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.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Thinking about Codex Inquisition, perhaps I was going about this the wrong way. Similar to how C: CSM has strong focus on the Chaos Marines, Codex: Inquisition should focus on the Inquisitors and their personal resources. Anything else (i.e. Chambers Militant and Inducted forces) should be secondary, and may be handled more akin to generic Lesser Daemons.

That necessarily means that Sisters of Battle would need a stand-alone Codex again, in much the same way that Chaos Daemons now have their own book. It also means that Grey Knights and Deathwatch become much smaller, and don't get fleshed out much further in this book, but similarly implies that Grey Knights would get their own book later. IMO, this is no great loss, as neither Grey Knights nor Deathwatch have been handled very well to date. Yes, the GK got PA versions, which then doubled as FA and HA, but that's all pretty weaksauce for an upgrade, which is why C: DH is a real disaster. It would be much better if GW were to take the time to make a full Codex: Grey Knights, and do it properly.

The whole point of a Codex: Inquisition was to combine the three ordos of the Inquisition and all their assets into a single book. This is in anticipation of the fact that this is what GW has said they intend to do to cut down on the number of codex books. You've just proposed that instead of having 3 books they should have 4. The Daemonhunter and Witchhunters codices were originally done to showcase the Chamber militant which each have stronger following than the Inquisition alone. You've sawn the legs off a three legged stool and expect it to some how stand. In a game about warfare why would the militant arm of the three ordos "be secondary." The thing that you call secondary is really the whole purpose of a Codex: Inquisition, the inquisition is just what ties them all together.

You have just thrown out the whole reason a Codex: Inquisition is going to be done. In the words of HBMC: what are you smoking?


-Generic Lesser Daemons is the biggest thing to piss people off about that codex, so thats a bad idea.

-The "personal resources" of an Inquisitor are strictly speaking just his retinue, everything else is borrowed.

-The inducted forces are borrowed forces. What you really want can much more easily be accomplished by going back to third edition and making something like the Codex Assassin that any Imperial Force could use, but with the Inquisitor. Arbitrary rule sets not based on anything thats remotely established walks the line of being a waste of time. The type of Inquisitor led force you intend and describe will be represented by the Inquisitor option that is suppose to be in the next Codex: Imperial Guard.

I think if you had your way and a Codex Inquisition left out the chamber militants... most people would go "WTF?" As Codex: Inquisition would do nothing to remedy the situation that it is intended for.

aka_mythos wrote:Arbitrary: subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion.

Your counting method is arbitrary because you are drawing distinctions in ways other than they way they're intended.

By that definition, everything here is arbitrary. For example, the proposed lists and "units" are arbitrarily compbined. And in the counter-example, one might as well lump all SM together as a 3 entries: SM Character, SM Unit, SM Vehicle.

In any case, your use of the word arbitrary is deliberately imprecise, as it implies there isn't any method or reasoning behind it.

So here's my 2 cents.

I'd rather see more Sisters of Battle than see them sublimated into a Codex: Crap.

Grey Knights are about as worthy of a Codex as Assassins were.

I could care less about "Alien Hunters" aka the Xenos fighters.

Hello, they call those Space Marines and IG. We don't need more retardedness along this pattern.

While I think this is a good discussion, I think you guys are missing a few things:

There is no "Xenos" Inquisition.

Grey Knight players are few and far between...because they are just another Space Marine chapter, really.

So that leaves only Sisters as a unique element in the 40k universe.

I personally love the Sisters. Two more smurf chapters? How about, not?

Give them both a Blood Angels treatment, and be done with them.

Make another Sisters Codex, the only one with a heart and soul.

The inquisition was always a gakky way for Gav to shove his crappy Inquisitor game down everyone's throat and sadly it removed alot of the fun unique units from the Sisters and grouped them into weird little groups. Which in the next book will be "whittled" down to 'healer', 'gunner', 'bs guy'. Gee, can I have 3 of each? Neat! Next edition after, I can run...imperial guardsmen as my "retinue".

So please, let's not go that way.

Restore Sisters of Battle, remove the Witch Hunters inquisition crap, don't add the Xenos crap, and put the GK into a web pdf and allow anyone to run them in an Imperial army. Oh, and no lame 'special demon rules to balance for non-demon games points blah blah but demons kick our ass' ok?

Thanks. Fries.

Technically, I'm combining all *four* Ordos (Malleus, Heriticus, Xenos, Sicarus) into a single book, along with their (generic) "Chambers" (GK, SoB, DW, Assassins).

