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.

A couple of SoB fan codices have popped up recently amid a wider flare up of debate on the subject of what should be done with Sisters. I have long been a strong proponent of kicking out Inquisitors and Ecclesiarchy freaks in favor of a pure Sisters dex. But after thinking over some of the recently proposed ideas and reading back through C:WH's fluff I think a better approach would be to keep the freaks in and sideline but not drop the Ordo Hereticus Inquisitor. But I would restructure things a bit so as to keep the dex Sisters-dominated. Here's my an outline of my idea so far:

Standard Missions Force Organization Chart
- Compulsory: 1 SoB HQ, 2 SoB Troops
- Optional: 1 HQ, 4 Troops, 3 Fast Attack, 3 Heavy Support

HQ
- Canoness/Palatine
- 0-1 Confessor: can only be taken as an additional HQ choice, must be taken in order to use units marked with asterisked “Ecclesiarchy” units; can take retinue of *Ministorum Missionaries
- 0-5 *Ministorum Priests (as in C:IG 5th)

Elites
- Celestian Squad
- Repentia Squad (except they generate and can use Faith Points and no 0-1 limit)
- Inquisitor and Retinue (which can include detachable temple assassins)
- *Ministorum Missionaries (assaulters, can upgrade laser pistols to shotguns)

Troops
- Battle Sisters Squad
- Special Characters: there should be a special character from each of the non-Militant Orders that could replace one Sister per Squad and convey some kind of special ability (sort of like IG’s Ordnance Master, Fleet Officer, or Astropath)
- Transports: Rhinos that are cheaper than the SM equivalent
- *Frateris Militia: something like Conscripts in C:IG 5th—with two exceptions: (1) cannot use transport and (2) subject to Holy Rage unless joined by Ministorum Priests or within so many inches of Ministorum Missionaries

Fast Attack
- Seraphim Squad
- Dominion Squad
- *Arco-flagellants (cheaper and up to ten)

Heavy Support
- Retributor Squad
- Immolators
- Exorcists
- *Penitent Engines

Manchu wrote:Standard Missions Force Organization Chart
- Compulsory: 1 SoB HQ, 2 SoB Troops
- Optional: 1 HQ, 4 Troops, 3 Fast Attack, 3 Heavy Support

Lame, straight off the bat. SoB HQ and troops should be as good or better at what they do as the inquisitor and freaks and thus desirable to take, but if I want to take an inquisitor and freaks instead there's no reason I shouldn't be able to do that except for you don't like that I want to.

Giving the sisters a fair go and making them a viable and legitimate "pure" choice: good.

Making them mandatory so that I can't play an Ordo Hereticus army without them: not good.

. . . there's no reason I shouldn't be able to do that except for you don't like that I want to.

Know thy fluff: There is no such thing as an Ordo Hereticus army. There is also no such thing as an Ecclesiarchy army. The closest thing to the first option is an Inquisitor working with an independent army. The closest thing to the second option is when a rabble is roused to fight alongside the Sisters.

Manchu wrote:

. . . there's no reason I shouldn't be able to do that except for you don't like that I want to.

Know thy fluff: There is no such thing as an Ordo Hereticus army. There is also no such thing as an Ecclesiarchy army. The closest thing to the first option is an Inquisitor working with an independent army. The closest thing to the second option is when a rabble is roused to fight alongside the Sisters.

Seems still a bit limiting. Why remove options when you could gain them? Fluff be darned, the game needs to be fun for everyone, including someone like Warboss Tzoo.

No, we don't need a Codex: Sisters of Battle, we need a Codex: Witch Hunters. The Ordo Hereticus have enough of their own stuff (Inquisitors, Arco-flagellants, Storm Troopers, etc) to justify having a large portion of the codex dedicated to them.

The sisters are the armed force of the Ecclesiarchy and the vast, vast majority of the time, the operate as such, as a 'pure' sisters force. They police and guard pilgramage routs. They protect Ecclesiarchy sites (not to mention impress the great unwashed with how awesome the Ecclesiarchy is). They also conduct the crusades and wars of faith.

They are also however, the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus and on the rare occasions when the Ordo Hereticus need a propper army* they are asked (asked, not ordered) to do the job.


I believe the codex should reflect this. It should be mostly Sororitas units, with nods to both the greater Ecclesiarchy and the Ordo Hereticus.

For example, three or four Sororitas HQ options (Canonnes, Palatine, Living Saint, maybe something else too)

A couple of Ecclesiarchy HQ options (Bishop, Priest)

And, yes, there should be the option of an Inquisitor Lord.

Troop choices too. The bulk of the army's troops should be Battle Sisters, but I feel the option to use zealots and stormtroopers should exist.

