Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ok a lot of people in the rumors and news sections of various 40k websites have asked things like when do we get plastic Grey Knights? Or people always asking "when will DH, WH and OX get something new and improved to be ore in line with 5th edition rules"?

Well here is something i have noticed more so now than ever before in the past 2-3 years. People are actually fielding more and more GKT and PAGK in their Allied lists. What does this mean? Well as people start to see the effectiveness of these units on the field they want more. I think one of the main reasons speculated to and maybe even confirmed is that the reason why there have been no updates to the Ordo's groups is because they just dont sell well enough. I am a person who buys from Forgeworld and i enjoy how they approach the inquisition in their models. I love answering their question after i purchase something. "What model would you like to see Forgeworld make?" I always enter Plastic GKT and PAGK.

Anyways i jut wanted to point out that i think alot more people are using DH and WH now that they are boosted by the new deep strike rules, or using Vulkan with sisters, new IG codex, etc... I think it all translates to $ for GW. Right now im seeing so much excitement for the new IG codex not from just IG players or fans of horde armies but from WH and DH players who hope to induct the new storm troopers and a Valkyrie. GW needs to take a strong look at the response their new armies get from players. We may be over critical of the codex' they release and we may find some things to be overpowered but what we enjoy most of all is the new models, army lists and competition at our LGS. The potential for a =][= book is a great thought because 3 armies could be covered in there with countless possibilities that tie into all the imperial armies.

in closing i think that 5th edition has done wonders for the sale of DH and WH and we may see some attention swing towards this in the future as sales improve based on collateral improvements.

windswept313 wrote:Well here is something i have noticed more so now than ever before in the past 2-3 years. People are actually fielding more and more GKT and PAGK in their Allied lists. What does this mean? Well as people start to see the effectiveness of these units on the field they want more. I think one of the main reasons speculated to and maybe even confirmed is that the reason why there have been no updates to the Ordo's groups is because they just dont sell well enough. I am a person who buys from Forgeworld and i enjoy how they approach the inquisition in their models. I love answering their question after i purchase something. "What model would you like to see Forgeworld make?" I always enter Plastic GKT and PAGK.

I for one haven't seen people taking more allied inquisition than usual, and it would be strange to suggest that Forgeworld make plastic GK, considering FW only works with resin. And I would much prefer to work with metal models than resin.

The only =I= units I see in Imperial armies are the DH lord with mystics for anti-drop work, and maybe a psychic hood if one is not already available.

I haven't seen GKT or GKPA at all.

Also, it is highly unlikely that you will be able to induct the new IG units into DH/WH armies, since those specify the units that are "inductable". So far as I know, Stormtrooper and Valkyrie are not in that list (this assumes tounries or other official lists, not club rules, btw).

In addition, GW has no way of knowing that you're buying GKs for use in your imperial armies, so they don't actually know how much extra money they're making. This was the same issue with LaTD, where converters would buy units and boxes from 5 different armies, but there was no way to know it was used for LaTD, ergo, GW has no idea how much extra revenue it generates.

I have a substantial Inquisitorial army that contains not a single GK or SoB.

When GW gets around to re-doing my Codex, they will genericise Inquisitors, remove many if not all the random 'flavour' units, and re-emphasise the armies to be mostly GK and SoB. And Alien Hunters will be ignored completely.

My army will cease to be, and join my Lost & The Damned army on the shelf.

BYE

I see a marked increase of =][= allied units going from nearly zero, to a fair amount in imperial lists.

I myself use GKT in my deathwing (expensive but quite complimentary).

I can definitely see merit of the inclusion of =][= units in the new imperial guard. Sisters instead of stormtroopers as one example. Dominions in a flamey tank that can move 12" and still fire its twin linked heavy flamers as another example.

windswept313 wrote:... or using Vulkan with sisters...

yeah,
has this been ruled as legal yet?
I don't think that it is...

IMO I don't think that it should be legal...

PAnic...

Panic wrote:

windswept313 wrote:... or using Vulkan with sisters...

yeah,
has this been ruled as legal yet?
I don't think that it is...

IMO I don't think that it should be legal...

