents, fully revised and updated along with new detachments plus rules for adding even more servants of the Emperor to your army.
ZaelART wrote: I don't have the codex, and I know this isn't the purpose of the codex, but is it possible to create a CAD using only Codex: Imperial Agents?
Each Faction has its own detachment. Which is a unique Force Organization Chart. For example the Deathwatch FOC is a single troop choice, so you could build an army from only this book. It would just be made of multiple unique FOCs.
Pouncey wrote: IMO, if they were looking to cut down on the number of Codices, the first place to start would be the half-dozen or so Space Marine codices in existence with full model ranges.
If GW has proven anything over the past year or so, is that it's not looking to shrink it's product line for 40k. With all the newly added armies, the ones basically already announced, and a few rumored to be coming, shrinking their 40k product line, does not seem to be the path they are on.
I don't own any of the books so I can't say for sure, but I thought I read that no, there is no changes, just that it's in actual print form. There is a chance I am wrong though. Only Sisters and Inquisition got minor changes and the rest is on paper form exactly how they were in ebook or pdf.
Pouncey wrote: IMO, if they were looking to cut down on the number of Codices, the first place to start would be the half-dozen or so Space Marine codices in existence with full model ranges.
If GW has proven anything over the past year or so, is that it's not looking to shrink it's product line for 40k. With all the newly added armies, the ones basically already announced, and a few rumored to be coming, shrinking their 40k product line, does not seem to be the path they are on.
I, uh, didn't suggest making any models OOP.
Just cutting down on the number of Codices, and writing the all-inclusive Space Marines Codex general enough with a wide enough variety of options that all models currently in existence can reasonably fit in there somewhere.
Example:
Problem: Sanguinary Guard can't be Honor Guard, they have jet packs and wrist-mounted boltguns and relic blades.
Solution: Add option for Honor Guard to take jet packs and relic blades, treat wrist-mounted boltguns as standard boltguns.
Follow-on problem: But then you'll have to take Sanguinary Guard models if you want that combination in an Ultramarines list or whatever.
Solution: Or, just, like, kitbash? Space Marine infantry kits are pretty damned cross-compatible.
Its just a book that pulls many basic options from their respective codex and presents them in printed book so people can use them without pulling out several different books or e-books with the trade off being you don't all the options and characters available if you had used said army's actual codex.
GW is probably operating under the assumption that a person who buys C:IA doesn't have Codex: Inquisiton, Sisters of Battle, Grey knights, officio assassinorium, or any others I missed and would like to have access to some their units without having to buy several different books and haul them around or constantly pages through their mobile device. There was a another possibly that I had considered but I forgot it while navigating the ridiculous late holiday shopping crowds while picking up ingredients.
Either way, even a quick flip through the book it's obvious that its not meant to replace any codex but just condenses several options into one source and throws in some new formations in the process (something GW themselves with their new sovial presence, have confirmed it's intention was), a very practical idea that due to classic GW unclear wording (and perhaps abit of demagoguery from others) has been taken for something else.
I honestly don't see what there is to get so bent out of shape about.
Its just a book that pulls many basic options from their respective codex and presents them in printed book so people can use them without pulling out several different books or e-books with the trade off being you don't all the options and characters available if you had used said army's actual codex.
GW is probably operating under the assumption that a person who buys C:IA doesn't have Codex: Inquisiton, Sisters of Battle, Grey knights, officio assassinorium, or any others I missed and would like to have access to some their units without having to buy several different books and haul them around or constantly pages through their mobile device. There was a another possibly that I had considered but I forgot it while navigating the ridiculous late holiday shopping crowds while picking up ingredients.
Either way, even a quick flip through the book it's obvious that its not meant to replace any codex but just condenses several options into one source and throws in some new formations in the process (something GW themselves with their new sovial presence, have confirmed it's intention was), a very practical idea that due to classic GW unclear wording (and perhaps abit of demagoguery from others) has been taken for something else.
I honestly don't see what there is to get so bent out of shape about.
Honestly, I think players like myself who play one of these factions primarily may simply have forgotten that our factions are fairly unpopular and minor, and that Codex: Imperial Agents was probably just a valid attempt to start selling a bunch of e-books in a hardcopy form, but none of the factions were individually popular to warrant the shelf space or production costs, so they simply jammed them together in the same book and made a small attempt to let you field them together. They just couldn't include literally everything without making the book too long, so they had to cut out some options. However, they kept the individual codices available as eBooks and emphasized that they were still valid, so anyone who wants to can simply choose to go with the eBook instead of C:IA.
I mean, if you just drop the assumption that GW is actively trying to make these factions unpleasant, and is making an effort to boost their popularity and recognition, well, it kinda makes sense. Yeah, historically GW hasn't treated factions like the Sisters well, but, you know, people change, and GW may easily have seen the error of their ways, so if they already have, or if the end up doing so in the future, at some point we have to be prepared to leave the past in the past and move forward.
