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.

And once again, you are skipping over the important part.

An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol, Boarding Patrol, Battalion, Brigade or Arks of Omen Detachment in this manner is ignored for any rules that state all units from that Detachment must have at least one Faction keyword in common

In what manner is that?

If your army is Battle-forged, you can include one Agent of the Imperium unit in each Imperium (excluding Fallen units) Patrol, Boarding Patrol, Battalion, Brigade and Arks of Omen Detachment in your army without those units taking up Battlefield Role slots in those Detachments.

So putting an Inquisitor or Assassin in your detachment in a way that prevents it from making the detachment not a Navis Imperialis detachment means it cannot fill the required HQ slot of the detachment.

You are still left unable to fill the HQ slot of a Navis Imperialis detachment because any Agent of the Imperium model that can fill the slot is not Navis Imperialis unit and does count for determining what type of detachment you have.

Breton wrote:
Don't get me wrong, the rules are poorly worded, and result in some rather silly possibilties (Nids/Chaos forces with an Inquisition/NAVIS detachment for example) - but you can in theory make the NAVIS detachment if you jump through enough hoops and assume the same internal logic applied to Adeptus Astartes and/or CHAPTER Dets (and the others that are actually defined - technically there's no way to make a NAVIS/etc Det because there's no rule defining a NAVIS/etc Det.)

I might be missing something here, but how do you think you're achieving the bit in bold, assuming the army as a whole is Battle-Forged?

 Dysartes wrote:
I might be missing something here, but how do you think you're achieving the bit in bold, assuming the army as a whole is Battle-Forged?

Inquisitors don't break faction purity. It doesn't matter though because inquisitors and navy stuff are bad so nobody wants to take them. Maybe it would be funny to play orks with an inquisitor and be able to brag that you beat your friend even though you brought an inquisitor to nerf yourself.

 Conscript #760714 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
I might be missing something here, but how do you think you're achieving the bit in bold, assuming the army as a whole is Battle-Forged?

Inquisitors don't break faction purity. It doesn't matter though because inquisitors and navy stuff are bad so nobody wants to take them. Maybe it would be funny to play orks with an inquisitor and be able to brag that you beat your friend even though you brought an inquisitor to nerf yourself.

You may want to reread the rules again. They very clearly state that Agents of the Imperium don't break purity in IMPERIUM patrols, battalions and brigades... so certainly not ANY army, and not even ANY detachment in IMPERIUM armies.

As for the Navis situation: As someone already pointed out earlier in the thread, HQ's aren't mandatory in AoO Detachments. So you take two units of breachers and a unit of voidsmen and that IS a Navis AoO detachment. You can still include the Rogue Trader as an Navis because the detachment doesn't require an HQ, which makes any HQ slot available non-compulsory.

It's clear that GW ONLY wanted Navis Detachments to work in Boarding Action games. A shame, but I do believe that was the intent.

As for the Inquisition, PA: Pariah is the best 8th/9th list they've had- still not great, but better than any of the alternatives. It was compatible with 9th right up until the release of Octarius, so it does work with the edition. Failing that, if you've got Octarius, the only thing that's different really is the absence of the Malleus Terminator.

If you choose to use this list, or if your opponent insists on it, you're probably best with an AoO Detachment anyway- take'm as Agents, and you can use anything and everything in the dataslate- none of the units, not even troops, are mandatory, so neither Shipborn nor Master and Commander have any effect.

I want to make it clear, however, that I'm not defending GW here. This dataslate is still a tire-fire and it represents the fourth missed opportunity to get it right. It wouldn't have taken much more to do it. I'm going to hope it gets better before the end of the edition, but if it doesn't, I'll just have to build the 9th ed Agents dex that GW should have built. I don't plan in getting into the ring with 10th when it comes.

A lot could happen between now and then, but I'm certainly preparing to walk away.

PenitentJake wrote:


You may want to reread the rules again. They very clearly state that Agents of the Imperium don't break purity in IMPERIUM patrols, battalions and brigades... so certainly not ANY army, and not even ANY detachment in IMPERIUM armies.

