Switch Theme:

Adepta Sororitas Codex Rumors  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Dakka Veteran





Inquisitorial retinues really need a full on Kill Team supplement, and be Kill Team first with 40K crossover rules.
That way you can go absolutely mad with a few small specialists and not have to worry about armies of the things - they can just slot in next to a GK, Tempestus or SoB detachment.

But Ecclesiarchy stuff definitely should be in the Sisters book, I'd honestly love a 'huddled masses' unit akin to conscripts, of fanatics, pilgrims and whichever poor souls are trapped with them in the various last stands they make.
The Sisters and the Church being the absolute last line of defence is something that they've referenced several times in the current era.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/14 18:55:38


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
Or to put it another way, you used to be able to legitimately play both Witch Hunters and Grey Knights as an Inquisition army with support from either Grey Knights or Sisters. That’s basically gone. That makes me sad to the point that I don’t want to have anything to do with 40K these days other than reading the fiction (about Inquisitors mostly).
That's just how GW is at the moment. They don't think the Inquisition belongs on the battlefield, so they get nothing new beyond the odd campaign-related special character. Maybe one day that will change, but for now the Inquisition is in the dog house at GW.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Let me tell you about when GW renamed my Sisters of Battle “witch hunters” for some reason and threw in a bunch of sideshow units rather than actually developing the existing army list which had been one of the best in 2nd edition. It’s like if they renamed imperial guard “warriors of the imperium” and added Custodes and assassins and sisters of silence out of nowhere, shoehorning them into the background and claiming it was always thus.
Which might mean more if in doing so the Sisters had lost a bunch of their stuff. They didn't.

When Witch Hunters became Sisters of Battle again they didn't split all the things from the non-Sisters side and make a complete force. Ditto for Grey Knights. Eventually we got a half-assed "Imperial Agents" book that was valid for about a year.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/04/14 21:05:11


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





TBH, Inquisitors on the battlefield are little more than Inquisitors themselves and whatever army they can requisition. There is no real "Inquisition army" (and if there is one, it's generally more an exception than the rule) - it's mostly made up of existing forces like Astra Militarum regiments, Adepta Sororitas retinues or even some Space Marines chapters that have some ties / debts with the Inquisition (like the Exorcists).

And even in the past, that's how they were depicted : a few HQ / Elite truly "Inquisition" choices and the rest comes from other forces.

If you want to represent an Inquisitor and his retinue, I agree it's more akind to a Kill Team game than a 40k one. And if it's a 40k one...the core will definitely be made of other military forces like Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Adepta Sororitas or Astra Militarum.

In the end, how GW handled Inquisition in recent edition (mainly characters and acolytes as HQ/Elite choice that you can include in other armies) was actually the most faithful to how the Inquisition works in the background. So to me, no they weren't put in the doghouse...they were just always intended to work that way and if GW was to release a full Inquisition book with miniatures, to me it would be made up of mostly characters and a handful of elite choices. They were never really an "army" that can work by itself alone, IMHO.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/04/14 21:21:47


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





Sarouan wrote:
In the end, how GW handled Inquisition in recent edition (mainly characters and acolytes as HQ/Elite choice that you can include in other armies) was actually the most faithful to how the Inquisition works in the background.
Except they are strongly discouraged from taking their retinue - in part because any more than the inquisitor puts heavy penalties on the list, and in part because what little passes for a retinue these days is a chimp and a handful of inept but enthusiastic bullet catchers.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/14 21:37:11


 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





A.T. wrote:
Except they are strongly discouraged from taking their retinue - in part because any more than the inquisitor puts heavy penalties on the list, and in part because what little passes for a retinue these days is a chimp and a handful of inept but enthusiastic bullet catchers.


And then you remember than most of their retinues in the background actually come from existing forces, and that you simply can play one unit from the "allied army" as their actual retinue.

Acolyte rules were never as complete as you would like to cover all the possibilities like in the RPG Dark Heresy, anyway.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/14 21:44:57


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

I disagree. The Acolyte rules from the Daemon/Witch Hunter books were both expansive and flavourful, covering all sorts of potential unit types.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





Sarouan wrote:
Acolyte rules were never as complete as you would like to cover all the possibilities like in the RPG Dark Heresy, anyway.
Aside from not being able to take a tech priest outside of Inquisitor Lok they covered most of the bases.