PAnic...

Off topic, but the closest thing to being ruled as legal is the adepticon FAQ which DOES allow this combo.

That said that I agree it is broken as hell and should be ruled by GW in errata that Vulkan's rules do not apply to allied units.

But until then, RaW dictates that it is.

[edit] to keep this thread from being derailed into a rules argument regarding such lagality, there are far more appropriate places on this site to debate that topic.

IMHO, I can see GW just dropping the Inquisition. I think this would be a major f-up on their part, but then again....GW do that alot.

I can see GW just making Grey Knights another "faction" or Chapter that could be made from a standard Space Marine army....this means, no plastic crack for those boys.

I can see the male chauvanists (spelling?) that seem to run GW dropping sisters altogether.....yipee, a completely male orientated wargame...excellent. The women all stay at home a raise the babies while the "good 'ol boys" go out and kick but!

Believe me though. The day they confirm the above, is the day that I stop playing WH40K and GW products altogether!! Solemn word on that!

I don't see them dropping either WH or DH. The reason being they haven't dropped a full codex line since squats in second edition. Yes they dropped one off sub lists from bampaigns (13th Company, Lost and the Damned) but they haven't dropped anyone else. Heck, they even kept sisters from 2nd edition.

That being the case I don't see them dropping the DH or WH. I see them revamping them though I hope they don't combine them since it would lose a lot of flavor for me.

The DH list in particular needs an update and the WH list, while competative need some work in the Inq. side. Though personally I think the Inq. entry in both books should be the same to save confusion and time. Oh and they should drop the allied into other armies rules. That's a holdover from 3rd.

Given Andy Hoare has stated he is currently working on Codex: Witch Hunters, I cannot see these being dropped. That said, Jervis did state that the focus would be taken away from Inquisition and back onto Sisters and Grey Knights (when Codex: Daemonhunters is updated), so what HBMC predicted will probably be truth of it.

Damn.

On this occassion, if I'm wrong.....I'll be very happy!

Please do not argue whether or not sisters benefit from Vulkan's chapter tactics in this thread.

Thank you.

sorry yakface, i will not do it again.

Elric of Grans wrote:Given Andy Hoare has stated he is currently working on Codex: Witch Hunters, I cannot see these being dropped.

Can I get a source on this?

I remember reading somewhere that Andy said that as well. 2009 is supposed to be a very productive year for GW.

G

Personally I hate GKT. Those basterds kick to much ass. Im not even joking. I dont see why more people dont use them. My god they easily kill their worth in points

I'm just hoping that they drop the ability for other Imperial armies to take the Inquisitor and Mystics. They're becoming like fries at McDonalds, they come with everything. You'd swear they were being gathered up by press gangs and given out to Imperial forces as about as standard issue as lasguns are for IG.

dancingcricket wrote:I'm just hoping that they drop the ability for other Imperial armies to take the Inquisitor and Mystics. They're becoming like fries at McDonalds, they come with everything. You'd swear they were being gathered up by press gangs and given out to Imperial forces as about as standard issue as lasguns are for IG.

I wouldn't worry too much. Assuming Inquisitor Retinues still exist come the next round of Inquisitorial Codices, the Henchmen will no doubt become 'Generic'. I'd be more concerned for those of us with Death Cultists, Archo-Flagellants, Penitent Engines and Inquisitorial Storm Troopers - they probably won't even exist in the rules anymore within the next couple of years.

I predict you will be able to take an Inquisitor (and perhaps Inquisitor Lord), ISTs, and Assassinorum operatives (not Deathcultists), but none of the other Inquisitorial elements.

Fetterkey wrote:Can I get a source on this?

It was announced at a Games Day sometime in the middle of last year. I cannot remember any more accurately than that.

For Codex: Witch Hunters, I hope the go back and do Priests, Arco-Flagellents, Penitent Engines and Sisters Repentia properly, though I can see them just dropping the freak show. Given there are plastic Storm Troopers with Shotguns in the works, I hope we get better rules for Arbites than the current ones. Frankly, I have low expectations of Andy Hoare and was rather disappointed when I heard he had it again. He mostly screwed up last time and I doubt he will get it right this time.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I have a substantial Inquisitorial army that contains not a single GK or SoB.

