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.

I keep hearing Imperial Guard players talking about an allied Inquisitor from Demon Hunters. This has me a bit confused/concerned. Does the newest codex really new allies to be competitive? Why can't they do with using just one codex? The last time I checked, using allies was optional, ie, at player+opponent discretion. Has this changed in 5th ed?

Is this legal? Is this fair? Is this cheesy? Thoughts and comments please.

Perturabo's Chosen wrote:I keep hearing Imperial Guard players talking about an allied Inquisitor from Demon Hunters. This has me a bit confused/concerned. Does the newest codex really new allies to be competitive? Why can't they do with using just one codex? The last time I checked, using allies was optional, ie, at player+opponent discretion. Has this changed in 5th ed?

Is this legal? Is this fair? Is this cheesy? Thoughts and comments please.

Perfectly legal. Both Inquisiton codex has rules for Imperial armies taking allied Inquisition unit and it does NOT require opponent consent.

Nothing wrong with it. Adds variety to armies. When Chaos players stop fielding flavorless duel lash anti-fluff cheese I'll start worrying about an Imperial force having an Inquisitor along...

There are rules for taking allies. All the Imperial forces can do a restricted mixxing and matching of 2 forces. It irritates me, because they cut up Chaos (removing daemons) without giving us a similar system. Taking Inquisitor with Psychic Hood, 2 Mystics and the new Codex is going to be the new cheese, though. Just look at the new Guard "core" that's been floating around for competative lists.

Just wait until you get first turn assaulted by the 6 grey knight terminators comming out of a vendetta. Then you can call the cheese!

CT GAMER wrote:
When Chaos players stop fielding flavorless duel lash anti-fluff cheese I'll start worrying about an Imperial force having an Inquisitor along...

That'll show us. Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with it. I wish more of the armies could ally with each other in 40k.

Because that Tyranid ally list is so very long.....

I never really liked Daemonhunters and Witch hunters from a design standpoint. It would have been better if all options had been in the codex.
(That's aside from the fact that I feel Daemonhunters in particular should not exist as an army.)

asugradinwa wrote:Just wait until you get first turn assaulted by the 6 grey knight terminators comming out of a vendetta. Then you can call the cheese!

Silly as it may seem I think by RAW you can get 12 terminators in a Valkyrie/Vendetta as the takes up two spaces rule isn't a rule of the models but of the transports that typically carry them. I don't see an issue outside of tournaments, but it could be interesting to see the hilarity that ensues.

Oldgrue wrote:Because that Tyranid ally list is so very long.....

If you go with fluff behind it, then the nids can be allied with any army as they
"have incorporated them into their hive mind, effectively brainwashing them"

However, most just use this explanation for pairings in Apoc games. If you were to try it in a smaller game....

Da Boss wrote:I never really liked Daemonhunters and Witch hunters from a design standpoint. It would have been better if all options had been in the codex.
(That's aside from the fact that I feel Daemonhunters in particular should not exist as an army.)

Da Boss is on point. i also never felt like daemonhunters should have been an army. space marines are already an elite force, so a super elite force.....army? again just my opinion.

im gonna go out on a limb and say if/when the new inquisition codex is released allies will go down the drain. which is fine by me personally.

studderingdave wrote:

Da Boss wrote:I never really liked Daemonhunters and Witch hunters from a design standpoint. It would have been better if all options had been in the codex.
(That's aside from the fact that I feel Daemonhunters in particular should not exist as an army.)

Da Boss is on point. i also never felt like daemonhunters should have been an army. space marines are already an elite force, so a super elite force.....army? again just my opinion.

im gonna go out on a limb and say if/when the new inquisition codex is released allies will go down the drain. which is fine by me personally.

I think you are Wrong. Using Codex: Ultramarinesaresoveryawesome to represent Grey Knights is just as wrong as using it to Represent Space Wolves. The way I see it, when they redo the Inquisition codex, they will make it a Stand Alone codex with all the "Allied" option rules in their codex (so the Tac Marine rules and Infantry Platoon Rules will be in THAT codex). So while yo can get similar armies, you wont have any more of this "parent/Child" nonsense.

Maybe he thinks they should be represented as an Elite choice in the SM codex or other Imperial armies? Not comprising their own unique army or as counts as something in whatever codex I happen to be using?