The current arco-flagellant rules are actually something of a casualty of the shrinking inquisition, going from expensive 'elite' units to cheap chaff. I had hoped they would reconsider them with the new plastics. Who knows, perhaps the new dex will - the non-sororitas infantry all suffer from being variations on a theme after they were squashed together in the 5e GK codex.
   
Made in au
Repentia Mistress




I'd be happy with Crusaders/Priests ect. Getting their own book like Inq.

Let 'em play with Sisters and IG books

Do you know what 40k melee needs? #FreetheFlagellants

Learn all your rules back to front. Stop trying to do the same for every other army. 
   
Made in gb
Utilizing Careful Highlighting




U.k

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
Andykp wrote:
 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
But here’s the issue I have and the reason I’m upset (that’s too strong a word, it’s just toy soldiers after all), the army used to be called Witch Hunters. They renamed the army to the name of just one part of the army, then we have people saying that all those other units really have no place being in the army that they used to be a part of. Talk about moving the goal posts. It’s like if they’d renamed Craftworld Eldar, Aspect Warriors and people were now claiming that all those other units were just there to make up the numbers and really have no part in the future of the Aspect Warriors army.

Or to put it another way, you used to be able to legitimately play both Witch Hunters and Grey Knights as an Inquisition army with support from either Grey Knights or Sisters. That’s basically gone. That makes me sad to the point that I don’t want to have anything to do with 40K these days other than reading the fiction (about Inquisitors mostly).


The army was sister of battle then became witch hunters in third. So if what it used to be called is upsetting you then forget about it. They were sisters first so it’s ok.


I honestly can’t tell if it’s my fault or your fault that you so utterly missed the point I was trying to make.

Whatever.


I thinks it’s mine. Apologies.
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I disagree. The Acolyte rules from the Daemon/Witch Hunter books were both expansive and flavourful, covering all sorts of potential unit types.


That weren't unique or anything you couldn't make from the former codexes, actually. They were litterally imperial guards / storm troopers as basis.

Face it : it wasn't that great an option. We didn't miss that much since then.

The Inquisitors themselves were always the stars of the show in terms of real customization.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka










Automatically Appended Next Post:



The obvious question I have to ask-
Are the SOB supposed to stagger these halberd troops in with heavy bolters and heavy flamers? How much damage can they soak up in use as a holding force to tie someone down with, then jump in with the jump troops?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/15 00:26:44




At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money. 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





Videos of how soldiers in the medieval times used hallberds are nice and all, but pretty much sure they didn't wear power armours enhancing your strength, nor shields with guns included inside. Hell, as much as I'm concerned, we don't even know how the power weapons are affected with their weight (if your blade is enhanced by a force field, do you really need to use a lot of strength to cut through enemy defenses ?).

Which is why it's pointless to debate about this, really.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/15 00:30:37


 
   
Made in ca
Fresh-Faced New User





I don't see what the complaints are about wielding the halberd one-handed. Clearly the battery plugged into the skull icon makes it lunge forward on its own! Punctuate a shield bash with a bolt to the face!

Visually the unit looks much more recognizable. Regular Celestians look like troops with helmets, these look like actual bodyguards. Bet they'll go great with some characters that want to get in close and survive a round or two of combat.
   
Made in us
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!






Sarouan wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I disagree. The Acolyte rules from the Daemon/Witch Hunter books were both expansive and flavourful, covering all sorts of potential unit types.


That weren't unique or anything you couldn't make from the former codexes, actually. They were litterally imperial guards / storm troopers as basis.

Face it : it wasn't that great an option. We didn't miss that much since then.

The Inquisitors themselves were always the stars of the show in terms of real customization.