When GW gets around to re-doing my Codex, they will genericise Inquisitors, remove many if not all the random 'flavour' units, and re-emphasise the armies to be mostly GK and SoB. And Alien Hunters will be ignored completely.

My army will cease to be, and join my Lost & The Damned army on the shelf.

BYE

About time in my opinion, Sisters received nothing with C: WH sans broken Repentia.
Anything that is going to lead to the Sisters receiving the respect that they should've received well before Necrons and Tau were even considered for a codex is a good thing.

Screw the Inquisition, should've never been in the codex to begin with.

Fetterkey wrote:

Elric of Grans wrote:Given Andy Hoare has stated he is currently working on Codex: Witch Hunters, I cannot see these being dropped.

Can I get a source on this?

It was 'mentioned' at a Games Day or some such by one of the Design Team back in early 2008.
I did a slap-dash search on both here and Warseer quickly but didn't turn up anything.

Sadly, he is the reason we have the current mess of a codex with not one, not two, but three useless units. One overpriced HQ, redundant rules galore and being out right told that 'Yeah, the army list is flawed, go ally to fix it.'

Don't even get me started on their lazy arse excuse to why they didn't want to do their job and make Plastic Sisters to begin with.

Delephont wrote:IMHO, I can see GW just dropping the Inquisition.

I can see GW just making Grey Knights another "faction" or Chapter that could be made from a standard Space Marine army....

I can see the male chauvanists (spelling?) that seem to run GW dropping sisters altogether.....

The day they confirm the above, is the day that I stop playing WH40K and GW products altogether!!

IMO, this is a bit much to imagine, even of GW.
____

Hulksmash wrote:I don't see them dropping either WH or DH. The reason being they haven't dropped a full codex line since squats in second edition.

The DH list in particular needs an update and the WH list, while competative need some work in the Inq. side. Though personally I think the Inq. entry in both books should be the same to save confusion and time. Oh and they should drop the allied into other armies rules. That's a holdover from 3rd.

I don't recall Squats having a proper (i.e. standalone printed) Codex, though GW did promise one... But remember Codex: Assassins?

Actually, WH should be redone back as C: Sisters of Battle, with all of the Inq and Allies stuff completely stripped out. The Inq and Allies stuff should only appear in the DH / Inq book. This is so much simpler to work with.
____

Elric of Grans wrote:Given Andy Hoare has stated he is currently working on Codex: Witch Hunters, I cannot see these being dropped. That said, Jervis did state that the focus would be taken away from Inquisition and back onto Sisters and Grey Knights (when Codex: Daemonhunters is updated),

Sisters are cheap enough and common enough to appear as a whole army, but GK? I dunno. I still have trouble seeing GK as a full Codex - expanding the army waters the GK down into yet another Marine force, and squeezes away most of interesting Inquisition "freakshow" elements.
____

Kettu wrote:About time in my opinion, Sisters received nothing with C: WH sans broken Repentia.

Screw the Inquisition, should've never been in the codex to begin with.

You forgot the Living Saint, which is awesome, but too bad it doesn't match the concept art with dove wings and a power halberd.

Agreed. I blame Gav and his crappy Inquisition game for this.

WRONGBADFUN wrote:Agreed. I blame Gav and his crappy Inquisition game for this.

I actually really enjoy playing my Inquisitorial Conclave. I like being able to field an Inquisitorial force that doesn't involve Grey Knights and Sisters of Battle.

But thanks for telling me how I should be playing the game WRONGBADFUN. It's nice to know that I'm 100% wrong, and should be playing SoBs only or GKs only, and that my choice of fielding Inquisitors and ISTs is actually wrong and bad and not fun.

So thanks WRONGBADFUN. Don't know where this website would be without your cutting insight into How The Game Should Be Played.

BYE

I have a little Radical DH force myself (with inducted guard), and I really think the new IG codex will help them out.

Since you take the units as listed in their original codex, that means IG Platoons will benefit from the new rules for IG Same goes for LRBT, we might be able to take a whole squad of them! Sentinels, Rough Riders, ect... will be interesting to see them in =][= armies.

