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.

Can Inq. Coteaz from the GK codex make your allied Inquisitor Codex Henchmen troops?

While Coteaz from the =I= dex states he makes henchmen from the same detachment scoring, the GK version of Coteaz simply says Henchemn squads "in the same army" become troops. And yes the henchmen units in both books are called "Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands".

He does not make them scoring, he makes them troops.

Inqus codex got no troop slits, only elites.

Wont work even if he does influence them.

Sorry that's what I meant. Troops. Edited for clarification. There is no troop slot in the Inquisition Codex however. So I'd imagine that would be the issue...

Second question. The Inquisition codex can ally with itself. So Coteaz in a Primary =I= attachment allied to another =I= Attachment, all Henchmen score?

I would assume not fella, as they are in different detachments, you've kinda answered that yourself in your first post above.

 WhiteDevil wrote:


Second question. The Inquisition codex can ally with itself. So Coteaz in a Primary =I= attachment allied to another =I= Attachment, all Henchmen score?

I dont think they can ally with themselves. It states that you can either take them as primary, or alternately a special Inquisitor detachment. Not both. The fact that they use the word alternately makes it clear i think.

 WhiteDevil wrote:
Can Inq. Coteaz from the GK codex make your allied Inquisitor Codex Henchmen troops?

While Coteaz from the =I= dex states he makes henchmen from the same detachment scoring, the GK version of Coteaz simply says Henchemn squads "in the same army" become troops. And yes the henchmen units in both books are called "Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands".

GK Coteaz says, "Inquisitorial Henchmen warbands" in your "army" are scoring; the Inquisition Codex allows you to take "Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands" which will, of course, be part of your army.
RAW it works.
I also don't see a problem RAI. He's Coteaz. He can do what he well pleases.
I do fully expect the word "army" to be changed to "GK detachment" if Coteaz is still part of the 6e GK book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SpankingApe wrote:
I would assume not fella, as they are in different detachments, you've kinda answered that yourself in your first post above.

Could you explain why you think "detachment" is an important word, when GK Coteaz's rule clearly says "army," which includes all detachments?

You can take them as an allied detachment and you can take them as as an inquisitorial detachment (not allied detachment). The wording is a bit vague but the allied chart shows how the two different detachments would interact instead of being black like other situations and that clears up any RAI issues for me until an amendment.

1) If you take GK Coteaz as part of any Grey Knight Detachment then all IHW units in your army, including those in an inquisitorial detachment, must be taken as troops and cannot be taken as elites. So don't do this... ever. I imagine if this because an issue then the GK codex will get an errata to change army to detachment.

2) IHW units in a Primary Detachment taken from Codex Inquisition are scoring units. If you take an inquisitional detachment in addition to this primary detachment it must have =I= Coteaz as an HQ for that detachments IHW units to also be scoring.


In short, never take GK Coteaz unless you want to take Banishers instead of Priests.

Polecat wrote:

 WhiteDevil wrote:


Second question. The Inquisition codex can ally with itself. So Coteaz in a Primary =I= attachment allied to another =I= Attachment, all Henchmen score?

I dont think they can ally with themselves. It states that you can either take them as primary, or alternately a special Inquisitor detachment. Not both. The fact that they use the word alternately makes it clear i think.

actually, yes I can allly with I, it specifically says it can, and it has an allies matrix with itself showing it is BB with itself,

so yes, 4 HQ + 6 elites for a INQ army

For the OP,

again codex I is very clear on this, coteaz only makes henchmen in his detachment "scoring" weather through making them troops VIA GK codex, or making them "scoring" via INQ codex.

if INQ is primary detach, henchies are scoring without coteaz, but only in the primary detach.

However, what you seem to miss, is that if GK coteaz is in the army at all, the warbands are not scoring, they are TROOPS.

And inqusitor armies can't take troops.

Therefor, until FAQ, coteaz in GK as allied or primary would prevent you from taking any warbands from the inq codex.