Understand - I run a pure Sisters army - always have, likely always will - love it. But they are part of the Ecclesiarchy and they do work with (with, not for) the Hereticus.


*Of the three Ordos, the Hereticus least need an actual army. Unlike Chaos and Aliens, heretics and psykers can rarely field an army of their own. your typical Hereticus Inquisitor is an investigator, a detective, a diplomat and a psychologist, but not a general. This is exactly why the Hereticus do not have their own army.

Azezel wrote:Unlike Chaos and Aliens, heretics and psykers can rarely field an army of their own. your typical Hereticus Inquisitor is an investigator, a detective, a diplomat and a psychologist, but not a general. This is exactly why the Hereticus do not have their own army.

You do know that 'heretics' are what the Imperium calls normal people who turn to Chaos, right? 'Chaos' refers to daemons and their gods. Traitor Guardsmen and Chaos cultists are 'heretics'.

Cheese Elemental wrote:

Azezel wrote:Unlike Chaos and Aliens, heretics and psykers can rarely field an army of their own. your typical Hereticus Inquisitor is an investigator, a detective, a diplomat and a psychologist, but not a general. This is exactly why the Hereticus do not have their own army.

You do know that 'heretics' are what the Imperium calls normal people who turn to Chaos, right? 'Chaos' refers to daemons and their gods. Traitor Guardsmen and Chaos cultists are 'heretics'.

Yes but when that happens they send in the guard or space marines to deal with that.

I do know that. In this case I was using 'Chaos' to refer specifically to daemons (and, I suppose Chaos Space Marines, but I was thinking of daemons).

But the two instances of heretics you cite are pretty much exactly what I was on about - albeit I wasn't being clear - my fault.

Most of the stuff the Ordo Hereticus deals with are your common or garden cultists, your unsanctioned psykers, your mutant cell and apostate/divergent religion. Any one group rarely numbers over a few dozen, tops (or maybe it's just much harder to hid once membership reaches this level?). The kind of numbers that can be dealt with by an Inquisitor and a platoon of stormtroopers, maybe with arbites support.

When heresy gets really big - when a Guard Regiment (Or Marine Chapter) goes rogue, or a chaos cult gets control of a planetary government or PDF - then, yes, the Hereticus need an army and they call the Sisters in.


Truth to tell - I think we actually agree with each other more than we disagree. We both think the Hereticus has a valid place in the same codex as the sisters. I think we both agree it should be possible to build and play both a pure sisters, and pure inquisition army? I think we just disagree on proportions.

Manchu wrote:

. . . there's no reason I shouldn't be able to do that except for you don't like that I want to.

Know thy fluff: There is no such thing as an Ordo Hereticus army.

Let me rephrase: If I want to field an army based around the ordo hereticus then I shouldn't have to field sisters to do so.

Manchu wrote:
- *Frateris Militia: something like Conscripts in C:IG 5th—with two exceptions: (1) cannot use transport and (2) subject to Holy Rage unless joined by Ministorum Priests or within so many inches of Ministorum Missionaries

I would love this. No I wasn't thinking on a meatshield

Cheese Elemental wrote:No, we don't need a Codex: Sisters of Battle, we need a Codex: Witch Hunters. The Ordo Hereticus have enough of their own stuff (Inquisitors, Arco-flagellants, Storm Troopers, etc) to justify having a large portion of the codex dedicated to them.

I guess we don't share the same meaning for "enough". I don't care about making one codex for both, or one codex for each. But I do think that Ordo Hereticus needs more development, more units, to be a equilibrated army by itself, while SoB are a good army by themselves. I like better SoB, and I want my army to be pure SoB. But I wouldn't refuse to include Ordo Hereticus units if they would cool enough, for bigger games, or alternative lists for fun. In the same way, if a gamer wants to make a Ordo Hereticus pure list (without SoB), he/she should be able to have more units than stormtroopers, arco-flagellants and penitent engines. So GW should: a) keep the allies rules or b) create more Ordo Hereticus units.

Manchu wrote:

Standard Missions Force Organization Chart
- Compulsory: 1 SoB HQ, 2 SoB Troops
- Optional: 1 HQ, 4 Troops, 3 Fast Attack, 3 Heavy Support

HQ
- Canoness/Palatine
- 0-1 Confessor: can only be taken as an additional HQ choice, must be taken in order to use units marked with asterisked “Ecclesiarchy” units; can take retinue of *Ministorum Missionaries
- 0-5 *Ministorum Priests (as in C:IG 5th)

Elites
- Celestian Squad
- Repentia Squad (except they generate and can use Faith Points and no 0-1 limit)
- Inquisitor and Retinue (which can include detachable temple assassins)
- *Ministorum Missionaries (assaulters, can upgrade laser pistols to shotguns)