GW has retrenched on the Inquisition, because they don't know what to do with it. But if you go back, GW has traditionally had 2 Inquisition themed books since they've done Codices:
- 2E: SoB & Assassins (+ "Agents of the Imperium")
- 3E: SoB & Assassins (+ "Agents of the Imperium")
- 4E: WH (SoB) & DH (Assassins)
This is because this is what actually *works* based on the models GW has produced.

Combining the Ordos and Chambers fails because the Chambers aren't at the same level of detail. Trying to treat them uniformly produces poor results because you have to create a lot of new stuff for GK and DW to make them comparably viable compared to SoB. It's the same problem with the Radical DH, but on a larger scale.

If you look at what's well-established, you have lots of Sisters units with a long history of how that army should work, and you have you have Imperial Agents (i.e. Inquisition) that date back to Rogue Trader. These are armies that can become full Codices. So restore the C: SoB with C: Inquisition replacing C: Assassins while adding Grey Knights and Deathwatch.

By the time Inquisition gets their Codex, the new-style Codices will be in full force. Complex things like what you're wanting will be long gone in favor of much tighter things like what I propose.

And quite frankly, I don't see Sisters retaining the Stormtrooper, Assassin, or Inquisitor options. Nor do I see Imperial Guard gaining an Inquisitor or Assassin option. Which is why that stuff gets rehomed to C: Inquisition. And BTW, what is your source for IG getting an Inquisitor entry in their list. I've been following the IG rumors, and this is news to me.

Multi-book armies are going away in favor of standalone books which may duplicate units from other books. The Land Raider is a pretty good example of this, appearing in DH, WH, SM, CSM, BT, and DA Codices, along with the BA preview, and presumably SW.

Actually, like C: CSM, my proposed C: Inq does a lot to remedy the situation by creating an umbrella under which the various Chambers (like WH) can be placed. So if people can understand how C: Daemons sits under C: CSM, then they'll see how C: SoB sits under C: Inq.

Stelek wrote:So here's my 2 cents.

Interesting. I basically agree with *everything* that you wrote.

So you're not really proposing rules, what you want is just for the Inquisitor stuff to to away, Grey Knights to vanish, and Sisters to get their own book.

So you're proposing the removal of rules.

BYE

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Arbitrary: subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion.

Your counting method is arbitrary because you are drawing distinctions in ways other than they way they're intended.

By that definition, everything here is arbitrary. For example, the proposed lists and "units" are arbitrarily compbined. And in the counter-example, one might as well lump all SM together as a 3 entries: SM Character, SM Unit, SM Vehicle.

In any case, your use of the word arbitrary is deliberately imprecise, as it implies there isn't any method or reasoning behind it.

I claim only your method of counting is specifically arbitrary because you are counting one army in one way and counting the other in a different way just to prove a point. I am pointing out that your analysis fails because once you compare them in the same way they end up being pretty much equal and not the drastic difference you try to imply.

The reason for basing things on pre-established works and fluff is to avoid and marginalize the arbitrary nature of proposed rules.

That definition is from a dictionary man. A better word: biased, you're not trying to be impartial in how you count the units and are using two different counting conventions to prove your point. No matter how often I try to provide a count that attempts to use an equal convention you ignore it.

Mythos, you're never going to get through to him, so don't bother. He's just going to keep doing what he's been doing all thread, and saying why you "can't" do what you've proposed and how GW would do it another way, or how he'd do it (which is just an extension of how he thinks GW would do it).

Isn't the fact that he thinks the Chamber Militant units should be like 'Generic Daemons' proof enough that he hasn't got the faintest clue what this particular sub-forum is about?

BYE

P.S. Don't quote the above. I quite enjoy my anonymity I get from him.

Stelek wrote:So here's my 2 cents.
I'd rather see more Sisters of Battle than see them sublimated into a Codex: Crap.
Grey Knights are about as worthy of a Codex as Assassins were.
I could care less about "Alien Hunters" aka the Xenos fighters.
Hello, they call those Space Marines and IG. We don't need more retardedness along this pattern.
While I think this is a good discussion, I think you guys are missing a few things:
There is no "Xenos" Inquisition.
Grey Knight players are few and far between...because they are just another Space Marine chapter, really.
So that leaves only Sisters as a unique element in the 40k universe.
I personally love the Sisters. Two more smurf chapters? How about, not?
Give them both a Blood Angels treatment, and be done with them.
Make another Sisters Codex, the only one with a heart and soul.