Now, I'm not sure about the precice wording of the inq codex one (somebody can PM me a quote of the phrase that makes the warbands scoring if your primary is inq) so I'm not sure if it works that having a main inqusition force makes any and all warbands scoring (including allied ones)

 BoomWolf wrote:

Now, I'm not sure about the precice wording of the inq codex one (somebody can PM me a quote of the phrase that makes the warbands scoring if your primary is inq) so I'm not sure if it works that having a main inqusition force makes any and all warbands scoring (including allied ones)

Its just before the =I= FOC. "If you take the Inquisitorial detachment as your primary detachment, then Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands are scoring units."

think about it,

do any of the SM special characters that unlock bikers or some unit as troops,

unlock that unit as troops for their ally when allied with other SM's?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
whoops, double tap

 DJGietzen wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Now, I'm not sure about the precice wording of the inq codex one (somebody can PM me a quote of the phrase that makes the warbands scoring if your primary is inq) so I'm not sure if it works that having a main inqusition force makes any and all warbands scoring (including allied ones)

Its just before the =I= FOC. "If you take the Inquisitorial detachment as your primary detachment, then Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands are scoring units."

I asked as I didnt buy the ebook, being tau and all its not much value to me (though tempting to build myself a small inquisitional force for killteams/combat patrol)

So, judging by that wording. I'd say that if you ally Inquisition with more Inquisition-both sides have scoring henchmen, right? after all its the same codex, and the same unit, and unlike space marines-there is no chapter tactics difference or anything.
Would be a real chore to pull off a stand-alone inquisition army if its wrong. (its probably RAI, but RAW is the question.)

NO... coteaz from codex GK only affects henchmen from codex GK, these henchmen are a unique unit, ONLY available to codex GK

coteaz from codex INQ only affects henchmen from codex INQ...these are a unique unit, available only to codex INQ.

coteaz has different rules in the two codexes, and the henchmen units ALSO are different in the rules between the codexes,

they are NOT identical units, and are not interchangeable as you suggest. rules for one, do not apply to the other, unless specifically stated as such.


or do you argue that I can take priests in a nilla GK list?

as well as taking the special INQ warlord trait in a nilla GK list?

as well as counting henchmen as scoring elites in nilla GK dex?

as well as giving the special equipment available only in C:I to the inquisitors in codex GK?

that is what happens when you incorrectly treat two different units, from two different codexes, as the same unit.

you are literally saying two different units are interchangeable, when they are not.

coteaz' rules, are in reference to the appropriate unit of henchmen for his specific codex, depending on what codex "coteaz" is from (there are literally TWO units of coteaz now, they are different in the rules, although not in name)

these "coteaz" and "henchmen" are proven different in RAW (due to options, rules, differences and so on)

so when you assert that they are all the same unit, being referenced in two totally separate codex's, you are demonstrably, wrong.

you need to have the rules if you want to argue RAW with any kind of authority/meaning boomwolf

What does GK has anything to do with it? I asked specifically about Inq main+Inq secondary, no GK involved.

I thought "ally Inquisition with more Inquisition" is pretty clear that no GK are involved, apparently not.

 BoomWolf wrote:
However, what you seem to miss, is that if GK coteaz is in the army at all, the warbands are not scoring, they are TROOPS.

And inqusitor armies can't take troops.

Therefor, until FAQ, coteaz in GK as allied or primary would prevent you from taking any warbands from the inq codex.

boom, you spoke about GK right there,
and asserted that GK coteaz, could affect C:I henchmen, making them impossible to take,.

however, GK coteaz, only references the GK unit henchmen, it makes no reference to another codexes unit,C:I henchmen. they are different units, with different rules.

the two codexes, have two different units for henchmen, and they are not the same/interchangeable as your assertion would suggest.

as above, that is demonstrably illegal, as both coteaz' and both henchmen units, are completely different,

I'm curious as to who feels the need for more than 6 henchman squads (max 72 models) in games under 2k.

We moved PAST that point now, we BOTH had comments from then, the subject was concluded, and your interpretation was deemed right, WHY do you keep dwelling on it!?

The subject I raised after, if you would read it, is what happens you you join INQUISITION as your primary with INQUISITION, with no GK involved. just inquisition.
Are all warbands now scoring, or only the ones from the primary?

 BoomWolf wrote:
what happens you you join INQUISITION as your primary with INQUISITION, with no GK involved. just inquisition.
Are all warbands now scoring, or only the ones from the primary?

glad its all cleared up then,

to answer
the way its worded in C:I,

If you take the Inquisitorial detachment as your primary detachment, then Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands are scoring units.

seems like RAI to me, is that they obviously want you to have 6 scoring possible like everyone else

RAW, i think agree with RAI, as they seem to be specifically referencing all of C:I's warband units, with no restrictions on it.
but It doesnt say specifically how that relates to self allying with C:I, so i expect a lot of people to argue that because its not spelt out in dumbglish for them, that they only get 3 scoring.

 greyknight12 wrote:
I'm curious as to who feels the need for more than 6 henchman squads (max 72 models) in games under 2k.