Troops
- Battle Sisters Squad
- Special Characters: there should be a special character from each of the non-Militant Orders that could replace one Sister per Squad and convey some kind of special ability (sort of like IG’s Ordnance Master, Fleet Officer, or Astropath)
- Transports: Rhinos that are cheaper than the SM equivalent
- *Frateris Militia: something like Conscripts in C:IG 5th—with two exceptions: (1) cannot use transport and (2) subject to Holy Rage unless joined by Ministorum Priests or within so many inches of Ministorum Missionaries

Fast Attack
- Seraphim Squad
- Dominion Squad
- *Arco-flagellants (cheaper and up to ten)

Heavy Support
- Retributor Squad
- Immolators
- Exorcists
- *Penitent Engines

May I suggest to move any special "upgrade" characters to a command squad?
Where is the canoness/palatine's backup squad of sisters? Maybe 0-1 celestian squad + special chars + banner?

Dedicated transports = only rhinos or rhino, immolator?
Exorcists = firing modes?
Movement: deepstrike = y/n? scout move/infiltrate = y/n?

Why not just rename the Inquisitor "Abbess Sanctorum" and keep all the rules? And at once you have a fluffy all Sororitas army (without the inquisitor being a subordinate to the church!).
Even AdMech has its own Assassins (->Mechanicum novel), why not the church (see Helldorado for the fitting miniature: "Sister Eloise et Alvarro".

The official Redemptionist (->your "Frateris Militia" ) rules are very good and indeed something like a meat shield, as fitting for an unarmoured mob of fanatics (with lots of nice models -> Necromunda).

Adding Sisters Hospitallers to standard units is a good idea. Sisters Dialogous could boost morale or do something like a commissar.

One problem still not solved: With the Exorcist so much better, noone will care about the other heavy options, one problem for the nice penitent engine models.

1hadhq wrote:


Exorcists = firing modes?

I've often wished for that.

Considering that the Exorcist (spectacular as it is) is our only long-range fire support, I would like it to have more flexability.

I believe in the fluff, Exorcist missiles are supposed to be Melta-based, so giving them 2d6 for penetration would seem fitting - not to mention give them plausable hope of hurting AV14.

I'd also like to see a second mode, d6 STR4 blasts (also with 2d6 penetration) which always scatter (that is, scatter even if a hit is rolled on the scatter die). This mode would be the terror of infantry and light armour.

Personally, to reflect their status as ancient, nigh unique relics, I'd make them one per army too. And maybe give them AV14 at the front, since everything would be trying to take such a machine down.


I have no idea what the point value of this would be - higher than it is now, though.

I love my Exorcist like a daughter, but even I can admit that she's undercosted now, let alone if the above changes were implimented.

I would hope that we would get more out of a codex reboot than this. This is a straight translation of C: WH basically with maybe 1 or 2 new units and a loss of a ton of units (including allies).

So far every 5th ed codex has gotten 'new stuff'. Why would we lose things?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Azezel wrote:
I believe in the fluff, Exorcist missiles are supposed to be Melta-based, so giving them 2d6 for penetration would seem fitting - not to mention give them plausable hope of hurting AV14.

I'd also like to see a second mode, d6 STR4 blasts (also with 2d6 penetration) which always scatter (that is, scatter even if a hit is rolled on the scatter die). This mode would be the terror of infantry and light armour.

Personally, to reflect their status as ancient, nigh unique relics, I'd make them one per army too. And maybe give them AV14 at the front, since everything would be trying to take such a machine down..

Uck. Don't make them 0-1 unless you're giving something else for a heavy. 1 Exorcist would force me to go immo spam.

And d6 Str 4 with 2d6 Penetration? Why add the 2d6 penetration? Just have two modes, D6 Str 8 AP1 Melta and D6 Str 4 AP5 Blast

People always want to dive straight into the nitty-gritty of inventing new units or modifying existing ones but I don't think there is enough consensus among fans about what the weaknesses of C:WH currently are much less how they should be tackled. There needs to be a deeper investigation into the fundamental problems of Codex writing before we can even talk about the details. My OP here wasn't a final draft blue print for what I want a future C:SoB to look like but rather (as WarbossTzoo noticed immediately) an idea about how it should be broadly structured to deal with what I perceive to be the major failing of C:WH--what I'll call "brand weakness."

But let's start with "brand strength." What I mean by "brand strength" is not just how well (which is to say, accurately) an army's identity is known (i.e., not trying to play Tau primarily as assualters) but more basically how cohesive an army's identity is--after all, you can hardly recognize what the army should be like if you have no idea what that is in the first place. And army's "brand strength" is the product of two components: fluff and crunch. Let there be no mistake here, fluff is the more important factor because crunch flows from fluff. I need to know what the army is like (or supposed to be like) in the background in order to write rules for it. This point can be illustrated by thinking about Marines: there are currently five different SM codices (not counting GK) but they have distinguishing features. Although they all should be recognizable as Marines, SW need to be distinct from both BA, DA, and BT on one hand and NillaMarines on the other.