I hope when they redo the DH codex, they throw a bone to us radicals :(

You take the units from their parent codex, but I think the limits still apply. Iirc, things like LRBTs are 0-1, or 0-1 per infantry platoon/armored fist. I don't think that the current inducted rules would allow you to take a platoon of LRBTs.

It will likely be something that would need to be errata'd or faq'd to make it work cleanly.

I also remember there being some discussion about inducted IG from the current dex not being able to take doctrines if they were inducted into a DH force. I don't know if there will be any limits like that either.

I have a 1000 point DH Radical Army, with SSTs and Dhosts, and not much else. I don't anticipate it changing much with the new guard dex (though I hope it does, I'm working on some inducted models now).

Inquisitors are so much a part of the fluff, that they really do need a place in the game. Of course, Genestealer cults, chaos covens, rogue traders and traitor marines who fought in the Great Crusade are part of the fluff too. It doesn't always mean that it works into the game well.

My guess is that GW does stand-alone GK and SoB codexes and totally does away with the DH and WH codexes. I could see them doing an Inquisition codex (with all the cool parts - daemonhosts, arcoflagellants, etc.) with allied units 'built into' the codex. But, my guess is that the Inquisitors and their warbands get confined to Forgeworld and/or Apocalypse and GW calls it a day.

I play Mostly a Sisters army, but I have enough Storm Troopers with A Inq. Lord and Land Raider to add extra with them. I do hope they come out with a new codex soon. I hate seeing great models with bad rules just sitting on the shelf. While WH have overall good units some of the special units need a rules change. Maybe Storm Troopers with heavy weapons, Sisters Repentia with acts of faith and inv. saves, Pent. Engines that are not closed topped! All of these units are nice models, but are not just not used where I'm at. Matter of fact I've not even seen anyone use Pent. Engines. Just to easy to kill and they are so underarmed for their points! Repentia suck so much in close combat with the armies that the Sisters need to to fight (SM, CSM, Nec, etc.) that if/when they get into close combat they die before they even get a chance to fight. When I use them, I use them as a tank hunter/killer unit because at least they get a chance to kill something before they die! Unless there is a termie unit near by to fight! At least there they get to swing at the same time!
Overall the WH's and DH's armies can and will fight well. However, the units that really add more to the list and are needed so bad are so bad at what they do that you can't run them. Some simple rules changes would add so much and then you would see the models move off the shelf and get seen on the battlefield. I would love to see heavy weapons with storm troopers, it would add a lot to them! Repentia with a Inva. Save and Strikes first on a Charge would make them so much better! Pent. Engine that is closed top (shielded by faith?) with two twin linked heavy flamers (one on each arm!) again would add so much to the battlefield!
We have seen several new codexs for SM and CSM in the last few years and yet the units in them have become so much better with just a reworded rule or a new slant on them. We need the same thing to happen to WH and DH. The only thing is WHEN!

dietrich wrote:My guess is that GW does stand-alone GK and SoB codexes and totally does away with the DH and WH codexes. I could see them doing an Inquisition codex (with all the cool parts - daemonhosts, arcoflagellants, etc.) with allied units 'built into' the codex.

With Vows and such, Sisters, have enough to make a standalone modern Codex, but a standalone GK Codex? There just isn't enough stuff there to do it:

HQ: GK Captain, Captain Stern
Elite: GKT, GK Dread
Troops: PAGK
Fast: DS PAGK
Heavy: 3 flavors of Land Raider, PAGK w/ Psycannons

IMO, the list greatly lacks diversity and flexiblity to allow playability. But if the GK add lots of other stuff, then they lose their essential character.

DD, reminds me of the necron list, limited choices to say the least

i have seen a pretty big rise in units being taken, things such as GKT's are a pain in the ass to kill, and can cause a crazy amount of damage without much effort.

yes, pure GK's are costly (points and money) but they make up for it pretty well.
removing =][= from it would piss quite a few people off.

allthough daemon players would be glad to see mystics going


i like it how it is now, it just needs some upgrades and brought up to date.