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.

Arschbombe wrote:

CyRevenant wrote:
Why would the format in which a codex is published have any impact on the quality of said codex.

That's what I'm saying. There's no reason a codex published in the pages of WD and then made available for download as a PDF would have to have bad rules, bad fluff, and a bad army list simply because it was in WD. Seems like the naysayers are making the assumption here is that a codex that gets sent to a printer will automatically be better in all aspects merely because it is printed and bound.

Kanluwen wrote:The rumors are already strong that Faith points have gotten a nerf in the full codex that Phil Kelly is working on.

Robin Cruddace is supposedly going through and trying to make a 'bridge-the-gap' WD article removing the parts from the WH codex that GW wants removed(allies, Inquisition) and perhaps adding a few new units that are going to be in the book proper, with Kelly looking over his shoulder and ensuring it doesn't get Cavatored.

but how likely are we to see new models? thats the problem i see with the wd codex. nothing more. if you take out all the inquisition your left with a very specific list, 1 fast attack option, 1 troop choice, 1 elite, 2-3 heavies. you NEED to add more units but what can you add without making new models? this is my problem with the wd codex and not the fact it might be ok rules. personally i dont care about rules until i see the actual printed copy (a wd or a "true" codex)

kenzosan wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:The rumors are already strong that Faith points have gotten a nerf in the full codex that Phil Kelly is working on.

Robin Cruddace is supposedly going through and trying to make a 'bridge-the-gap' WD article removing the parts from the WH codex that GW wants removed(allies, Inquisition) and perhaps adding a few new units that are going to be in the book proper, with Kelly looking over his shoulder and ensuring it doesn't get Cavatored.

but how likely are we to see new models? thats the problem i see with the wd codex. nothing more.

Seriously? You expect new models in the WD codex?

The whole reason we're not seeing Sisters this year is because of the models, and that's a statement from Jes Goodwin the guy freaking sculpting them.

if you take out all the inquisition your left with a very specific list, 1 fast attack option, 1 troop choice, 1 elite, 2-3 heavies. you NEED to add more units

No, you don't. Nowhere does it say they NEED to add units in a codex. Players expect it, but there's no law for it.

but what can you add without making new models?

Really? Putting it simply, the new units that would likely be 'added' would be variants on Sisters or things that can easily be represented by things that WH players would have in their collection.

this is my problem with the wd codex and not the fact it might be ok rules. personally i dont care about rules until i see the actual printed copy (a wd or a "true" codex)

No, your problem is that you just want something shiny and new. While not unreasonable, it's not going to happen with a WD army list.

SoB fans pray to the emperor that tomorrow there will be an incoming for Codex: Sisters of Battle!

Kanluwen wrote:

kenzosan wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:The rumors are already strong that Faith points have gotten a nerf in the full codex that Phil Kelly is working on.

Robin Cruddace is supposedly going through and trying to make a 'bridge-the-gap' WD article removing the parts from the WH codex that GW wants removed(allies, Inquisition) and perhaps adding a few new units that are going to be in the book proper, with Kelly looking over his shoulder and ensuring it doesn't get Cavatored.

but how likely are we to see new models? thats the problem i see with the wd codex. nothing more.

Seriously? You expect new models in the WD codex?

The whole reason we're not seeing Sisters this year is because of the models, and that's a statement from Jes Goodwin the guy freaking sculpting them.

if you take out all the inquisition your left with a very specific list, 1 fast attack option, 1 troop choice, 1 elite, 2-3 heavies. you NEED to add more units

No, you don't. Nowhere does it say they NEED to add units in a codex. Players expect it, but there's no law for it.

but what can you add without making new models?

Really? Putting it simply, the new units that would likely be 'added' would be variants on Sisters or things that can easily be represented by things that WH players would have in their collection.

this is my problem with the wd codex and not the fact it might be ok rules. personally i dont care about rules until i see the actual printed copy (a wd or a "true" codex)

No, your problem is that you just want something shiny and new. While not unreasonable, it's not going to happen with a WD army list.

Well isnt that what every Sisters player is basically complaining about?

We want shinny new codex and shinny new models. Not some WD bandaid codex they might as well as just made it into a FAQ

AgeOfEgos wrote:All shooting armies are going to get a boost in 6th Ed.? Er?

About time, was getting bored of always winning with my overpowered Tyranids

Kanluwen wrote:It really isn't a "slap in the face". Phil Kelly, responsible for the Dark Eldar Codex, has been dropping hints that he's working on the Sisters book now since he's "all Eldared out".

1.) IIRC it was Jes saying that with a knowing look at Phil, then adding something about women that should not be fighting in 40k. And I am not aware of any definite statement by Jes that sculpts are not ready by now.
2.) Sororitas 1st Codex was invalidated in less than a year, the 2nd Codex was a cheap copy-paste from the Daemonhunter Codex and now it seems that Sororitas will be the only fraction that doesn't get a real Codex for 3 editions???? I call that another slap in the face.