The inquisition was always a gakky way for Gav to shove his crappy Inquisitor game down everyone's throat and sadly it removed alot of the fun unique units from the Sisters and grouped them into weird little groups. Which in the next book will be "whittled" down to 'healer', 'gunner', 'bs guy'. Gee, can I have 3 of each? Neat! Next edition after, I can run...imperial guardsmen as my "retinue".
So please, let's not go that way.
Restore Sisters of Battle, remove the Witch Hunters inquisition crap, don't add the Xenos crap, and put the GK into a web pdf and allow anyone to run them in an Imperial army. Oh, and no lame 'special demon rules to balance for non-demon games points blah blah but demons kick our ass' ok?
Thanks. Fries.

Wow... you're in the wrong place. The whole point of the original post was to find away to combine the three Ordo's and their chamber militant into one book because its what GW has voiced their intent with Inquisition. All you want is a Codex: Sister of Battle. That would be cool and all but if that what you want to discuss you should create a new thread. Hit the back button, to return to the index page in the top left hand corner is button that says "New Topic" click that and type away.

The Inquisitor game came first establishing much of the fluff used in both inquisition codices. They were added into Codices because of their popularity. The units are the way they were in the codex to justify their battlefield presence. It was a great game so flexible so much ambiance but it really required a good GM.

H.B.M.C. wrote:So you're not really proposing rules, what you want is just for the Inquisitor stuff to to away, Grey Knights to vanish, and Sisters to get their own book.

So you're proposing the removal of rules.

YES.

You can "remove" the GK Codex, the Inquistorial crap, and move it to web based PDF's.

Alot easier to update (or when this stuff gets updated in 2020, this is "good"?).


Since Smurfs are getting S6 power weapons, why do GK exist? Right. Get rid of the GK.

Since Xenos don't exist, don't clodge the damn system with more useless crap.

People want to run Arbite and Inquisitorial armies? Fine, PDF on the web. Go nuts.

I want UNIQUE armies. That means Sisters. GK are not unique and neither will Xenos be (hey neat all the DW ammo just got stuffed into the marines codex too...) so why bother putting more support behind crap codices that no one needs to run these?

Ok I give the shrouding to sternguard vets with S6 power weapons (or whatever slowed good unit Jervis pulled out of his ass) and BAM, call them GK. Make sure it's +5 points for GK and +21 for GKT.

/clap

I too, can design stupid units with stupid rules and eliminate entire codices with one line.

SISTERS OF BATTLE = COOL.

Rest = Lame.

Sales of the Inquisition (and the carnival, curse you Hoare!!) show this to be true. I am your father...

Sorry, if you want me to stand around while you guys talk about how 'Awesome' Codex: Inquisition will be, not gonna do it.

Grey Knights are space marines.

Xenos are space marines.

EFF THE SPACE MARINES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sisters are a unique force in the 40k universe and that is what players need.

NOT MORE SPACE MARINES WITH CRAP RULES WRITTEN FOR CHILDREN 10 AND UNDER!!!

Thanks for listening.

I'm all for Sisters getting their own book, but please dude this is the totally wrong topic to be debating that in.

If you want Grey Knights to go than they're gonna have to get crammed into Codex: Space Marines, as I can't see why the Legion of the Damned would get their own unit entries than the Grey Knights should get their own as well since they also are fairly popular and do have their own models. Sounds fair, no?"

So what your basically saying is that you want Inquisitors to get their own Codex, but to have barely any units in it? Sure the army is fairly Space Marine heavy right now, but if you take away those than all that's going to happen is GW is going to throw more "Inquisitorial" Guard units in there. Take a look at what you'd have if you stripped away Grey Knights, Deathwatch, and Battle Sisters:

Inquisitor Lord
Priests
Inquisitors
Assassin
Death-cult Assassins
Arco-flagellants
Daemonhosts
Inquisitorial Storm Troopers
Penitent Engine

Even if you added Xenos Mercenaries and Alpha Psykers that would still only be 11 units, you'd need at least another 9 units for the Codex to be up to today's standards of unit numbers required to make a Codex (that being roughly 20, not including Transports and Special Characters). We already have enough people who are pretty angry at the fact that GW dropped Squat, Lost and the Damned, Salamanders, and now Blood Angels if what I heard is correct. I doubt that if GW left GK out of the new Inquisitor Codex that they'd include Battle Sisters or give them their own Codex.