There's nothing clear about the rules here - but yeah it does state at the top reference its an Imperium yadda yadda, then takes 3 paragraphs to get through the rest of it - then dropping the Imperium part while repeating the rest of the giant list.

As for the Navis situation: As someone already pointed out earlier in the thread, HQ's aren't mandatory in AoO Detachments. So you take two units of breachers and a unit of voidsmen and that IS a Navis AoO detachment. You can still include the Rogue Trader as an Navis because the detachment doesn't require an HQ, which makes any HQ slot available non-compulsory.

Now you need to reread the rules again the 1st HQ slot is compulsory UNLESS Knights (which don't have any)

It's clear that GW ONLY wanted Navis Detachments to work in Boarding Action games. A shame, but I do believe that was the intent.

As for the Inquisition, PA: Pariah is the best 8th/9th list they've had- still not great, but better than any of the alternatives. It was compatible with 9th right up until the release of Octarius, so it does work with the edition. Failing that, if you've got Octarius, the only thing that's different really is the absence of the Malleus Terminator.

If you choose to use this list, or if your opponent insists on it, you're probably best with an AoO Detachment anyway- take'm as Agents, and you can use anything and everything in the dataslate- none of the units, not even troops, are mandatory, so neither Shipborn nor Master and Commander have any effect.

You're missing the point - people want to take the NAVIS Det not the INQUISITION Det. Your Knights thing above did get me thinking about taking NAVIS in a Knights army, give up one of the big knights for a couple squads and an HQ - they still don't have ObSec, but they can climb towers and such.

I want to make it clear, however, that I'm not defending GW here. This dataslate is still a tire-fire and it represents the fourth missed opportunity to get it right. It wouldn't have taken much more to do it. I'm going to hope it gets better before the end of the edition, but if it doesn't, I'll just have to build the 9th ed Agents dex that GW should have built. I don't plan in getting into the ring with 10th when it comes.

A lot could happen between now and then, but I'm certainly preparing to walk away.

Breton wrote:
Now you need to reread the rules again the 1st HQ slot is compulsory UNLESS Knights (which don't have any)

Yeah, my bad. I don't actually have any of the Arks of Omen Books, I was getting my information from a White Dwarf, and the detachment in that issue looks nothing like the actual detachment. Sigh.... That makes just about everything I said about Navis wrong.

You're missing the point - people want to take the NAVIS Det not the INQUISITION Det. Your Knights thing above did get me thinking about taking NAVIS in a Knights army, give up one of the big knights for a couple squads and an HQ - they still don't have ObSec, but they can climb towers and such.

The Inquisition piece was a response to something that came up earlier in the conversation about using Voidsmen or Breachers as troops choices in order to create Inquisition patrol detachments- you can't do it, because the only troops options in the list are shipborn, so they can't fill the patrol's compulsory troops choice if the detachment is Imperial Agents or Inquisition. However, you can build an Imperial Agents AoO drendering any subsequent troops choices optional.etachment that includes voidsmen or breachers because you could choose elites as your non-HQ compulsory,

PenitentJake wrote:


The Inquisition piece was a response to something that came up earlier in the conversation about using Voidsmen or Breachers as troops choices in order to create Inquisition patrol detachments- you can't do it, because the only troops options in the list are shipborn, so they can't fill the patrol's compulsory troops choice if the detachment is Imperial Agents or Inquisition. However, you can build an Imperial Agents AoO drendering any subsequent troops choices optional.etachment that includes voidsmen or breachers because you could choose elites as your non-HQ compulsory,

Right, and you can do it with the Allied Patrol by using a (potentially second) Inquisitor or Assassin as the compulsory HQ, the Rogue Trader as the optional HQ, and then its still a NAVIS detachment. A lot of hoops to jump through - but it makes a sort of internal sense. They're shipboard units, they need a reason to be on the ground - an Inquisitor or an Assassin dragging them along fits the bill.