Kanluwen wrote:Would you rather have a quickly done codex ala Blood Angels or the craptastic Dark Angels book--or a Dark Eldar?

The Codex Sororitas is in the works as long as the Grey Knight Codex, started half a year after that one. 3 years development time isn't a rush job and should result in more than 10 pages in a WD.

Phototoxin wrote:SoB fans pray to the emperor that tomorrow there will be an incoming for Codex: Sisters of Battle!

Even SoB fans have a limit in faith.

Here some more rumours by ghost21:

I can see acts of faith being like psychic powers.
(...)
Put it this way: characters in GK Codex? I doubt they will be repeated in the SoB one.
(...)
There is going to be another plastic set for sisters that will contain lots of bling too, the two sets will have everything
but there will be one set for normal sisters and seraphim

Kettu wrote:And how many can you make from this other set?

It's about 10.
(...)
It's the Repentia.
(...)
Hey, I'm not in charge of design, Repentia are a lot thinner, have no backpacks, and have 2 handed weapons. You expect 5 there? They'd all fit on one sprue.
(...)
Well, Repentia are like sister's scouts .. urm now ... oh damn it !

TimLeeson wrote:Could you answer this question please? if not, it's cool but id appreciate if you could tell us if the generic sisters will have leg-poses that are "bent knees" like necron warriors, dark eldar warriors ect or if they'd be more like the dark eldar wytches with running poses ?

I saw 50/50

So we will see the following plastic kits according to him:
1.) Standard sisters (pack of 5)
2.) Repentia (pack of 10)
3.) Penitent Engine
4.) Modular Priest

Kanluwen wrote:

kenzosan wrote:but how likely are we to see new models? thats the problem i see with the wd codex. nothing more.

Seriously? You expect new models in the WD codex?

The whole reason we're not seeing Sisters this year is because of the models, and that's a statement from Jes Goodwin the guy freaking sculpting them.

if you take out all the inquisition your left with a very specific list, 1 fast attack option, 1 troop choice, 1 elite, 2-3 heavies. you NEED to add more units

No, you don't. Nowhere does it say they NEED to add units in a codex. Players expect it, but there's no law for it.

but what can you add without making new models?

Really? Putting it simply, the new units that would likely be 'added' would be variants on Sisters or things that can easily be represented by things that WH players would have in their collection.

this is my problem with the wd codex and not the fact it might be ok rules. personally i dont care about rules until i see the actual printed copy (a wd or a "true" codex)

No, your problem is that you just want something shiny and new. While not unreasonable, it's not going to happen with a WD army list.

that was my point, i dont expect new models with a wd codex. they need them, seriously, all metal! thats all kinds of stupid. to top it off you want to add varients on existing sisters, there are no varients! 1 metal unit means 1 of each upgrade. in order to load out metal squads in basic/special weapons you need 2-5 packs just to get 1 gun, cuz thats how the package metal models. that is my point and has been. wd codex =/= new models.

i just went to the gw site: 3 standard sisters is $17, any of the upgrades/varients for that squad is $13 for 1. a squad of 9-19, you already need 3 packs just to make 1 squad. then you can upgrade a total of 2 models to some other weapon and the sister superior has an alternate as well. 1 standard, minimum, squad is gonna set me back $51 minimum. i dont understand the misinterpretation here. models are needed more then a new dex. thats been my stand point and a wd dex means no new models. by some unlikely stroke of luck and you see plastic sisters with the w/d codex i will probably faint from laughing so hard.

and no, a starter box does not count as you are getting 2 armies and not just sisters. if the starter has more sisters per dollar then the current set up then i will count it as plastic sisters.

Just to keep it real... Let's stop with 'Slap in the face'. It makes you sound silly whenever you say it.

In the WoW community, the phrase is a bit of a joke:

Slap in the Face
5 Rage
Instant cast
1 day cooldown

Delivers a face slap to all nearby players, stunning them. Targets affected by this ability can still communicate through the forums. Lasts until the next patch is released.

pretre wrote:Just to keep it real... Let's stop with 'Slap in the face'. It makes you sound silly whenever you say it.

In the WoW community, the phrase is a bit of a joke:

Slap in the Face
5 Rage
Instant cast
1 day cooldown

Delivers a face slap to all nearby players, stunning them. Targets affected by this ability can still communicate through the forums. Lasts until the next patch is released.

so happy i quit wow years ago...