Um...it was a retinue you bought with the Inquisitor who all had various abilities they would bake into it and varied special rules. If you mean the baseline before any special rules/abilities/equipments you purchased the retinue was a Guardsman statline but with a 6+ save then sure, but each of the members varied that baseline. You could have Stormtroopers and Servitors as basic grunts who also granted extra Weapon SKill to the Inquisitor, or have Acolytes (who you could give 15 points of equipment to, so based on the Daemonhunters book at least since I have that at hand right now...could have say Power Armor and a Hellgun on one while another is playing with a Storm Shield and a Bolt Pistol, while a third could have a Storm Bolter and Carapace Armor) throwing themselves in front of the Inquisitor to soak up wounds, and so on..

I'm not saying that the Inquisitor *didn't* get more options than their flunkies, but saying they were not fully fleshed out or unique is kind of an odd take.

Plus, at this point I don't even think Inquisition has any access to Power Armor outside of a couple of named characters. Inquisition needs a full fix at this point to bring back their options - and at bare minimum they should be allowed to take specifically Inquisition units with them into other factions without having to eat up a detachment. Something simple like Inquisitor + retinue/acolyte unit + a daemonhost/jokaero and what have you won't break doctrines etc.



All that said, I really do like those halberd Sisters and hope their price isn't too painful.
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




Tacoma, WA, USA

 holycraptastical wrote:
I don't see what the complaints are about wielding the halberd one-handed. Clearly the battery plugged into the skull icon makes it lunge forward on its own! Punctuate a shield bash with a bolt to the face!

Visually the unit looks much more recognizable. Regular Celestians look like troops with helmets, these look like actual bodyguards. Bet they'll go great with some characters that want to get in close and survive a round or two of combat.
Because it just looks wrong. If you have to justify why something that looks wrong works, you are already losing the style battle.

Chain weapons get a pass because they are so closely baked into Warhammer lore. Plus everyone thinks they should be super dangerous, even if they are a silly idea for a weapon you want to penetrate armor. That is completely different from explaining how someone is going to chop with a polearm use one-handed.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Sarouan wrote:
That weren't unique or anything you couldn't make from the former codexes, actually. They were litterally imperial guards / storm troopers as basis.
That's not even slightly true... unless you're talking about the current Acolytes which are just boring base-line humans with very few options? The old Inquisitorial Henchman gave us combat servitors, gun servitors, penitent psykers, servo-skulls, actual Acolytes, anti-daemon Hierophants, over-watching Mystics. And more.

You could build (largely ineffective) gaggles of melee troops, following their (usually outclassed) Inquisitor Lord into combat. You could build weird collections of freaks to ward off incoming Deep Strikers, or anti-daemon units. There was the (at the time) famed Kyoto-Pattern Inquisitorial Fire Team, named after our very own Kid Kyoto, which was one of the most efficient heavy weapon units around. I scarcely made a Guard list at the time without including one of them.

An Inquisitor's followers were varied, flexible, and fun. Not really ever very good, but again, these were mostly squishy humans (and even squishier Cheribum and Servo-Skulls).

 alextroy wrote:
Because it just looks wrong. If you have to justify why something that looks wrong works, you are already losing the style battle.
People seem to really struggle with the concept that the more fantastical you get, the more the mundane things stick out when they look wrong.

"This universe has space-ships and daemons from another dimension, so why can't a halberd be used one-handed???"

Because we know it can't. So it looks wrong.


This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/04/15 03:45:58


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Out of the new sisters stuff, I like the halberd and shield sisters and yes I even like the nundams or megamaids if you will.

The dogmata model I think sucks and the tank feels boring. The Sister LT Palantine looks nice but I fear she'll cost as much in dollars as she costs in points to field which sucks.

I really hope they don't make the book crap otherwise. Either way sisters for me is a looks over substance type thing for me but I'd love it if they were actually still going to be good.
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





kurhanik wrote:
Um...it was a retinue you bought with the Inquisitor who all had various abilities they would bake into it and varied special rules. If you mean the baseline before any special rules/abilities/equipments you purchased the retinue was a Guardsman statline but with a 6+ save then sure, but each of the members varied that baseline. You could have Stormtroopers and Servitors as basic grunts who also granted extra Weapon SKill to the Inquisitor, or have Acolytes (who you could give 15 points of equipment to, so based on the Daemonhunters book at least since I have that at hand right now...could have say Power Armor and a Hellgun on one while another is playing with a Storm Shield and a Bolt Pistol, while a third could have a Storm Bolter and Carapace Armor) throwing themselves in front of the Inquisitor to soak up wounds, and so on..

