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.

Why is it that the witch hunters are mostly an army of girls?

Ordo hereticus is a part of the inquisition.
Adeptus sororitas is part of the ecclesiarchy.
Both are represented today in one codex.

Doesnt mean that bitchhunters must be girls. Of the witch-hunting inquisitors, you get 50% female models.
Still no female inquisitional stormtrooper models available. So to assume the witch-hunters are mostly girls isnt correct.

The sororitas have to be girls, because an old edict forbid the church of the imperial cult to field men under arms. So they cheated a bit
and recruted girls. Still most priests and missionaries available as models and represented in fluff arent girls....

I think you've seen the sororitas as witch-hunters, which is just one of several dutys they have.
In fluff terms, the ecclesiarchy supports the witch-hunting with troops and therefore SoB.

So:

Fluff: witchhunters = ordo hereticus inqisitors
Rules: codex witchhunters = inq + sob + inducted troops from either IG or SM. => seen as witchhunters

1hadhq wrote:Doesnt mean that bitchhunters must be girls.

Interesting typo...

mbalmes13 wrote:Why is it that the witch hunters are mostly an army of girls?

After Vandire's fall from grace the "Church" was barred by the Imperium from maintaing a force of "armed men at arms". They got round this by founding the Sisters of Battle.

Even in the 40k setting there are RAW vs. RAI arguments it seems.. who says the ruels don't reflect the background eh ?