And how is this distinction determined? Is it that there is a lack of assaulty-type Marines out there that SW need to fill? Not at all--just ask BA and BT! No, the distinction in the rules is based on what the SW are like in the background. SW, as a more divergent Chapter, get their own book while a less divergent Chapter like the White Scars can be played up to the standards of their background perfectly out of the NillaDex. If it wasn't for the large amount of SW fluff out there we wouldn't have a lot to go on in determining whether or not the SW Codex rules were a "good fit" for the Wolves. In fact, we probably wouldn't think a SW dex was at all necessary (or, for those who think the current one is unnecessary, your argument would be much stronger) in that case. This is partly what I mean by "brand weakness." Purely as a function of the amount of fluff out there, Sisters certainly suffer from "brand weakness."

The problem is more complicated than that, however. After all, there is no Dark Eldar novel or comic book out there but I would argue that they enjoy a high degree of brand strength. Let's not confuse brand weakness with neglect. The DE may be long overdue for some attention but everyone has a fairly good if general idea of who the DE are and how they're supposed to play--i.e., sadistic slavers and glass hammer respectively. So why do Sisters, who certainly have a lot more established fluff than DE, suffer from a weaker brand than the DE? Simple: the Sisters brand has been severely confused as a result of GW's obsession with the Inquisition earlier last decade. This becomes painfully obvious in every thread about the Sisters that most people--even some who play them--have a very shaky idea of who they are or what they do.

The debate invariably assumes two possible answers: either they are primarily the army of Ordo Hereticus thanks to the Convocation of Nephilim OR they are primarily the army of the Ecclesiarchy thanks to the Decree Passive. The third option--that they are their own self-organized and managed institution--is almost never brought up even though it is the correct answer. The blame lies with C:WH. Even the name is confusing. Who are these "witch hunters"? There are Marines, Guard, Necrons, Eldar, Tau, etc, but there is no faction in the 40k universe called the "witch hunters" (Dan Abnett's anomalous character aside). Even "daemonhunters" is less confusing--after all, daemon hunting is the primary function of GK. But "witch hunting," however you define "witch," is not the primary function of the SoB. "Witch hunting," again, however you define "witch," is also not the primary function of the Ecclesiarchy. It is the primary function of Ordo Hereticus, if you define "witch" to mean anyone that Ordo Hereticus doesn't like (which Ordo Hereticus Inquisitors might indeed do) but then why should the Sisters be roped into the Ordo Hereticus agenda over their own?

Convocation or no, Space Marines and Guardsmen can be conscripted by the Inquisition as easily as Sisters. Yet no one demands that Inquisitor Lords be included as HQ options in C:SM or C:IG. And rightly so: doing that would confuse the brand identity of SM and IG. At least no one confuses them for armies of the Ecclesiarchy--even though Guardsmen are forever stamping out heretics on behalf of the Imperial Creed while Space Marines are heard to scream "For the Emperor!" wherever they appear. Sisters, meanwhile, are very commonly thought to be indistinguishable from the wider Ecclesiarchy. This is ridiculous; it's like confusing the Imperial Guard with Adpetus Administratum. Can you imagine if people who played Guard--and a whole lot more who don't play Guard--demanded that units of Administratum accountants be included in C:IG because they are totally indispensable to someone's (never mind who in particular) play style or indeed the very identity of the Guard itself? And yet we who play Sisters frequently hear (and sometimes even say) this sort of thing about Arco-flagellants and Penitent Engines.

And consider this: What is the difference between an Inquisitorial unit and an Ecclesiarchical one? Some are obvious, Inquisitorial Stormtroopers or Ministorum priests for example. But what about Arco-flagellants and Penitent Engines? C:WH is so mixed up that this isn't even clear. All we know for certain is that neither is part of the organization of Adepta Sororitas. Combining all of these disparate units together into a mish mash doesn't make a great deal of sense without some much brighter lines in the background than are currently provided. Poor fluff (the faction is hard to relate to) results in poor crunch (the faction is hard to play). And when both fluff and crunch are down, it's no surprise that the brand is weak. That weakness in turn results in an unsuccessful product. This is why I have been such a staunch opponent of including any Inquisitorial or Ecclesiarchical units in a prospective C:SoB.