Also I don't know what lore you guys are reading, but the Chamber Militants are part of the Inquisition, thus at the behest of the Inquisition. Yes, including your precious Sisters of Battle. Also I don't know where you're getting that the Ordos Xenos doesn't exist. It clearly does as its been in the fluff for quite a while now. The Emperor created the Ordos Xenos shortly before the Great Crusade in order to investigate, catalog, and destroy any potential alien threats. All Chamber Militant means is that the force is the military arm of the Inquisition.

As for all my squad options within the squads, unless you want me to get rid of Seraphims or Celestines than its really all I can do to keep the squad number down. I also don't see just upgrading a squad to having 4 Special/Heavy Weapons as being such a huge change. The Chosen from the prior (not the current) CSM list were both Terminators and Veterans, yet they only counted as one unit. What I'm suggesting is also much less complicated than the Chosen were.

I'll say it again, I'm all for a Sisters codex, but lets face it, it's not going to happen. If not for Codex Witch Hunters the Sisters of Battle would have been shelved. Be thankful, if your lucky GW won't just make a single generic Battle Sisters squad ala Harlequins or Legion of the Damned in the new Inquisitor Codex. This isn't the place for rabid Battle Sisters fanboy rantings, its a place for potential rules discussion.

Marik, while I agree with you, I have to say its really no use. Those two have problems with concept of a unified Codex, in the way GW intends to do and the way you have effectively achieved. They are sadly railroading this conversation and we should all do our best to stay on topic; not wasting our time justifying a threads existence to people who are stubbornly wasting everyones time.

Marik, I think you've come closes to hitting the nail on the head for a Codex: Inquisition. I think your ideas are very fitting, there are a few tweaks but its mostly nomenclature. I sent you a PM with those minor adjustments and I was wondering what your thoughts on it were?

aka_mythos wrote:Marik, while I agree with you, I have to say its really no use. Those two have problems with concept of a unified Codex, in the way GW intends to do and the way you have effectively achieved. They are sadly railroading this conversation and we should all do our best to stay on topic; not wasting our time justifying a threads existence to people who are stubbornly wasting everyones time.

[WarSeer]
Guys, I apologize for disagreeing with you and proposing an alternative. I had forgotten that board rules disallow dissent or disagreement, and that proposal or discussion of alternatives under "Proposed Rules" was not allowed. I thought I was on another board that allowed creative thought and alternative proposals. I wasn't aware that we were only allowed to say "Good job, attaboy." [golf clap]
[/WarSeer]

[Dakka]
Dude, grow up. You guys aren't the only ones who can come up with a new idea, and not everybody needs to agree with it. Codex: Inquisition isn't a single concept, and right now "sales category: 'Inquisition'" is more of a holding bin than anything else. Stelek makes good points, and he's backed by a tradition of rules, Fluff, and models that go back to Rogue Trader. Strong Fluff goes back more than one edition. In other words, just deal with the fact that not everyone agrees.
[/Dakka]

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Marik, while I agree with you, I have to say its really no use. Those two have problems with concept of a unified Codex, in the way GW intends to do and the way you have effectively achieved. They are sadly railroading this conversation and we should all do our best to stay on topic; not wasting our time justifying a threads existence to people who are stubbornly wasting everyones time.

[WarSeer]
Guys, I apologize for disagreeing with you and proposing an alternative. I had forgotten that board rules disallow dissent or disagreement, and that proposal or discussion of alternatives under "Proposed Rules" was not allowed. I thought I was on another board that allowed creative thought and alternative proposals. I wasn't aware that we were only allowed to say "Good job, attaboy." [golf clap]
[/WarSeer]

[Dakka]
Dude, grow up. You guys aren't the only ones who can come up with a new idea, and not everybody needs to agree with it. Codex: Inquisition isn't a single concept, and right now "sales category: 'Inquisition'" is more of a holding bin than anything else. Stelek makes good points, and he's backed by a tradition of rules, Fluff, and models that go back to Rogue Trader. Strong Fluff goes back more than one edition. In other words, just deal with the fact that not everyone agrees.
[/Dakka]

You're free to disagree with specific ideas, but you two effectively disagree with the entirety of the concept. You keep trying to railroad the discussion from the discussion of that core concept to something other than it. If what you want to discuss is other than the threads established core concept it deserves its own thread. I don't oppose your idea, I just think that what you and stelek want to talk about is fundamentally different from what we're talking about.