That being said I also see them including all the rules in one book in the future, at the very least there won't be same name rules discrepancies in the same list anymore.

Neconilis wrote:That being said I also see them including all the rules in one book in the future, at the very least there won't be same name rules discrepancies in the same list anymore.

I hate to break it to you, but they already tried this. It was called 3rd edition, and it didn't work very well, hence why we have the rules (that everyone needs) and the codex's (which are bought by the people who need them). I sure as hell do not want to be paying £100 for my 6th edition rulebook with no fluff and Minimal Half Baked Armylists thank you very much (and don't kid yourself, GW wont make the Rulebook a 1,000 page monster to incorperate all the rules AND fluff, they will just kill the fluff and trim down the rules.)

Gwar! wrote:

Neconilis wrote:That being said I also see them including all the rules in one book in the future, at the very least there won't be same name rules discrepancies in the same list anymore.

I hate to break it to you, but they already tried this. It was called 3rd edition, and it didn't work very well, hence why we have the rules (that everyone needs) and the codex's (which are bought by the people who need them). I sure as hell do not want to be paying £100 for my 6th edition rulebook with no fluff and Minimal Half Baked Armylists thank you very much (and don't kid yourself, GW wont make the Rulebook a 1,000 page monster to incorperate all the rules AND fluff, they will just kill the fluff and trim down the rules.)

You misunderstand, I meant in the next DH/WH/Inq codex/codices. So much like you said there won't be fishing through multiple books and at least everything in the same book and therefore army list will be the same, so no who bought this land raider/chimera and from what codex because it matters silliness.

I know it's odd Gwar!, but people do actually agree with you on occasion ;-)

damnit Gwar! do you really have to bring back foul memories of army rules in the rulebook. that was awful.

Gwar! are you saying that the new inquisitior book should stipulate allies like they are now or have all the allowed allies stats IN the new INQ codex if/when it is released?

Neconilis wrote:You misunderstand, I meant in the next DH/WH/Inq codex/codices. So much like you said there won't be fishing through multiple books and at least everything in the same book and therefore army list will be the same, so no who bought this land raider/chimera and from what codex because it matters silliness.

I know it's odd Gwar!, but people do actually agree with you on occasion ;-)

Damnit why do you have to be so misleading :( But yeah, having all the options in 1 codex will be nice.

studderingdave wrote:damnit Gwar! do you really have to bring back foul memories of army rules in the rulebook. that was awful.

Gwar! are you saying that the new Inquisition book should stipulate allies like they are now or have all the allowed allies stats IN the new INQ codex if/when it is released?

What I am saying is that Allies, as is, will never ever make it into a new Codex. You have more chance of GW Scrapping LotR (as much as we would rejoice, it just will not happen).

The way I think the new codex's will go is by having all the relevent option fully in the codex, so no more of this "See Codex: Ultrmahrinez for t3h Land Raider Roolz!" but will be "HQ: Inquisitor, If you take an Inquisitor Storm Troopers are Troops, Grey Knights Captain: If you take this guy Grey Knights are Troops. Cannoness: If you take SoB are troops etc etc
Elites will be thinks Like Storm Troopers, Grey Knights, Sob etc Basically all the stuff that a HQ Character will make troops are elites to start with. In addition you will have "real" Elites like Deathwatch, Celestians, GK Termies etc etc

Troops will be Infantry platoons (Full rules again) and Tac Marines and Scout Marines (Full rules)

And so on and so forth. Basically, instead of taking units from other codex's the full rules are put in the Inquisition codex, and it stays self contained.

sounds good to me, i would go for that.

studderingdave wrote:sounds good to me, i would go for that.

I bet you $60 right now GW wont ever do something as easy and intuitive as that! In fact, I might just write up a Skeleton Codex (as in the layout, not the costs or anything) and Send it to them and let them keep the copyright. If it means they do it right, I can live with that. Now someone give me Cavatore's Email!

something so easy and sensible as that? nah, they will add another phase to the game, like the guard codex. you think the "orders phase" is complicated? wait for the "wait a minute lemme bust out 3 other codexes and a few FAQ's for that answer" phase.

its going to be complicated, even though the simplicity is so apparent.