6? How about 8 with GK Coteaz as allies. Also, i feel the need. I haven't even starting toying with a list, but I think it'd be pretty awesome to just be 100% inquisition with 5 inquisitors running around the table. Tournament viable? Probably not, but I'm going to try for 2k.

 greyknight12 wrote:
I'm curious as to who feels the need for more than 6 henchman squads (max 72 models) in games under 2k.

the dedicated transports is why its nice for GK's

also I had the exact thought "i can only take 72 henchmen, damn" a bit before this dex was announced.


thank you flying spaghetti monster!

BoomWolf wrote:So, judging by that wording. I'd say that if you ally Inquisition with more Inquisition-both sides have scoring henchmen, right?

Upon a bit of reflect I think you are right. If you had a Primary Codex Inquisition detachment and an inquisitorial detachment then all the the henchmen would be scoring, regardless of detachment.

Lets develop this further, if you main the inqusition, and have allied GK, with a regular inquisitor HQ, and elite warband, do THEY score?

If not, then how can the rules tell apart these two identical names?

If yes, then where does the line of cross-codex interference cease?

Having the same unit with different rules on two codecies is a pain x_x hope they remove the GK ones soon and be done with it.

 easysauce wrote:
NO... coteaz from codex GK only affects henchmen from codex GK, these henchmen are a unique unit, ONLY available to codex GK

That is an interesting claim, I look forward to proof.

easysauce wrote: coteaz from codex INQ only affects henchmen from codex INQ...these are a unique unit, available only to codex INQ.

coteaz has different rules in the two codexes, and the henchmen units ALSO are different in the rules between the codexes,

they are NOT identical units, and are not interchangeable as you suggest. rules for one, do not apply to the other, unless specifically stated as such.

No one suggested they are interchangeable. What has been suggested is that the two different types of henchmen units will both be affected by the GK Lord of Formosa rule because they both qualify as "Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands in an army that includes Corteaz" and that because this rule is a property of the GK version of Corteaz it is only in effect when the GK version of Corteaz is in your army.

easysauce wrote:coteaz' rules, are in reference to the appropriate unit of henchmen for his specific codex, depending on what codex "coteaz" is from (there are literally TWO units of coteaz now, they are different in the rules, although not in name)

these "coteaz" and "henchmen" are proven different in RAW (due to options, rules, differences and so on)

While they are different units with different options and different rules, they both qualify as "Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands" much in the same way Corteaz and Valeria are both qualify as an "Inquisitor"

 BoomWolf wrote:
Lets develop this further, if you main the inqusition, and have allied GK, with a regular inquisitor HQ, and elite warband, do THEY score? NO, THEY ARE SEPARATE UNITS WITH SEPARATE RULES

If not, then how can the rules tell apart these two identical names?THEY HAVE DIFFERENT RULES< AND ARE IN DIFFERENT CODEXES

If yes, then where does the line of cross-codex interference cease? WHEN YOU ARE NOT APPLYING RULES/WARGEAR/WHATEVER FROM ONE CODEXES UNIT CODEX TO ANOTHER, henchmenGK=/=henchmenI just as dreadnoughtBA=/=dreadnaughtGK JUST AS YOU CANT TAKE THE BA MISSLES ON A GK STORMRAVEN ECT ECT

Having the same unit with different rules on two codecies is a pain x_x hope they remove the GK ones soon and be done with it. AGAIN< ITS NOT THE SAME UNIT< THAT IT HAS DIFFERENT RULES, AND IS IN DIFFERENT CODEX"S PROVES THIS

my answers in caps... I thought you had already conceeded this...

so now every reference, in any book, to space marines, grants every space marine that ability?

regardless of codex?

there are rules for C:I inquisitors and henchmen, there are different rules for GK inquisitors and henchmen, they are not the same unit under the rules.... they have different option, rules, codexes, thats how you can tell,
the same way we tell all the different SM chapters tac squads, dreads, storm ravens, and so on apart between all the marine codexes...

 BoomWolf wrote:
We moved PAST that point now, we BOTH had comments from then, the subject was concluded, and your interpretation was deemed right, WHY do you keep dwelling on it!?

dont know why i was correct half a page up, and now you are trying to argue the same thing again...

Nobody claimed they are the same unit, however the rules refering them do not give any hint except RAI as to what version (if only one) each means.

The rules looks of a name, and both share the name-therefor, why WONT it work? the two units being different is not enough, they both qualify, as DJGietzenMade mentioned that named inquisitors are still inquisitors.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Nobody claimed they are the same unit, however the rules refering them do not give any hint except RAI as to what version (if only one) each means.

The rules looks of a name, and both share the name-therefor, why WONT it work? the two units being different is not enough, they both qualify, as DJGietzenMade mentioned that named inquisitors are still inquisitors.

Because of Context.

The Context in the rules for Coteaz in the GK codex are only talking about the Henchman squads from the GK Codex. This must be true because Codex Inquisition was not made when C GK came out therefore any rules within could not possibly be talking about the Inquisitoral Codex.

 easysauce wrote:


so now every reference, in any book, to space marines, grants every space marine that ability?

regardless of codex?

What other codex do you see that has "Space Marines" in it? The other MEQ codicies never refer to them as "Space Marines".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

The Context in the rules for Coteaz in the GK codex are only talking about the Henchman squads from the GK Codex. This must be true because Codex Inquisition was not made when C GK came out therefore any rules within could not possibly be talking about the Inquisitoral Codex.

Are you arguing RAI or RAW? In an RAW discussion situational context like this has no baring, only grammatical context does, and unfortunately grammatical context does not dissuade the RAW argument put forth. But your right I think the Intent was clear and HIWPI would be from the intent and not the RAW.

 DJGietzen wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

The Context in the rules for Coteaz in the GK codex are only talking about the Henchman squads from the GK Codex. This must be true because Codex Inquisition was not made when C GK came out therefore any rules within could not possibly be talking about the Inquisitoral Codex.

Are you arguing RAI or RAW? In an RAW discussion situational context like this has no baring, only grammatical context does, and unfortunately grammatical context does not dissuade the RAW argument put forth. But your right I think the Intent was clear and HIWPI would be from the intent and not the RAW.

RAW of course.

The context of the rules matter.

The Context of "army" as noted in the GK Codex is specifically talking about an army list chosen from Codex Grey Knights.

Page 81 tells us what army means when they use the word army in the GK Codex.

 DeathReaper wrote:


RAW of course.

The context of the rules matter.

The Context of "army" as noted in the GK Codex is specifically talking about an army list chosen from Codex Grey Knights.

Page 81 tells us what army means when they use the word army in the GK Codex.

Unfortunately pg 81 of the codex defines an army list, not an army. Because the army list is used in conjunction with the force organisation chart from the scenario, and all the scenario's in the BRB use a chart that divides an army into 3 detachments pg 81 of the codex and 109 of the BRB tell us that the Grey Knights army list is used to field a detachment, not an entire army.

I made a posting about this subject as well and the way the Alabama Cage match decided to judge this is that GK Coteaz does not effect the the Inquisition Codex due to the fact that they have no troop slots and if it could effect it then it would make the dex unusable. This also led to what they thought was intended by GW and there is no way they would make something that would break itself like that. so Army must mean separate detachments are separate armies.

That being said, now due to the fact that there are 2 armies on the board i figured i should be allowed to use my coteaz from both codex, but that is not being allowed due to page 110 or 109 whichever talks about unique characters in your "army". but because a large % of the player base dislikes the idea of someone using the codex like this with 2 unique characters it was deemed unusable even though they are technically different and from 2 different codex.

I personally think that we should be able to use 2 coteaz because they have completely separate profiles in 2 separate books.

Now my support for this was actually given to me in an argument. I believe it was boom wolf in fact mentioned that if 2 Coteaz could be run (one from each dex) then other codex such as Tau that he run should be able to use double of their characters, after seeing that and reading this page i realized that the reason 2 Coteaz should be able to be fielded is that none of the other "unique" characters have a profile in more then one dex. most supplements allow you to use the army list form codex "X" i believe. that's why you dont see 2 abbadons or farsights walking around.