I'm not saying that the Inquisitor *didn't* get more options than their flunkies, but saying they were not fully fleshed out or unique is kind of an odd take.

Plus, at this point I don't even think Inquisition has any access to Power Armor outside of a couple of named characters. Inquisition needs a full fix at this point to bring back their options - and at bare minimum they should be allowed to take specifically Inquisition units with them into other factions without having to eat up a detachment. Something simple like Inquisitor + retinue/acolyte unit + a daemonhost/jokaero and what have you won't break doctrines etc.


H.B.M.C. wrote:That's not even slightly true... unless you're talking about the current Acolytes which are just boring base-line humans with very few options? The old Inquisitorial Henchman gave us combat servitors, gun servitors, penitent psykers, servo-skulls, actual Acolytes, anti-daemon Hierophants, over-watching Mystics. And more.

You could build (largely ineffective) gaggles of melee troops, following their (usually outclassed) Inquisitor Lord into combat. You could build weird collections of freaks to ward off incoming Deep Strikers, or anti-daemon units. There was the (at the time) famed Kyoto-Pattern Inquisitorial Fire Team, named after our very own Kid Kyoto, which was one of the most efficient heavy weapon units around. I scarcely made a Guard list at the time without including one of them.

An Inquisitor's followers were varied, flexible, and fun. Not really ever very good, but again, these were mostly squishy humans (and even squishier Cheribum and Servo-Skulls).


Yep, they had more options in their older codexes, but even then it wasn't that much unique. I'm talking about the Acolytes here, not the special units like Daemonhosts that really had very specific and unique rules to them.

They were limited to a very specific set of basic Imperium weapons and when you had rules for mystics or hierophants...it was just a gimmick general rule (also usually linked to a very limited weapon options).

Nostalgia is just blinding you again with the reality at that time. For example, servo-skulls were an equipment option only for inquisitors, not acolytes - and there was even a version where they were just mere token on the battlefield for some rules.

And yeah, you could have servitors...that are also available in other codexes like Astra Militarum or Adeptus Mechanicus. Like I said, nothing you can do nor find elsewhere. Yep, it feths the rules if you really do so exaggerately in V8/V9, but the point is...you can still do it. It's just not optimized at all for a tournament...exactly the same with the older codexes when you chose options for the background of your Inquisition retinue rather than taking the best options rulewise.

Moving on.


kurhanik wrote:All that said, I really do like those halberd Sisters and hope their price isn't too painful.


I'm honestly expecting a box of 5 at a price similar to bladelords (pessimist me is guessing a bit higher).


H.B.M.C. wrote:People seem to really struggle with the concept that the more fantastical you get, the more the mundane things stick out when they look wrong.

"This universe has space-ships and daemons from another dimension, so why can't a halberd be used one-handed???"

Because we know it can't. So it looks wrong.


Everything in 40k can't be used or is even remotely realistic. Size of weapons is overly exaggerated. Proportions aren't humanely correct. Transport vehicles are too small for their transport capacity. Guns in the hilt of swords or incorported to a hallberd's blade like for the Custodes is complete insanity, even if the Custodes use hallberds two handed "the right way". Hell even the power armors are impossible if they're really like the background says they are (thick and not just some paper armor worn directly over the skin). And I'm not just talking about "sister boob armors" here.

They're fantastic miniatures, that's the thing. They're not meant to be historically or realisticly accurate.

So what you're saying is pointless. If that was really true, 40k miniatures wouldn't be as popular as it is right now. Because to a lot of people, they don't look wrong - they look awesome. Because that's not reality that they're looking for.

Not even talking about soldiers wearing gothic, overly ornate equipment like the sisters or fighting without a helmet covering your whole face ("headshot !"). Yet, a lot of people like their faces in the open because it gives them more character (and also allow to paint some skin).