Its just a book that pulls many basic options from their respective codex and presents them in printed book so people can use them without pulling out several different books or e-books with the trade off being you don't all the options and characters available if you had used said army's actual codex.
GW is probably operating under the assumption that a person who buys C:IA doesn't have Codex: Inquisiton, Sisters of Battle, Grey knights, officio assassinorium, or any others I missed and would like to have access to some their units without having to buy several different books and haul them around or constantly pages through their mobile device. There was a another possibly that I had considered but I forgot it while navigating the ridiculous late holiday shopping crowds while picking up ingredients.
Either way, even a quick flip through the book it's obvious that its not meant to replace any codex but just condenses several options into one source and throws in some new formations in the process (something GW themselves with their new sovial presence, have confirmed it's intention was), a very practical idea that due to classic GW unclear wording (and perhaps abit of demagoguery from others) has been taken for something else.
I honestly don't see what there is to get so bent out of shape about.
Honestly, I think players like myself who play one of these factions primarily may simply have forgotten that our factions are fairly unpopular and minor, and that Codex: Imperial Agents was probably just a valid attempt to start selling a bunch of e-books in a hardcopy form, but none of the factions were individually popular to warrant the shelf space or production costs, so they simply jammed them together in the same book and made a small attempt to let you field them together. They just couldn't include literally everything without making the book too long, so they had to cut out some options. However, they kept the individual codices available as eBooks and emphasized that they were still valid, so anyone who wants to can simply choose to go with the eBook instead of C:IA.
I mean, if you just drop the assumption that GW is actively trying to make these factions unpleasant, and is making an effort to boost their popularity and recognition, well, it kinda makes sense. Yeah, historically GW hasn't treated factions like the Sisters well, but, you know, people change, and GW may easily have seen the error of their ways, so if they already have, or if the end up doing so in the future, at some point we have to be prepared to leave the past in the past and move forward.
Bang on. Main reason i'm buying C:IA is that I don't own any of the ebooks codexes. Yet i have the 4 assassins, quite a bit of inquisition and SoB. (well i have them on my computer because they're easy to find and all from that odd russian site but w/e). Having a legit hardbook rather then hakfassed copy pasted rules is better.
drunken0elf wrote: Bang on. Main reason i'm buying C:IA is that I don't own any of the ebooks codexes. Yet i have the 4 assassins, quite a bit of inquisition and SoB. (well i have them on my computer because they're easy to find and all from that odd russian site but w/e). Having a legit hardbook rather then hakfassed copy pasted rules is better.
I'm gonna buy C:IA and use it. Might even consider it my Christmas present to myself.
I have the ebook Sisters of Battle Codex already, but I don't have a tablet, e-reader, smartphone or any portable digital devices, so even though I play at home instead of a club or store, I've had to print out my Codex, and it has been a fantastical pain in the ass. My first attempt was to simply push print all. That took a week because even though I made sure to print it in greyscale, I ran through like 3-4 cartridges of ink trying to print all the full-page pictures that are literally every second page, and had to go to the store to get more on two occasions. Then, after that, I discovered that due to not having set the page size properly, it had printed them in a format that rendered what I had printed totally useless since stuff was printed after each page ended (and thus the printer simply sprayed ink on itself, thinking it was printing on a piece of paper, and having no way to know that paper wasn't actually there. Stuff like that is actually why a robot apocalypse in the present day would fail hilariously, our computers generally lack the capability to kill us at all, and they can't even launch nukes without a human being in the process, so the computers can only try to lie to humans to convince them to fire nukes, some wouldn't obey, some would, and, uh, nukes cause EMPs and computers are generally located where humans are (read: GENERALLY, because I'm well aware we've sent computers to Mars and Jupiter, and have apparently been periodically ramming them into comets on occasion for scientific research), so they're killing themselves too, and if humans can get control of enough nukes enough to choose where they detonate, we can wipe out the machines with a few well-placed or lucky detonations in the upper atmosphere wiping out all computers on the planet.), so I had to start OVER and reprint every page (learned enough from one failed attempt to be very, VERY selective about what pages to print).
Anyways, irrelevant diatribe about the absurdity of a robot apocalypse aside, having an actual hardcopy of my army's rules is something I've wanted for a long time. And when I think about it, I really don't care that I have to share that book with other armies, and my not-Celestine character is my least favorite anyways, so no big loss.
I'm halso a bit hyped about fall of cadia to see the supplement with the new inquisitor Greyfax and Celestine. (I still don't know if i like her new sculp better then the pewter one.
I'm just hoping it's not going to be a black templar centered supplement... In the art they're with cadians and blakc templar marines. Hey, Using my kaskrins might be relevant again lol. Still waiting for those hellguns to come back. Hotshot lasguns are trash.
You boasted how you quit over two years ago, don't play no more, show no interest, and you said you didn't care.