Gwar: I think Grey Knights should have been a fun optional unit for Space Marines or alternatively that the inquisition book should have included Allied Tactical squads and Platoons as choices, with Grey knights as elites, as you have suggested. We're not massively in disagreement here.

Question have any of you actaully played as a dh army? Or do you all just have a grudge againts them cause they can have allies and your army cant? I could care less if in their new codex if they got ride of the fact that they could be taken in a parent army of SM or ImpG or even just got ride of the SM allies all togeather however I could see them being able to take certain guard unites in their army still.

I cannot. I fully expect inducted/allied rules to disappear from the two Inquisition books, with them instead being rounded out as complete armies. This will be a bigger task for Codex: Daemonhunters than Codex: Witch Hunters, as it is severely lacking in every area.

Elric of Grans wrote:I cannot. I fully expect inducted/allied rules to disappear from the two Inquisition books, with them instead being rounded out as complete armies. This will be a bigger task for Codex: Daemonhunters than Codex: Witch Hunters, as it is severely lacking in every area.

Which is why I feel will merge both books (Have Inquisitors/Inqusitor Lords, Grey Knights Captains and Cannonesses as HQ etc etc) and a few Smattering of Deathwatch stuff.

So, the DH and WH book allow you to take allies from the Imperial gaurd and Space marine Codex. But does this work in reverse? Can Gaurd and SM take DH and WH Allies? How does taking allies fit into the FOC?

Perturabo's Chosen wrote:So, the DH and WH book allow you to take allies from the Imperial gaurd and Space marine Codex. But does this work in reverse? Can Gaurd and SM take DH and WH Allies? How does taking allies fit into the FOC?

Do you mean the current codex or what we think the new codex is? If you mean the current codex, the rules are in the DH and WH Codex, go check them out.

Thank you, I found them in WH. FOC must still be used, with the 1HQ and 2 troops that are compulsory coming from the main army.

Gwar! wrote:Which is why I feel will merge both books (Have Inquisitors/Inqusitor Lords, Grey Knights Captains and Cannonesses as HQ etc etc) and a few Smattering of Deathwatch stuff.

Even though Games Workshop have repeatedly stated they will not? Even though we know for a fact Andy Hoare is making a new Sisters Codex? Even though we know for a fact that Phill Kelly is separately working on a new Grey Knights Codex? Jervis himself effectively declared the death of Inquisition last year when he said that it was all a bad idea to begin with (paraphrasing) and they would be putting the focus back onto the original armies. Deathwatch are now Sternguard, while Daemonhunters will be Grey Knights with token Inquisitor, then Witch Hunters will be Sisters with token Inquisitor (which is effectively what it is now)

Elric of Grans wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Which is why I feel will merge both books (Have Inquisitors/Inqusitor Lords, Grey Knights Captains and Cannonesses as HQ etc etc) and a few Smattering of Deathwatch stuff.

Even though Games Workshop have repeatedly stated they will not? Even though we know for a fact Andy Hoare is making a new Sisters Codex? Even though we know for a fact that Phill Kelly is separately working on a new Grey Knights Codex? Jervis himself effectively declared the death of Inquisition last year when he said that it was all a bad idea to begin with (paraphrasing) and they would be putting the focus back onto the original armies. Deathwatch are now Sternguard, while Daemonhunters will be Grey Knights with token Inquisitor, then Witch Hunters will be Sisters with token Inquisitor (which is effectively what it is now)

Hey guess what? Did you think GW might, ya know, change their minds? Could you please link to this info as I have not read anything of this on BoLS, and I kind of trust them more than some random person on DakkaDakka

If you care, try searching for it; I have better things to do with my time than justify myself on the Internet. BoLS only reposts things that were reposted months after the original information came out and are far from all-inclusive in their rumours. All of those things are to be found on news and rumours posts all around the place. They were discussed by Jervis, Andy and Phil at Games Days last year, while several well-known sources of rumours (such as Warseer's Harry) have added further details. This is common knowledge that has been confirmed by multiple sources.

I seriously doubt they would change their mind and combine them now when they had long before started work on separating them.

Elric of Grans wrote:If you care, try searching for it because I cant link it because it is unsubstantiated; I have better things to do with my time than justify myself on the Internet because I know I am not right.

Fixed it for you.

Refusing to answer a Challenge is the same as losing it