If you nitpick about the real use of hallberds and shields in a fight, then you can't ignore the nonsense rest in 40k. And if it bothers you that much, then that just means 40k isn't meant for you. Go look for a more "realistic SF game" - I suggest you try Infinity...even if they're not escaping some nonsense as well that is necessary to make anime looking SF miniatures.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2021/04/15 06:42:06


 
   
Made in gb
Multispectral Hsien





Gosport, UK

She isn’t using the halberd one handed, she’s holding it one handed, rested on the floor. And until we see the back of the shield or the rest of the unit, we don’t know if they even do use them one handed, or if their other hand is free.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Sarouan wrote:
Nostalgia is just blinding you again with the reality at that time.
It's pretty clear that you haven't the faintest idea what we're talking about. I mean, referring to Servo-Skulls as equipment choices and tokens? Yeah. We're not talking about those rules. You're talking about different rules that came way, way after.

Sarouan wrote:
Everything in 40k can't be used or is even remotely realistic. Size of weapons is overly exaggerated. Proportions aren't humanely correct. Transport vehicles are too small for their transport capacity. Guns in the hilt of swords or incorported to a hallberd's blade like for the Custodes is complete insanity, even if the Custodes use hallberds two handed "the right way". Hell even the power armors are impossible if they're really like the background says they are (thick and not just some paper armor worn directly over the skin). And I'm not just talking about "sister boob armors" here.
Could you be any more capable of missing my point? (/Chandler)

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut






Sarouan wrote:
Everything in 40k can't be used or is even remotely realistic.


That's both untrue, and irrelevant to the point made.I don't need to bring up all the other examples of what I find impossible or unrealistic in a setting to point out that some specific component looks wrong. It's not a contest between one handed halberds and Space Marine hip structure, no matter how much some people would want to make it one.

Suspension of disbelief is a limited resource. All fantastic stories need to anchor the audience with some amount of familiarity derived from personal experience of the real world, lest they become absurdist, or in extreme cases, abstract. And while absurdism might work well in a piece of media a person experiences once, it doesn't generally work well in a setting one is meant to engage with over time.

We accept flying cathedral space ships and dragons as a functional part of a fantasy/sf setting because we have no personal experience with either of those things, so we cannot tell if they work as our repository of knowledge tells us they should. FTL travel in a hard SF story might fit the same criteria for 99% of readers, but an astrophysicist will writhe in pain reading about it. Some people in this thread have practical or researched experience with pole arm weapons and they find the notion of wielding one one-handed grating against their suspension of disbelief, a resource already strained by all the other crazy that 40k revels in.

You're not obligated to complain about the halberd, as everyone's personal experience is different, but 'a wizard did it' isn't always a valid argument.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





Sarouan wrote:
Nostalgia is just blinding you again with the reality at that time. For example, servo-skulls were an equipment option only for inquisitors, not acolytes - and there was even a version where they were just mere token on the battlefield for some rules.
Perhaps it would help if you glanced over the books, otherwise this is going to end up with several pages of off topic yes they were / no they weren't.
GW released cut-down versions for free:
https://web.archive.org/web/20130320021443/http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1050291a_Codex__Witch_Hunters
https://web.archive.org/web/20130617033945/http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1050287a_Codex__Daemonhunters
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 His Master's Voice wrote:


You're not obligated to complain about the halberd, as everyone's personal experience is different, but 'a wizard did it' isn't always a valid argument.


It's not about "a wizard did it", but internal consistency for decades.

It's not just flying cathedrals. It's just the same for the identical impracticality of chainswords, giant powerhammers or anime-fists smacking down 40 feet Warwalker-Machines, lighting claws, disproportinal guns the size of the guy wielding them (gene-enhanced or not). The halberd might be inconsistent for game/IP with a past of mostly suspension-of-disbelieve weapons. But 40K isn't that.

It fits the established pattern of weapons commonly seen in 40K and an accurate halberd would be as out of place in 40K as it would be in Monster Hunter or whatever.
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





H.B.M.C. wrote:Could you be any more capable of missing my point? (/Chandler)


You're trying to say that using a halberd and shield as fighting style is a suspension of disbelief in 40k.