A PDF codex and no new models makes little sense. Perhaps they'll start producing the old ones and repackage them so they're a viable options as an army ($41 for 10 doesn't seem so terrible now)

Otherwise I don't see the point. I highly doubt anybody would go out and start the army because of this new list. SoB aren't terribly gimped anyways, they have plenty of stuff that works in the 5th ed meta, power armor, flamer, melta, and cheap mech. They were ahead of their time. They don't need a throw in codex to be viable like Necrons, ec.

Kroothawk wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:All shooting armies are going to get a boost in 6th Ed.? Er?

About time, was getting bored of always winning with my overpowered Tyranids

No joke, ever since they took away consolidation in 5th assault armies are sweeping the boards.....

I hope they are referring to mid-range shooting (such as bolters). Given that FNP is almost standard kit now, usually you wonder if your melta gun is going to kill anything and roll your bolter dice so you look busy.

Kroothawk wrote:So we will see the following plastic kits according to him:
1.) Standard sisters (pack of 5)
2.) Repentia (pack of 10)
3.) Penitent Engine
4.) Modular Priest

We can't have a decently priced 10 woman Battle Sisters or Seraphim box, but we can have a 10 woman box of failed Sisters that nobody uses, and a multipart hero kit for a male Priest that, again, nobody uses?

Someone - either GW or the rumourmongers - is trolling us.

AlexHolker wrote:...a 10 woman box of failed Sisters that nobody uses, and a multipart hero kit for a male Priest that, again, nobody uses?

...in the current codex.

insaniak wrote:

AlexHolker wrote:...a 10 woman box of failed Sisters that nobody uses, and a multipart hero kit for a male Priest that, again, nobody uses?

...in the current codex.

this^ we have no idea if repentia or priests are better then they were.

I also don't see where the box of 5 sisters is coming from in that quoted post.

Much as I'm looking forward to plastic Sisters of Battle, I'd rather they put off the proper Codex until they can release the upcoming minis alongside it.

[Paying roughly twice the cost of a Tactical Squad for ten Battle Sisters once you include the additional cost of special or heavy weapons and a different model for a squad leader is of course, quite prohibitive. Of course, it wouldn't be so bad if you only needed a handful of them for a points-wise-decently-sized force, but unfortunately that is not the case, much as I like medium-sized armies.]

From what I hear from Dakkaites, the Inquisitorial stuff in the Grey Knights Codex is much preferable to their counterparts in the Witch Hunters Codex. It'd be nice if they brought the Witch Hunters stuff in line with the Grey Knights stuff.

Even if they slice the Inquisitorial stuff out of the Witch Hunters army list, I'd only be a little miffed, personally, and even then only because I broke down last month when I finally noticed the Sister Hospitaller mini and got an Inquisitor and retinue to make the Hospitallers playable in a proper list. I personally would only miss the Hospitallers from the Inquisition part of the Witch Hunters Codex.

I don't mind this little tidbit of an update, even if it turns out to be a bit of a nerf. At least they're not ignoring Sisters of Battle players, just giving us something to chew on because the minis are delayed. There's always the hope that it'll be a steak instead of a bone, of course.

Hospitallers aren't part of the Inquisition.

They're part of the Sisters of Battle.

So I don't think Hospitallers are going anywhere in that regard.

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:All shooting armies are going to get a boost in 6th Ed.? Er?

About time, was getting bored of always winning with my overpowered Tyranids

No joke, ever since they took away consolidation in 5th assault armies are sweeping the boards.....

I hope they are referring to mid-range shooting (such as bolters). Given that FNP is almost standard kit now, usually you wonder if your melta gun is going to kill anything and roll your bolter dice so you look busy.

FNP doesn't work against meltas.

Yeah, if the Inquisition goes, it would be nice to see the Hospitaller in there either as a tag-on to the Sisters HQ, or as an added in Elite choice.

Kanluwen wrote:Hospitallers aren't part of the Inquisition.

They're part of the Sisters of Battle.

So I don't think Hospitallers are going anywhere in that regard.

Excellent. Hopefully they'll get a wider use, instead of their currently limited role as Inquisitorial Henchwomen.

@insaniak: I can only assume that it's an inference from the current Grey Knights boxes, with there being two boxed sets for all the plastic infantry - one for Terminators, one for power armored Grey Knights. [Edit: This was a reply to an earlier post of yours regarding the 5 woman boxed set.]

Didn't want to trawl through 10 pages, but I'm guessing that people are saying that a WD codex is unlikely? TBH, I don't want a new codex, our rules are fine. Although, I would appreciate more fluff rather than just going over the Age of Apostasy again. I just really need plastic models, because no way am I paying £86.60 for 2 Troops and an HQ. Nuh uh.

As for Sisters Hospitaller, they were only henchmen before and I can't see them doing much in a new codex. The Orders Hospitaller are not part of the Orders Militant (though they are both Adepta Sororitas, I guess), so they wouldn't be involved in battle unless they were performing an Apothecary role. Perhaps rather than taking a Celestian squad as a retinue for your Adepta Sororitas Heroine, there'll be an honour guard almost exactly like a Marine Captain's one.