Disagree and feel free to propose specific alternatives in line with the core concept, but don't flame. Argue ideas do not attack people.

I think Marik has come closest to what the original poster intended and I happen to agree with his approach because it accomplish the goals that were put out there. So while you and stelek don't like the concept of a unified all encompassing codex for the inquisition it is the subject of this discussion.

Also an all Sisters of Battle codex is furthest from fluff. In Rogue Trader there was only one Ordo of the Inquisition and that was the ordo malleus and their Grey Knights. The next ordo mentioned was the Ordo Xenos featured in an article following Inquisitor Cryptman and Deathwatch squad in his discovery of a hivefleet approaching an Ork controlled planet and his observations of this new threat. The last and final Ordo created both in fluff and in actuallity were the Ordo Hereticus; where the other two ordos were created by emperor himself the ordo hereticus was established long after the emperor was bound to the golden thrown they originate in the Age of Apostasy to create a check on the power of the ecclesiarchy; the sisters of battle were born out of a loop hole that specifically band such a force. Where the first two ordos existed in Rogue Trader, Sisters of Battle and Ordo Hereticus were invented in 2nd edition.

I find myself leaning more toward Stelek's interpretation. It does seem to me that you could make the Inquisition codex entirely based around the Sisters of Battle as the primary force with options for Daemonhunters and Deathwatch as single troop or elite choices within that force (or separate PDF codexes) more coherently than attempting to create a giant supercodex that integrates all three exhaustively.

Really, the Grey Knights don't "deserve" to be an actual Army. It plays like a single troop, elite, and heavy support option because that's really all there is.

Sisters, on the other hand, seem to be distinctive enough on their own to warrant their own codex with plastic models. We never see Grey Knight armies because your whole army is three different models. We never see Sisters armies because they're all made out of metal and expensive as hell (this can also apply to GKs). Why not solve both by sidelining the GKs, which is in-line with their ultrarare, ultraelite status, and generating more interest for Sisters?

Deathwatch is just normal marines with black armor and multicolored shoulderpads. Give them the new Ap3 ammo that's coming out with the new marine dex if you don't feel they're special enough.

Wait, you are using "GW created the fluff for GK first" as an argument?

How about this.

Sisters were a playable army in 1997. Not the crap joke armies that were the Deathwatch (not an army), Grey knights (also not an army), or Necrons (a very amusing scarab unit but else a crappy army). The latter two were not improved much with actual Codices.

Grey knights are grey knights with smurf raiders or imperial guard. So....the same as they were before, but with a neat little book for you to buy.

Sisters had the original list, a fanatic list, the white dwarf list, ca2002, and a full on codex that actually added on to them with more units (ones I personally despise, but they actually got new models where the GK just got more marines in pretty armor and as sourclams pointed out...the model range is so impressive).

If I were you, I'd check my facts first.

Sisters are in fact the longest running Ordos 'army' by many years, and despite their cost there are many players who run them.

GK are no less expensive, yet people don't run the army (because it's almost as boring as Necrons, which is really saying something).

Hopefully you see the light. If not, I can send a Sister around to purify you.

aka_mythos wrote:You're free to disagree with specific ideas, but you two effectively disagree with the entirety of the concept. You keep trying to railroad the discussion from the discussion of that core concept to something other than it. If what you want to discuss is other than the threads established core concept it deserves its own thread. I don't oppose your idea, I just think that what you and stelek want to talk about is fundamentally different from what we're talking about.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

This isn't a discussion about if Grey Knights 'deserve' a Codex (I have friends who would argue that they've been waiting for a Grey Knight list ever since they were first invented... oh wait... Grey Knights did have a full army list when they were first invented), this is a discussion about proposing rules for a unified Inquisition Codex.

Now you guys (Stelek, Jonny-boy) may want Sisters to have their own separate Codex, and I certainly don't disagree with that notion, but that's not what this thread is about. At the end of the day, the Chambers Militant (all three of them), are part of this system now, so rather than whining about Sisters getting their own 'Dex and Grey Knights just being 'smurfs' (seriously Stelek, do you know how stupid you sound when you sound off about 'Smurfs'), and try to either think up ways to make a unified Inquisition Codex, or shut up and go away.

BYE

Well, maybe I'm just way out in left field in my interpretation, but that's more or less what I'm in favor of: a unified Inquisition codex, but one that uses the Sisters as a baseline. i.e. an Inquisition army is going to primarily be Sisters of Battle, with the option of taking PAGK or Deathwatch as troop choices or GK terms with land raider transports as elite choices.