My point is if that's the case, then that means you were blind about everything else that were way worse than that and still made for 40k before that - including when it started with metal miniatures.

You're failing to see that, apparently.


His Master's Voice wrote:
That's both untrue, and irrelevant to the point made.I don't need to bring up all the other examples of what I find impossible or unrealistic in a setting to point out that some specific component looks wrong. It's not a contest between one handed halberds and Space Marine hip structure, no matter how much some people would want to make it one.

Suspension of disbelief is a limited resource. All fantastic stories need to anchor the audience with some amount of familiarity derived from personal experience of the real world, lest they become absurdist, or in extreme cases, abstract. And while absurdism might work well in a piece of media a person experiences once, it doesn't generally work well in a setting one is meant to engage with over time.


I'm just saying if your suspension of disbelief is about the fighting style of a futuristic hallberd and shield with a power-armored sister, then it means that the people complaining about that specific part aren't really seeing the rest of much more suspensions of disbelief in 40k.

Hell, even firing with a bolter one-handed would be a big one. Yet it's the same case.

And it was way older than celestians wielding halberds :




You're not obligated to complain about the halberd, as everyone's personal experience is different, but 'a wizard did it' isn't always a valid argument.


Sister in power armor. Background specifically said the power armors enhance the strength of the user, not just Space Marines. That's the valid argument. No need of invoking wizards or putting videos of how medieval soldiers fought with halberds (without power armor, should I say it again).

Your suspension of disbelief is just misplaced, that's all.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/04/15 11:15:32


 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut






Sarouan wrote:
I'm just saying if your suspension of disbelief is about the fighting style of a futuristic hallberd and shield with a power-armored sister, then it means that the people complaining about that specific part aren't really seeing the rest of much more suspensions of disbelief in 40k.


Again, it's not a contest.

I dealt with the silliness of chainswords and powerfists twenty years ago. I'm sure, in time, I'll deal with one handed halberds. In the mean time, I'll point out how unfeasible they are.

Sarouan wrote:
Your suspension of disbelief is just misplaced, that's all.


Why, thank you. Whatever would I do without you graciously explaining how wrong my subjective perception of a piece of fiction is.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Portland

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:


Sorry, but I just don’t agree with your line of argument here. You’re essentially claiming that a big chunk of the units in this army are not actually part of this army because they’re not actually Sororitas. Never mind that arco flagellants aren’t Sisters and penitent engines aren’t sister, but they do have plastic kits. Let’s completely ignore that crusaders, death cult assassins and priests have always been part of this army.

You could argue that what I’m wanting is the old Witch Hunters army, not strictly sisters. Well yes. Yes it is, because to me that’s what the army is. Culling the army of anything that isn’t an actual Sister of Battle strips away a lot of the character. Luckily that isn’t what GW have done because penitent engines and arco flagellants! However they’ve left the main house unfinished but started working on an extension.


Death Cult Assassins and Crusaders were not always part of the army. They only showed up in the Witch Hunters codex along with the INQ elements.

I disagree that cutting the non-Sisters elements of the army removes character. Instead, it finally returns the army's original character. I remember when Witch Hunters was first released and so many of us were so disappointed to find that Sisters had become supporting characters in their own army for a circus of Inquisitors and freakshow randos. There were a LOT of very unhappy Sisters players.

So you may wish the army was more Witch Hunter flavored. Fine. I wish all that stuff could be stripped from the army. But I think a good compromise would be to put Priests, Missionaries, Arcos, Crusdaers, Penitent Engines, Deathcult Assassins and any other random Ministorium stuff in its own supplement that can be taken along side Sisters (Or Guard, or INQ). That way Sisters can expand and be about actual Sisters, but people who like Witch Hunters or just Ministorium stuff can use as much of that as they like (possibly even without Sisters at all).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/15 13:12:48


 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 jake wrote:
They only showed up in the Witch Hunters codex along with the INQ elements.

I disagree that cutting the non-Sisters elements of the army removes character. Instead, it finally returns the army's original character. I remember when Witch Hunters was first released and so many of us were so disappointed to find that Sisters had become supporting characters in their own army for a circus of Inquisitors and freakshow randos. There were a LOT of very unhappy Sisters players.