The trouble with that is that the Sisters are in fact a part--although it must be emphasized an independent part--of the Ecclesiarchy with especially close ties--and let's emphasize here that this is an alliance and nothing more--to Ordo Hereticus. So I can't really get on board with throwing the freaks out altogether. But the idea behind my first post was to ensure that C:SoB would remain primarily a book about SoB with some flexibility to include (or not include) the few Ecclesiarchical units. In other words, the Ecclesiarchy and Inquisition elements can actually be used to strengthen the Sisters brand but only if they don't get the spotlight. That's why I am totally opposed to the horrid combined Inquisition Codex as well as some silly Codex: Ecclesiarchy. Neither Ordo Hereticus nor the Ecclesiarchy has enough by themselves to merit their own book. They are both dependent on the Sisters for substance in C:WH. So if Sisters are pulling all the weight, it only makes sense that they are the brand that needs strengthening.

That said:

Necroman wrote:Why remove options when you could gain them?

It's not about removing options. It's about reworking options so that the book is more viable.

Cheese Elemental wrote:No, we don't need a Codex: Sisters of Battle, we need a Codex: Witch Hunters. The Ordo Hereticus have enough of their own stuff (Inquisitors, Arco-flagellants, Storm Troopers, etc) to justify having a large portion of the codex dedicated to them.

No, we don't need another C:WH. The first one is proof of that. And no, Ordo Hereticus does not have enough units to dedicate a lot of Codex to them. Even assuming that ones you've mentioned actually are Inquisition units, you've just mentioned almost all of them.

Azezel wrote:It should be mostly Sororitas units, with nods to both the greater Ecclesiarchy and the Ordo Hereticus.

I agree with most of what you're writing but I don't know how my idea doesn't give them a nod. I also don't understand why an Inquisitor must be an HQ unit.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:If I want to field an army based around the ordo hereticus then I shouldn't have to field sisters to do so.

What do you mean by "based around" and how is that not possible above? I hope you mean more than "I want Inquisitors as an HQ choice" because I'll be disappointed if that's all.

1hadhq wrote:May I suggest to move any special "upgrade" characters to a command squad?

I've thought about this quite a bit but I think a Sisters HQ makes more sense as an IC that can be joined by Celestines than a Guard-style Command Squad. It's harder to imagine her blasting off with a Seraphim jetpack if she has to hold hands with Sisters Famulous and Dialogous while doing so.

Kroothawk wrote:Even AdMech has its own Assassins (->Mechanicum novel), why not the church (see Helldorado for the fitting miniature: "Sister Eloise et Alvarro".

The Ecclesiarchy does not have access to Death Cult or Temple assassins. C:WH makes that clear. But notice that in my first draft above the Inquisitor can have detachable assassins in his retinue.

pretre wrote:So far every 5th ed codex has gotten 'new stuff'. Why would we lose things?

As I've said, OP isn't meant to be a final draft fandex. It's more of an illustration of how C:WH could be restructured into a much better W:SoB without losing all the Ecclesiarchy and Inquisition stuff. My OP is actually supposed to be the beginning of a discussion and not the end of it.

Good lord this was horribly formatted.

Manchu wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:If I want to field an army based around the ordo hereticus then I shouldn't have to field sisters to do so.

What do you mean by "based around" and how is that not possible above? I hope you mean more than "I want Inquisitors as an HQ choice" because I'll be disappointed if that's all.

Since we're talking about list-building, yes, I basically mean fielding an inquisitor as a HQ choice instead of having to field a Sister in that slot. I want to be able to field Stormtroopers and inducted guard instead of Sisters. I want to be able to field an army based around the Ordo Hereticus without having to field sisters to do so. As you said up above, the Ordo isn't an army, it works with armies. Since we'll be losing the ability to take allies, the only way I'd be able to do this in your hypothetical codex would be to first waste an HQ and two Troops FOC slots.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Good lord this was horribly formatted.

Manchu wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:If I want to field an army based around the ordo hereticus then I shouldn't have to field sisters to do so.

What do you mean by "based around" and how is that not possible above? I hope you mean more than "I want Inquisitors as an HQ choice" because I'll be disappointed if that's all.

Since we're talking about list-building, yes, I basically mean fielding an inquisitor as a HQ choice instead of having to field a Sister in that slot. I want to be able to field Stormtroopers and inducted guard instead of Sisters. I want to be able to field an army based around the Ordo Hereticus without having to field sisters to do so. As you said up above, the Ordo isn't an army, it works with armies. Since we'll be losing the ability to take allies, the only way I'd be able to do this in your hypothetical codex would be to first waste an HQ and two Troops FOC slots.

Wouldn't it be better to separate the two sort of like chaos daemons and chaos space marines.
So like one a sister of battle codex (with several ecclesiarchy units) and then an Inquisition Codex which involves a few sisters, grey knight and death watch units and a bunch a whole bunch of Inquisition units and other allies units.

Possibly, yes. But that's not how Manchu proposed that the codex would be.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

Manchu wrote:

. . . there's no reason I shouldn't be able to do that except for you don't like that I want to.

Know thy fluff: There is no such thing as an Ordo Hereticus army.

Let me rephrase: If I want to field an army based around the ordo hereticus then I shouldn't have to field sisters to do so.

Sure. It sounds like what you want is an Ordo Hereticus army. My advice is to cross your fingers and hope you get one at some point. Certainly Codex: Witch Hunters wasn't one. Instead it was a watered down Sister codex with a few tacked on Inquisition units. It felt poor and undeveloped and did nothing for the Sisters but hurt and confuse their brand image. An Ordo Hereticus codex would be cool, mostly because GW would have to invent almost the entire list from scratch, since the only real units that currently exist for the army are Stormtroopers, inquisitors and Assassins. Or they could do what the did with WH and simply tack the Inquistion onto an existing army, killing that armie's character in the process.

Sisters need a reinvention. Sisters need to be vastly distanced from the other imperial forces in play style, rules and models. Most especially they need to be distanced from Codex Witch Hunters. Right now the Sisters look and feel like a weird watered down cross between Space Marines and Guard. They have little apparent identity of their own, and their interesting fluff is lost in a sea of confusing Inquisition and Ecclesiarchy background. Their units are all variations on the same basic model. Their vehicles and weapons are all borrowed from space marines. The army feels poorly implemented and designed around the idea that there would only be a limited number of Sisters models released. Is it any wonder why it's never been horribly popular?

At the same time, the Sisters ARE very popular with non-40k players. The basic Sister is incredibly recognizable, and you can find Sisters fan art and fan fic all over the internet. That GW has squandered the obvious appeal of an army of attractive warrior nuns with guns is... pretty amazing.

Here's what I would like to see from a SISTERS codex:

- Fiction and art focusing on the Sisters themselves, their history, their champions and their battles. Too much of the current Sisters fluff (almost the entirety of the 2nd edition codex) is about the Ecclesiarchy. As a female friend of mine once said, it's kind of insulting that the only female army in 40K has a history dominated by (and of being dominated by) men.

- More unit variety. The army needs more then just 5 different flavors of the same basic troop. This more then anything is why the Sisters look and feel like Space Marines. Taking the space marine list and changing the names of Vets, Tactical Squads, Assault Squads and Devestator Squads to Celestians, Battle Sisters, Serephim and Retributors makes for a dull army. Giving them access to rhinos is like adding insult to injury.

- Unique units and rules. The Sisters need to do things that no other army in 40k does. Tau, Dark Eldar and Necrons were all introduced after Sisters made their first appearance in 40k, and in each case GW went out of their way to try to make these armies both play and feel unique and interesting. Sisters plays and feels like the Imperium's least favorite step daughter.

jake wrote:Sure. It sounds like what you want is an Ordo Hereticus army. My advice is to cross your fingers and hope you get one at some point.

Absolutely agreed.

Here's what I would like to see from a SISTERS codex:

- Fiction and art focusing on the Sisters themselves, their history, their champions and their battles. Too much of the current Sisters fluff (almost the entirety of the 2nd edition codex) is about the Ecclesiarchy. As a female friend of mine once said, it's kind of insulting that the only female army in 40K has a history dominated by (and of being dominated by) men.

- More unit variety. The army needs more then just 5 different flavors of the same basic troop. This more then anything is why the Sisters look and feel like Space Marines. Taking the space marine list and changing the names of Vets, Tactical Squads, Assault Squads and Devestator Squads to Celestians, Battle Sisters, Serephim and Retributors makes for a dull army. Giving them access to rhinos is like adding insult to injury.

- Unique units and rules. The Sisters need to do things that no other army in 40k does. Tau, Dark Eldar and Necrons were all introduced after Sisters made their first appearance in 40k, and in each case GW went out of their way to try to make these armies both play and feel unique and interesting. Sisters plays and feels like the Imperium's least favorite step daughter.

Agreed in all cases.

Cheese Elemental wrote:

Azezel wrote:Unlike Chaos and Aliens, heretics and psykers can rarely field an army of their own. your typical Hereticus Inquisitor is an investigator, a detective, a diplomat and a psychologist, but not a general. This is exactly why the Hereticus do not have their own army.

You do know that 'heretics' are what the Imperium calls normal people who turn to Chaos, right? 'Chaos' refers to daemons and their gods. Traitor Guardsmen and Chaos cultists are 'heretics'.

There are lots of other forms of heresy.

A planetary governer that tries to break away from imperial control is a heretic.
Someone who trades or consorts with xenos is a heretic.
An inquisitor who offers a criminal reduced punishment in exchange for information on other criminals is a radical and is bordering on heretic (if he's already in the OH's bad books it could be enough)

In fact there are loads of things that can make you a heretic other than daemons - that's why the OH and OM are separate.

Scott-S6 wrote:

Cheese Elemental wrote:

Azezel wrote:Unlike Chaos and Aliens, heretics and psykers can rarely field an army of their own. your typical Hereticus Inquisitor is an investigator, a detective, a diplomat and a psychologist, but not a general. This is exactly why the Hereticus do not have their own army.

You do know that 'heretics' are what the Imperium calls normal people who turn to Chaos, right? 'Chaos' refers to daemons and their gods. Traitor Guardsmen and Chaos cultists are 'heretics'.

There are lots of other forms of heresy.

A planetary governer that tries to break away from imperial control is a heretic.
Someone who trades or consorts with xenos is a heretic.
An inquisitor who offers a criminal reduced punishment in exchange for information on other criminals is a radical and is bordering on heretic (if he's already in the OH's bad books it could be enough)

In fact there are loads of things that can make you a heretic other than daemons - that's why the OH and OM are separate.

Including one point that Cheese Elemental has "skipped". The proper witches. Unauthorized psykers. They don't need to be Chaos workshippers to be pursued. Being a psyker and not being feeding the Golden Throne is enough.

Traitor guardsmen probably don't need the zeal of a Inquisitor to be fought.

jake wrote:
Here's what I would like to see from a SISTERS codex:

- Fiction and art focusing on the Sisters themselves, their history, their champions and their battles. Too much of the current Sisters fluff (almost the entirety of the 2nd edition codex) is about the Ecclesiarchy. As a female friend of mine once said, it's kind of insulting that the only female army in 40K has a history dominated by (and of being dominated by) men.

- More unit variety. The army needs more then just 5 different flavors of the same basic troop. This more then anything is why the Sisters look and feel like Space Marines. Taking the space marine list and changing the names of Vets, Tactical Squads, Assault Squads and Devestator Squads to Celestians, Battle Sisters, Serephim and Retributors makes for a dull army. Giving them access to rhinos is like adding insult to injury.

- Unique units and rules. The Sisters need to do things that no other army in 40k does. Tau, Dark Eldar and Necrons were all introduced after Sisters made their first appearance in 40k, and in each case GW went out of their way to try to make these armies both play and feel unique and interesting. Sisters plays and feels like the Imperium's least favorite step daughter.

I think the lack of variety in mainly due to the mini's, I love the models but its not as simple as sculpting a new set of arms/whatever else like they do for marines. I'd love to see more sister's around and would add to my 1k little army if they do come out in plastic, but I don't think you need to make sister's a mandatory choice to solve this perceived identity crisis. I've always seen them as their own entity like the Grey Knights and the Inquisition Codices I thought were just a means to an end, for bringing some lesser known factions into the game and having cool models released along the way. Hell at least you get some AT weapons in your Dev squad eqivalents. What I'd give to let the psycannon have an alternate fire Krak Missile (or even lascannon) Strength mode.

But seriously there's no need to make it mandatory to have sisters in the army or you may as well separate them altogether (which I guess you'd prefer?)

DEATH89 wrote:

I think the lack of variety in mainly due to the mini's, I love the models but its not as simple as sculpting a new set of arms/whatever else like they do for marines. I'd love to see more sister's around and would add to my 1k little army if they do come out in plastic, but I don't think you need to make sister's a mandatory choice to solve this perceived identity crisis. I've always seen them as their own entity like the Grey Knights and the Inquisition Codices I thought were just a means to an end, for bringing some lesser known factions into the game and having cool models released along the way. Hell at least you get some AT weapons in your Dev squad eqivalents. What I'd give to let the psycannon have an alternate fire Krak Missile (or even lascannon) Strength mode.

But seriously there's no need to make it mandatory to have sisters in the army or you may as well separate them altogether (which I guess you'd prefer?)

Which I would definitely prefer. I know I'm one of many Sisters fans who was really put off that they were shoehorned into an inquisition codex when they should have and could have supported a book all on their own. The Inquisition (which i have no problem with on it's own) is an unwelcome guest that has overstayed itself, as far as I'm concerned.

As far as lack of variety goes, the line should have gone plastic back in 3rd edition, when they SHOULD have gotten their new codex. The primary reason for the Sisters lack of popularity is the models:

- Metal models are expensive, limited in options and hard to find.
- Producing a codex (C:WH) around an pre-existing metal line severely limited the kinds of entries that could be created for the codex. This is why we have 5 versions of what is more or less the same squad, in the classic space marine fashion.
- Choosing to not focus on the Sisters and instead do an Inquisition themed codex with Sisters options meant that GW didn't have to update the army to plastic, which meant no new style models, no re-imagined or updated army and no weapons or vehicles except those borrowed from other lines.