I personalty don't see the need for a WD codex at all. Aside from the Allies issue that GW wants gone and the general lack of options as has been pointed out before, there is nothing seriously "wrong" or anything that necessitates the apparent stopgap measure of a WD codex with the current WH codex as it is.

I also see such a move somewhat comical on GW's part after making the WH codex, for the most part, available in PDF form once already.

If GW did want to make changes to the WH Codex, why not simply release a new FAQ to bring units more inline with what they may become and say the Allies rules on pages such and such no longer apply, ect.

I am most certainly in the minority on the issue of metal SoB models over plastic; I am quite happy with my metal SoB. That's not to say I am not looking forward to new kits or sculpts, but I already have all the SoB models I currently need. When the new codex comes out however...

If it does come to pass that SoB DO actually get a WD codex I hope against all hopes that it doesn't happen until after 'Ard Boyz this year as I already have my list and models together.

I am sincerely looking forward to a new SoB codex, but I do not see a WD codex as a solution in the meantime.

Kilkrazy wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:All shooting armies are going to get a boost in 6th Ed.? Er?

About time, was getting bored of always winning with my overpowered Tyranids

No joke, ever since they took away consolidation in 5th assault armies are sweeping the boards.....

I hope they are referring to mid-range shooting (such as bolters). Given that FNP is almost standard kit now, usually you wonder if your melta gun is going to kill anything and roll your bolter dice so you look busy.

FNP doesn't work against meltas.

That was his point

As a returning to the fold CSM player, can I just quickly note plastic Repentia would make my millenium.

Other than that, pretty much ends any hope of models this year, but hopefully when they do return they'll have had a Blood Angel level boost.

insaniak wrote:I also don't see where the box of 5 sisters is coming from in that quoted post.

Kroothawk wrote:Some rumours I trust more, even if they are not pleasant:

ghost21 wrote:Yeah sisters will be 5 to a box with options for seraphim though (I wished it wasn't true but unfortunatley I've seen the evidence)
(...)
Please don't hit me with a broom.
Only reported what I saw.

tastyfish wrote:So no chance of extra legs on another bit then? Or was it pretty obviously a complete set?

I'm not saying it's impossible. I certainly don't see everything. Those SoM Monsters for instance popped up without me seeing anything.
It looked like a complete sprue . I have heard repentia getting a plastic kit though

From an earlier post by ghost21.
Still hoping for 10 per box, a full Codex this year and no resin, but being GW ...

Ahh, missed that bit.

November according to whineseer:

Or they will release the Tyranids 2nd wave alongside Sisters; much as the Dark Eldar received a wave at the release of Grey Knights. It's not unlikely. In fact, I would fully expect this sort of behavior going forward, along with more 1 month-only releases instead of Oct/Nov, Dec/Jan, etc. style releases.

Tau will be the Xenos that follows Sisters. The White Dwarf release has no validity, by the way, and my personal hope is that it's the wish-listing of some masochistic nerd.

Oh, and Daemons won't see another full release for a LOOOONG time. Maybe a small wave, but that's it.

The schedule I've heard is:

June = Dark Eldar wave
July = Storm of Magic*
August = Necrons
September = Ogre Kingdoms
October = Tyranids 2nd wave**
November = Sisters of Battle**
December = light, piecemeal release

This sort of balances out how WHFB-heavy the initial portion of 2011 has been with Orcs & Goblins, Tomb Kings 2 months later, and now a summer release that will be massive.

*=Storm of Magic may very well break the "3-4 kits only" trend.
**= Indicates that these two releases are rather flexible. They could come at the same time, or they could switch months.

insaniak wrote:Yeah, if the Inquisition goes, it would be nice to see the Hospitaller in there either as a tag-on to the Sisters HQ, or as an added in Elite choice.

Given what they've been doing with almost every other 'dex, the Hospitaler will be the thing that gives the Celestine Squad FNP.

Would have preferred new models more than a patch job of a codex myself. Still was able to win a handicapped match against Dark Eldar, they wanted to use all 1250 points, I felt like using 850 SoB instead of 1250 of Eldar.

Still something is better than nothing at least. Hope there is some model release with the patch job codex, cause I don't think it will work when you have to buy each squad in multiple small pieces rather than the minimum needed for the squad to be usable.

When is the next incoming.. expected now.. usually at this time of the day... GRRR!

Death By Monkeys wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:All shooting armies are going to get a boost in 6th Ed.? Er?

You know, because shooty armies aren't good enough right now.

So, given this bit of tidbits, I should just be able to deploy my SW list, step out to grab a bit to eat, and upon returning find my opponent's nid list tabled.