So you may wish the army was more Witch Hunter flavored. Fine. I wish all that stuff could be stripped from the army. But I think a good compromise would be to put Priests, Missionaries, Arcos, Crusdaers, Penitent Engines, Deathcult Assassins and any other random Ministorium stuff in its own supplement that can be take along side Sisters (Or Guard, or INQ). That was Sisters can expand and be about actual Sisters, but people who like Witch Hunters or just Ministorium stuff can use as much of that as they like.


That doesn't make sense.

If you don't like some of the options in the army, don't use them.

Denying other people who enjoy those options the opportunity to take them would have zero impact on your army.
   
Made in pl
Dakka Veteran




Germany

Sometimes i look at older models and wonder how GW ever got big as a company if they made things that looked like that.

Games Workshop are not your friends. They are not a small dev trying their best. They are a multibillion dollar company making calculated decisions about how many costs they can cut, how lazy they can be about relases, and how much they can paywall. They will do it again. Stop giving them money for this. 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Portland

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
But here’s the issue I have and the reason I’m upset (that’s too strong a word, it’s just toy soldiers after all), the army used to be called Witch Hunters. They renamed the army to the name of just one part of the army, then we have people saying that all those other units really have no place being in the army that they used to be a part of. Talk about moving the goal posts. It’s like if they’d renamed Craftworld Eldar, Aspect Warriors and people were now claiming that all those other units were just there to make up the numbers and really have no part in the future of the Aspect Warriors army.

Or to put it another way, you used to be able to legitimately play both Witch Hunters and Grey Knights as an Inquisition army with support from either Grey Knights or Sisters. That’s basically gone. That makes me sad to the point that I don’t want to have anything to do with 40K these days other than reading the fiction (about Inquisitors mostly).


BEFORE the army was Witch Hunters it was Sisters of Battle. And then instead of giving us the same updates and plastic releases that most other 3rd edition armies got they changed us to an Inquisition force, stuck in a bunch of random non-sisters stuff and Sisters became guest stars in what used to be their own army.

I'm sorry you've lost out on an army you enjoyed. That sucks. But I'm not sorry that Sisters actually finally got to be Sisters again after a lifetime of waiting.

Maybe you should campaign for an actual INQ force that doesn't co-opt someone elses army and release schedule?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 jake wrote:
They only showed up in the Witch Hunters codex along with the INQ elements.

I disagree that cutting the non-Sisters elements of the army removes character. Instead, it finally returns the army's original character. I remember when Witch Hunters was first released and so many of us were so disappointed to find that Sisters had become supporting characters in their own army for a circus of Inquisitors and freakshow randos. There were a LOT of very unhappy Sisters players.

So you may wish the army was more Witch Hunter flavored. Fine. I wish all that stuff could be stripped from the army. But I think a good compromise would be to put Priests, Missionaries, Arcos, Crusdaers, Penitent Engines, Deathcult Assassins and any other random Ministorium stuff in its own supplement that can be take along side Sisters (Or Guard, or INQ). That was Sisters can expand and be about actual Sisters, but people who like Witch Hunters or just Ministorium stuff can use as much of that as they like.


That doesn't make sense.

If you don't like some of the options in the army, don't use them.

Denying other people who enjoy those options the opportunity to take them would have zero impact on your army.


I'm not advocating denying anyone the use of those models. I'm suggesting that they should be expanded into their own line that can be used along side Sisters by people who want to do that. This would allow Sisters to grow as its own army without the design constraint of extraneous non-Sisters units, and potentially allow the Ministorium units to grow as an allied force for Sisters, INQ and Guard. Nothing is lost, but new possibilities are gained.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/15 13:09:54


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 jake wrote:
I'm suggesting that they should be expanded into their own line that can be used along side Sisters by people who want to do that. This would allow Sisters to grow as its own army without the design constraint of extraneous non-Sisters units, and potentially allow the Ministorium units to grow as an allied force for Sisters, INQ and Guard. Nothing is lost, but new possibilities are gained.
What design constraint?
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: