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.

Who else has seen this codex?

What did you like/Dislike?

I liked the fact that a cannoness is no longer nigh immune to the game.

Having a 2++ and a Jump pack and Infernius pistol was a bit crazy.

DeathReaper wrote:Who else has seen this codex?

What did you like/Dislike?

I liked the fact that a cannoness is no longer nigh immune to the game.

Having a 2++ and a Jump pack and Infernius pistol was a bit crazy.

Codex is out?
I thought that only updates via WD for now and codex next year...?
You sure it's codex and not updates?

The Codex was released in the august WD.

That's the update...
We won't see Codex for some time now...

Brother Coa wrote:That's the update...
We won't see Codex for some time now...

Strictly speaking, the White Dwarf release is a new 'Codex' inasmuch as it categorically states it officially replaces Codex: Witch Hunters. So as of the publication of the second half, Codex: Witch Hunters will be invalidated.

Regarding personal opinions? I'm hanging fire until the second half. The first half is not promising - particularly when taken in conjunction with new information from the new Sisters of Battle section of GW's website (Penitent Engines still being Heavy Support and hence useless, Dominions weapons nerf). The wholesale Faith nerf will have to be accounted for in significantly (15-20%) reduced points costs. The newly-nerfed Immolator will have to be costed significantly cheaper than it is now. The initiative nerf for Celestians and Seraphim will significantly hamper their performance as the army's 'assault' squads.

There's certainly a whole lot of nerfing going on in the context of individual units - but nobody can say whether the army as a whole has been nerfed until we see the points costs and Wargear options, and whether or not there are unit special rules for other units counting as Troops choices. I'm hopeful there'll be rules of that type - ie, St Celestine making Celestians a Troops option - if not, Codex: Sisters of Battle would be the only 5th Edition Codex to have only one Troops option.

DeathReaper wrote:I liked the fact that a cannoness is no longer nigh immune to the game.

Having a 2++ and a Jump pack and Infernius pistol was a bit crazy.

Not really actually. The Canoness had to pass a test to be able to use the power before (equal or over if in a squad leadership out of a squad), which cost faith points generally too important to just throw around anywhere. Even then it would fight as well as a normal tactical marine sergeant and could still be instant deathed quite easily because of the lack of eternal warrior. Compare that to stuff like TH/SS terminators, DE Archons with shadowfield (not sure if it's the right name, 2+ invul untill failed) and Lysander and it's really not all that bad. Generally it would only have a 4+ invulnerable to fall back on and not many would waste points because of the acts of faith.

As for myself, I'm waiting for the second half to justify some of the changes I'm not quite liking the look of so far. I'm not looking forward to buying heaps to get the army back up to the same points level as well. Depending on how it goes I'll probably just shelve it until new models come out, as the way it is so far for half the price of one squad I could get 500 points in troops of Daemons.

I dunno, I was hoping to keep Inquisitors in, so I don't have to buy the GK codex to field my Inquisitor warbands, but sadly thats not the case.

I like the Missionary/Priest warband thing, at least that's something. As far as "Nerfing" goes, I expect it will be balanced by point cost changes.

I do agree with n0t_u about the single troops choice - now I really miss Inquisitorial Stormtroopers...

Personally, I think Inquisitors (+ retinue and ISTs) need "universal addon" rules so you can use them with any Imperial army. They probably show up with IG way more often than alongside Sisters, anyways, and some of them have pretty good contact to Marine Chapters as well.

^ this is something that should get a WD "Codex" as there's not so much stuff to talk about but it's useful for a large number of people

Mythal wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:That's the update...
We won't see Codex for some time now...

Strictly speaking, the White Dwarf release is a new 'Codex' inasmuch as it categorically states it officially replaces Codex: Witch Hunters. So as of the publication of the second half, Codex: Witch Hunters will be invalidated.

The White Dwarf release is the new Codex, since it replaces the old codex. (Strictly speaking all 5th ed "Codex" are just Updates to the 4th ed ones...)

n0t_u wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:I liked the fact that a cannoness is no longer nigh immune to the game.

Having a 2++ and a Jump pack and Infernius pistol was a bit crazy.

Not really actually. The Canoness had to pass a test to be able to use the power before (equal or over if in a squad leadership out of a squad)

Well when she was solo and ran around melta-pistoling all my tanks and having a 2++ because she rolled = to or over her squad size of 1 on 2d6 that was super OP.

Personally i don't mind the loss of Inquisitors, but then again I never invested heavily in them. I traded away my one unit of storm troopers and i never got around to buying the Chimera. But others invested heavily in Inqs, and I feel bad for them. But hey, at least you didn't buy 80 reductionist militia this time right? Unless you bought a couple of Chimeras, a bunch of storm troopers and an old guy in the most murderous chair ever. Yeah, I feel bad for the players who had half their army invalidated.

The Good:

Dominions getting the Scouts rule is nice and their Act of Faith is really well suited to them. Probably the best act in the new list.

Seraphim are primarily shooters again and another AoF that seems well suited. I don't know if this makes up for the nerf to Hit and Run (before Seraphim did not need to make an Init check, now they have to make the check, and have one lower init) but I like the focus on shooting. The big problem is, unless they are very cheap (point wise, nothing Sisters is cheap dollar wise) then they will likely be overlooked for Dominions.

The Ecclessiary Battle Conclave has potential. We have no idea how big they can get, but they can have a lot of power weapons which is good against MEQ.

6++ saves on everything. As a Black Templar player i have learned that 6++ on infantry aint super helpful, but on vehicles it is a nice little bonus.

Celestine seems improved, but i will have to see her on the table to be sure. At least she doesn't take away faith points when she dies. And Uriah Jacobs is the Priest of Pain, the Bishop of Beatings, the Missionary of Murder, the Abbot of... ok, I ran out, but he is a brutal monster for a 3 wound character with some great bonuses for the army and the unit he joins. FNP Celestians could be spiffy.

The Bad

The Acts of Faith in general are much less spectacular than the WH Acts. This wouldn't be so bad, but they are also much less reliable. You have to roll (on average it will be a 4+ roll, sometimes 3+) to activate the act, but more importantly you get 1d6 faith per turn, and it wipes at the end of your turn. Not only does this mean that you can only be faithful during your turn (severely limiting the melee based acts of faith) but it also takes away any resource management and replaces it with random luck. Hitting a big fight on an important turn and need those acts to go off? To bad you rolled a 1. Any two of these changes would have been ok, but all 3, that hurts, a lot.

Some of the Acts of Faith seem miss-matched. Divine Guidance for Retributors seems nice, unless you use multi meltas. It is nice that basic sisters can rally with their act, but rerolling 1s in combat? Not unless I have used every other act of faith available to me that turn. And celestians can only be fearless in close combat... not so great.

Sisters Repentia still seem unfocused. FnP seems better than a 4++ save, but with all the S6 or power weapons out there, it really isn't. Striking last makes them questionable as an assault squad despite all of them having Evicerators.

Celestians, and Seraphim are now I3 instead of I4. What makes this a real kick in the teeth is that priests are I4. Preists.

And speaking of Celestians, they get 2 base attacks now, but they lose Holy Hatred (aka preferred enemy - whoever they are stabbing at the moment), a point of initiative and access to all the cool acts of faith. Their Act of Faith makes them Fearless, but only in melee and only on their turn.And since you have to use the Act at the beginning of the phase, you have to assume you are losing the assault. It also gives them +1 str, but unless the get to have multiple power weapons, who cares? I am much better off spending that faith on my Dominions or Seraphim.

The TL Heavy Flamer is no longer fast. Come on guys, really? Was that necessary? I hate comparing to other armies, but every Blood Angels tank is fast and that hasn't made them OP. Well... anyway one fast sisters transport wouldn't kill ya.

The Ugly

The biggest hurt is the three way nerf on the Acts of Faith. Random faith points, unreliable activation and acts are limited to a single unit type. Over all the army cannot rely on faith, but the units are designed with the expectation that they will have their Act of Faith every turn. The acts themselves are pretty hit and miss and since you an only use them in your turn, all of the melee acts are half as effective.

And finally, we have to wait longer to see the second half of the list.

DeathReaper wrote:What did you like/Dislike?

I like the addition of Scouts on dominions and the buff to Celestine. Pretty much everything else is trash.

DeathReaper wrote:I liked the fact that a cannoness is no longer nigh immune to the game.

She never was.

DeathReaper wrote:Well when she was solo and ran around melta-pistoling all my tanks and having a 2++ because she rolled = to or over her squad size of 1 on 2d6 that was super OP.

Leadership test. And only one phase per faith point.

PHASE. Not turn. So in an assault, two acts of faith were used upp per game turn.

I'm fairly new to 40k but I heard someone say that GW did the same thing to blood angels. Release a WD codex that blows, then a few months later release a real codex that rocks. Do you think they did the same thing twice?

It is a possibility. Dunno how distinctly possible it is.

DeathReaper wrote:

Mythal wrote:
Strictly speaking, the White Dwarf release is a new 'Codex' inasmuch as it categorically states it officially replaces Codex: Witch Hunters. So as of the publication of the second half, Codex: Witch Hunters will be invalidated.

The White Dwarf release is the new Codex, since it replaces the old codex. (Strictly speaking all 5th ed "Codex" are just Updates to the 4th ed ones...)

Which is what I said

DeathReaper wrote:Well when she was solo and ran around melta-pistoling all my tanks and having a 2++ because she rolled = to or over her squad size of 1 on 2d6 that was super OP.

It would indeed have been OP, if that was how Acts of Faith worked for Independent Characters, but it wasn't. I'm surprised you never worked out how to neuter the Flying Nun, though - if you engage her in melee with almost anything, you can tarpit her for a game turn or two, and in that time she can't shoot your tanks and she burns most of her army's entire faith store just to stay alive. Also, the Flying Nun used an inferior AP2 variant of the Inferno Pistol - so if your opponent was trying to crib the +1 on the Damage Table, he was cheating.

PraetorDave wrote:I'm fairly new to 40k but I heard someone say that GW did the same thing to blood angels. Release a WD codex that blows, then a few months later release a real codex that rocks. Do you think they did the same thing twice?

Why do people on this board have such a hard time telling the difference between 'months' and 'years?'

Bookwrack wrote:

PraetorDave wrote:I'm fairly new to 40k but I heard someone say that GW did the same thing to blood angels. Release a WD codex that blows, then a few months later release a real codex that rocks. Do you think they did the same thing twice?

Why do people on this board have such a hard time telling the difference between 'months' and 'years?'

That may not be it.

It may simply be that most of them - well, us, since I totally took a 2-4 year hiatus from the game around the middle of the last decade - are relying on what we've heard from others. I've noticed I have a tendency to believe what people say is the truth, unless I have reason to believe otherwise, so if it seems reasonably plausible, I tend to believe it. I then forget over the following while that I just heard it from one person, and take it as factual knowledge in my memory, assuming it goes unchallenged.

That's exactly what would've happened to me with this thing we're talking about now, had people not stepped in and corrected those saying months. And in a few weeks or months, I may have been repeating the erroneous information.

Melissia wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:I liked the fact that a cannoness is no longer nigh immune to the game.

She never was.

DeathReaper wrote:Well when she was solo and ran around melta-pistoling all my tanks and having a 2++ because she rolled = to or over her squad size of 1 on 2d6 that was super OP.

Leadership test. And only one phase per faith point.

PHASE. Not turn. So in an assault, two acts of faith were used upp per game turn.

So My opponent was cheating (I do not think it was on purpose, he would not cheat, He probably misunderstood)

Well that makes it a bit more fair.

PraetorDave wrote:I'm fairly new to 40k but I heard someone say that GW did the same thing to blood angels. Release a WD codex that blows, then a few months later release a real codex that rocks. Do you think they did the same thing twice?

If by months you mean 3 years then yeah, you're right.

I have no idea why everyone thinks it was a few months.

Pouncey wrote:It may simply be that most of them - well, us, since I totally took a 2-4 year hiatus from the game around the middle of the last decade - are relying on what we've heard from others. I've noticed I have a tendency to believe what people say is the truth, unless I have reason to believe otherwise, so if it seems reasonably plausible, I tend to believe it. I then forget over the following while that I just heard it from one person, and take it as factual knowledge in my memory, assuming it goes unchallenged.

Indeed, there seem to be quite a few such "established assumptions" resiliently holding out within the community. The belief that BL novels are "canon", or the steadfast conviction that Space Marines are 8+ feet in size are two more of such myths - though the latter likely spawned from the former and some BL authors' artistic license.

I myself have been taken in by that mistake as well until I actually went hunting for quotes and sources as I grew more suspicious. And just like you I also simply believed people when they said it was "months" regarding the BA Codex. Goes to show how the "hive mind" principle can sometimes lead people astray rather than correcting itself...

Thanks for pointing out the truth.

I am really interested on how much they will cost, I really cant wait until next month.

Though i know they will drastically change when the Codex is reprinted in book form.

Lynata wrote:Indeed, there seem to be quite a few such "established assumptions" resiliently holding out within the community. The belief that BL novels are "canon", or the steadfast conviction that Space Marines are 8+ feet in size

Or the idea that the Avatar should be able to best Marneus Calgar in combat, or the stubborn insistance that Praxedes is a Saint rather than a mere Canoness. A lot of folks seem to try and take 'old' Codices as canon over new Codices, which is just as idiosyncratic as taking BL novels as canon over published Codices. It's Games Workshop's IP, after all - they can do what they like with it

The revised lore in the Sisters of Battle codex, removing all mention of the Convocation of Nephilim and redacting the whole 'Chamber Militant of the Ordo Hereticus' concept - taken in conjunction with Codex: Grey Knights - is an interesting move, but not unexpected, allowing a deeper exploration of the Ecclesiarchy in a future full Codex release. The changes to the fluff of Uriah Jacobus and Saint Celestine to make them 'alive' to field are also welcome, to my mind.

Lynata wrote:Indeed, there seem to be quite a few such "established assumptions" resiliently holding out within the community. The belief that BL novels are "canon", or the steadfast conviction that Space Marines are 8+ feet in size

Have you ever seen the statue of a Space marine outside of a GW store? they are big!

Mythal wrote:A lot of folks seem to try and take 'old' Codices as canon over new Codices

Yes, of course that is just as wrong. This is a bit more difficult, though - personally, I am operating under the assumption that old studio material remains valid until contradicted (i.e. retconned) by newer stuff. The problem with Praxedes' sainthood or the inquisitorial connection in the new Codex is that the measly four pages doesn't exactly contradict it, it just leaves it unmentioned. Though you could probably interpret the list of the Sororitas' duties ("fighting the Ecclesiarchy's wars, praying or training") in a way that it does mean a retcon...

Either way, I can see why there will be multiple interpretations of this. I just hope that future material will give us some more "hints" regarding this.

What clearly is a retcon, though, is that Praxedes is now KIA rather than MIA. Which is a shame. The old myth about her "continueing the fight" was pretty cool.

DeathReaper wrote:Have you ever seen the statue of a Space marine outside of a GW store? they are big!

I've seen some photos. But honestly, 7-7.6 feet already is huge. You don't need to go even higher, especially since it stops making sense when you keep in mind that Marines also utilize some stuff that was clearly meant for normal humans, such as the Rhino APC. It also helps to regard the sheer bulk of an Astartes, though, after all he's at least twice as wide as a human. Or, as Jes Goodwin said: "It's not the height, really."

I personally think it made total sense putting them in with the GK because they were formed at the same time and formed by the Sigillite.

DeathReaper wrote:

Lynata wrote:Indeed, there seem to be quite a few such "established assumptions" resiliently holding out within the community. The belief that BL novels are "canon", or the steadfast conviction that Space Marines are 8+ feet in size

Have you ever seen the statue of a Space marine outside of a GW store? they are big!

Actually, no, not in real life...

Mainly because my local GW doesn't have a Space Marine statue... They might have a cardboard poster in the window, though it's hard to remember, since it's not something I pay much attention to...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lynata wrote:

Mythal wrote:A lot of folks seem to try and take 'old' Codices as canon over new Codices

Yes, of course that is just as wrong. This is a bit more difficult, though - personally, I am operating under the assumption that old studio material remains valid until contradicted (i.e. retconned) by newer stuff. The problem with Praxedes' sainthood or the inquisitorial connection in the new Codex is that the measly four pages doesn't exactly contradict it, it just leaves it unmentioned. Though you could probably interpret the list of the Sororitas' duties ("fighting the Ecclesiarchy's wars, praying or training") in a way that it does mean a retcon...

Either way, I can see why there will be multiple interpretations of this. I just hope that future material will give us some more "hints" regarding this.

What clearly is a retcon, though, is that Praxedes is now KIA rather than MIA. Which is a shame. The old myth about her "continueing the fight" was pretty cool.

Well...

The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

Ever heard the song, "Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner?" Long story short, he fought as a mercenary, was murdered by his buddy at the behest of the CIA, his headless... body or ghost, not sure which, killed the guy who killed him, and then went on killing some more and continuing the fight all over the world.

Pouncey wrote:The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

I tried reading a potential survival and disappearance into the new version, but I fear that "mortal blow" and "martyrdom" are too unambiguous. :(

Oh well. I just wish I knew why they changed that. It was the perfect stuff for legends!

Lynata wrote:

Pouncey wrote:The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

I tried reading a potential survival and disappearance into the new version, but I fear that "mortal blow" and "martyrdom" are too unambiguous. :(

Oh well. I just wish I knew why they changed that. It was the perfect stuff for legends!

Well, Mortal Blow is an attack in World of Warcraft that doesn't necessarily finish off a wounded opponent. Wait, that's Mortal Strike.

And remember, Saint Celestine was thought to be dead for years, so much so that some bells somewhere on Terra tolled once, and everyone in earshot knew she was dead.

Maybe I'll have to go check my WD for details. It's gotta be more survivable than ground zero of an atomic pile going up, though.

Edit, nevermind. The part where her Sisters, "...avenge the death of their beloved Canoness..." kinda gave it away. Since they won, they doubtless retrieved her body.

Mythal wrote:or the stubborn insistance that Praxedes is a Saint rather than a mere Canoness.

She is.

"Saint" is declared post-mortem. She's not a Living Saint, but she is a Saint. Her given title was Saint Praxedes of Ophelia VII.