Of course this opens up other issues too - theoretically no ObSec for the NAVIS boys - Which isn't good, but not the end of the world for the niche they've carved out for NAVIS and INQUISITOR Dets. Truth be told I suspect the best use of the NAVIS or INQUISITOR stuff is supplementing a Knights Army. Give up a big knight maybe, get a couple to a few units that can now scale walls and buildings and such to secure objectives a Titanic Walker can't phsyically get to - flip side is the knight can still clear the objective so they don't need much to secure it. My idea for fixing knights was to give each Knight unit a Maintenance Crew with Welding Torches (short - 3-6" - range pistols) and a less blatantly ripped off Hydrospanners (Close Combat Weapon profile) You get 5-10 per knight, they have ObSec, and Imperial Guardsman or worse stats. They are bought as one unit, deployed at the same time but seperately and operate indepedently like SM Lieutenants and other such units.

Anyway back on topic - Its possible, but not really worth the effort I'd guess outside of a few niche cases.

Wait, can't you plug the compulsory troop slot with Spindle Drones?

 Blndmage wrote:
Wait, can't you plug the compulsory troop slot with Spindle Drones?

I don't have that PA book to know for sure (I assume its PA War of the Spider, Agents of the Imperium?)- its scheduled for obsolescence in June of 2023 though so the only datasheets we can "count on" are the ones they just gave us for free - plus they're not in the MFM just released (That I can find)

Breton wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
Wait, can't you plug the compulsory troop slot with Spindle Drones?

I don't have that PA book to know for sure (I assume its PA War of the Spider, Agents of the Imperium?)- its scheduled for obsolescence in June of 2023 though so the only datasheets we can "count on" are the ones they just gave us for free - plus they're not in the MFM just released (That I can find)

LoL. The whole edition is scheduled for obsolescence come June.

They're from Blackstone Fortress & can be found as Legends units.
They are the only Unaligned Troop unit in the game.
Limit 1 unit per army.

And the answer is: Yes, you can.
Assuming you & yours don't have some hangup about using Legends units of course......

ccs wrote:

Breton wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
Wait, can't you plug the compulsory troop slot with Spindle Drones?

I don't have that PA book to know for sure (I assume its PA War of the Spider, Agents of the Imperium?)- its scheduled for obsolescence in June of 2023 though so the only datasheets we can "count on" are the ones they just gave us for free - plus they're not in the MFM just released (That I can find)

LoL. The whole edition is scheduled for obsolescence come June.

They're from Blackstone Fortress & can be found as Legends units.
They are the only Unaligned Troop unit in the game.
Limit 1 unit per army.

And the answer is: Yes, you can.
Assuming you & yours don't have some hangup about using Legends units of course......

And a $200 box for a unit of 4, at least some good minis that could be used otherwise. But ouch.

ccs wrote:
Assuming you & yours don't have some hangup about using Legends units of course......

What sort of reasonable person would have an issue with that, especially if you're not playing in a torunament?

 Dysartes wrote:

ccs wrote:
Assuming you & yours don't have some hangup about using Legends units of course......

What sort of reasonable person would have an issue with that, especially if you're not playing in a torunament?

The people who understand that legends rules have been squatted and aren't supposed to be used anymore and don't want to deal with having to house rule them back into the game and figure out what is going to be a balance problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blndmage wrote:
Wait, can't you plug the compulsory troop slot with Spindle Drones?

Sure, if you want a completely anti-thematic list that exploits a RAW technicality with an ancient legends-only unit that most people won't allow.

In the case of the Spindel and Guardian Drones, would it not be legal to take the Two Remaining Rogue Traders, Janus Draik and Neyam Shai Murad in a Navy army since they are rogue traders and have them take up the necessary HQ choice?

 Paymaster Games wrote:
In the case of the Spindel and Guardian Drones, would it not be legal to take the Two Remaining Rogue Traders, Janus Draik and Neyam Shai Murad in a Navy army since they are rogue traders and have them take up the necessary HQ choice?

I was looking at them, there's also NITSCH’S SQUAD, from the rogue trader stuff, a Voidsmen troop.