An updated model line would have almost certainly brought an entire new style of play, a new look and a refined personality to the army. They missed their chance and instead wasted the Sisters on their big Inquisition push.

I think a combined Codex:SoB&WH can work but I do think it hinges on good plastics, the sooner SoB/GK and preferably IST's go plastic the sooner we'll see more variety of units and improved playability.


But I'm not gonna hold my breath for it

DEATH89 wrote:I think a combined Codex:SoB&WH can work but I do think it hinges on good plastics, the sooner SoB/GK and preferably IST's go plastic the sooner we'll see more variety of units and improved playability.


But I'm not gonna hold my breath for it

A combined codex will not work. Cause your putting two different armies in one book. Meaning you have two sets of special rules and two sets of fluff. The author might become biases and like one army better then the other. His attention is also split between the two armies meaning each army is going to be weaker. Why aren't space marine codex combined? Why isn't the chaos space marine and chaos daemon codex combined? Take a look at fantasy, why isn't warriors of chaos and daemon of chaos combined? GW knows this and is moving away and trying to separate armies. The best option is to give each of these armies a separate codex.

Necrosis wrote:
A combined codex will not work. Cause your putting two different armies in one book. Meaning you have two sets of special rules and two sets of fluff. The author might become biases and like one army better then the other. His attention is also split between the two armies meaning each army is going to be weaker. Why aren't space marine codex combined? Why isn't the chaos space marine and chaos daemon codex combined? Take a look at fantasy, why isn't warriors of chaos and daemon of chaos combined? GW knows this and is moving away and trying to separate armies. The best option is to give each of these armies a separate codex.

Okay, devil's advocate here. You don't know that it won't work, because you haven't seen it.

From historical precedent is it unlikely? Yes. But we don't know until we see the codex whether it will work or not.

For my part, I think that C: WH 'worked' and did it better than 2nd Ed Sisters or Codex: Chapter Approved. (Although I sorely missed Redemptionists...) More unit types (even just for sisters) and even another army type. Just because some of those units are not the most competitive doesn't mean it wasn't good at the time or it wasn't variety. A lot of codexes didn't make the cut to 5th ed. And some 5th ed codexes have flavorful (although non competitive) units *gasp*. I'm looking at your Pyrovores and Blood Claws.

And that was a 'combined' codex. Could it be done again? Potentially. Likely? Not so much.

pretre wrote:

Necrosis wrote:
A combined codex will not work. Cause your putting two different armies in one book. Meaning you have two sets of special rules and two sets of fluff. The author might become biases and like one army better then the other. His attention is also split between the two armies meaning each army is going to be weaker. Why aren't space marine codex combined? Why isn't the chaos space marine and chaos daemon codex combined? Take a look at fantasy, why isn't warriors of chaos and daemon of chaos combined? GW knows this and is moving away and trying to separate armies. The best option is to give each of these armies a separate codex.

Okay, devil's advocate here. You don't know that it won't work, because you haven't seen it.

From historical precedent is it unlikely? Yes. But we don't know until we see the codex whether it will work or not.

For my part, I think that C: WH 'worked' and did it better than 2nd Ed Sisters or Codex: Chapter Approved. (Although I sorely missed Redemptionists...) More unit types (even just for sisters) and even another army type. Just because some of those units are not the most competitive doesn't mean it wasn't good at the time or it wasn't variety. A lot of codexes didn't make the cut to 5th ed. And some 5th ed codexes have flavorful (although non competitive) units *gasp*. I'm looking at your Pyrovores and Blood Claws.

And that was a 'combined' codex. Could it be done again? Potentially. Likely? Not so much.

Of course the WH codex work better then the PDF. The PDF was a nerf to sisters (BS 3 sisters, like that made any sense) and you can't compare a 2nd edition book since it used a completely different set of rules. Besides the WH dex did not work, look how many people you see playing that army? Not many people. It was a cheap way of GW updating the army and trying to promote the Inquisitor specialist game. This has result in GW opening Pandora box, where you have some people wanting to play Inquisition armies while you have lots of other people wanting to play sisters. The best result would be to make two separate codex's. I don't want to see sisters has a half done army again. For once I want to see them as a full fledged army.

I am not sure that the only reason you don't see many SOB armies is that the codex is weak, although that is certainly part of it. I think that all of the models being metal is a serious issue. I, for one, would love to play a SOB army but I refuse to buy an army of metal models for the reasons that someone listed above. The expense and limited amount of poses just kills the army for me. I think that a new codex, SOB or WH, is still going to have popularity issues because of the model range. I would argue that part of the reason that Tau and Necrons took off so well is that they both were released with a large range of plastic models. I think that to "fix" the SOB a new codex must be accompanied by at least one plastic set of sisters or it is going to fall flat on its face.