This, to me, is the single most simple consolidation of the three lists: GK don't have much that warrants a full codex, Deathwatch definitely don't have anything that warrants a full codex, and Sisters, while having enough to warrant a full codex, don't represent fully the three arms of the Inquisition although they do constitute the majority of its standing forces from a pure numbers standpoint.

HBMC, you want to have GK and Xenos in a Sisters army.

Why? People don't run marines in a Sisters army now.

You can tell me what I'm saying is crap, and that's fine. Is it really?

You want to take a non-existent army (Xenos does NOT exist, no matter how often you say it does); and a army with 2 sculpts (Grey Knight, Grey Knight Termie) and 4 weapons (Psycannon, Incinerator, Power Sword, Power Halberd) and make it into a full fledged army.

Dude, Necrons are near death and they have WAY more models than the GK do.

Deathwatch ARE just black marines, like it or not.

Sisters are a viable army as they stand now (though I'd love to see the carnival units not suck like they do).

There is NO need for a "Ordo" book. GW knows this, that's why DH are at the end of the codex cycle (close to being dropped IMO) and the Xenos Hunters are DEAD and GONE.

Sisters could be made viable with plastic models, and a revamp of the carnival units--more Sisters would be nice, but they really do have a completely viable army running just Sisters.

GK teleport attack? Lame. GK sit back and shoot with psycannons, or LR charge with GKT. Gee, there's a winner of an army...can't imagine why an army with 3 blisters on the rack isn't exciting GW enough to make a full-fledged book out of it.

Everything else is just IG and pretend IG.

Do I want the GK army to go away? Not really, and while I don't completely oppose the idea in this thread--I don't want the Sisters to be tainted by marines in their codex.

Know why? That's the death knell for the uniqueness that ARE the Sisters of Battle.

They are NOT marines. THAT is why people buy them. I will gladly spend a THOUSAND DOLLARS on a Sisters army rather than buy three marine armies off ebay for that price.

Now if you separate out the GK and the Deathwatch into their own little bonus sections in a Codex: Inquisition, fine so be it...so long as the Sisters retain their identity.

You do know alot of Sisters players HATE the Witch Hunters name and won't use it? Why? Because Sisters are their own army, and people like that about them.

Imperial without being marines or IG really is neat.

It's like being a Xenos race, and that's a good thing for the hobby.

Being some stupid mishmash (like the ordos are right now) is bad for the hobby.

I hope you understand better now.

Or you can keep being dismissive and rude.

Here's a question for you, Stelek:

If we took the Sisters of Battle codex (aka Witch hunters) in its current form, and simply added in PAGK as a troop choice, a Deathwatch killteam as a troop choice, and GK terms in a landraider as an elite choice, do you think people playing sisters would bother to take them?

My opinion would be what can a PAGK do that Sisters can't do for cheaper and with more flame templates, ditto Deathwatch, and GK Terms cost so much that I'd rather just have more flame templates and meltaguns.

Then my follow up for the general population would be:

If people playing Sisters didn't bother taking the aforementioned Space Marine units, would it even be worht the bother to include them in the Inquisition Codex?

My personal opinion on this would be 'yes, the option should exist', but my gut feeling would be that if I wanted to play an Inquisition army, I might have a squad or two of Marines just for moral support but really, the whole reason for playing Inquisition would be to retain power armor without being Astartes.

Correct on all points.

I don't think Sisters players would bother.

Not being Astartes in any way (stats, abilities, etc) is why people like Sisters.

Not having to bring 200 guardsmen but being able to fill the gaps in a Sisters army is another reason.

Do I think it would be worthwhile to include them? Well, I'm never one for eliminating armies that have been around for a while (even craptastic unpopular nonselling ones like the GT) but to be honest I think this is the problem with a Codex: Inquisition....

If you provide a unified IG section, a unified Marine section, a unified Deathwatch section, a unified GK section, and a unified Sisters section...all built into one book...

That totally breaks the mold GW has set for themselves in trying to make each Codex stand alone. A task I think that is impossible, but whatever that's the one they've set for themselves.

See, as soon as the IG book or Marine book is redone--the Inquisition book is broken.

So, only the Sisters are a complete army (without the IG).

Since Marines + Sisters don't mix, drop the Xenos crap into the Marine Codex because that's what the Xenos hunters are. A white dwarf article will do.

Then make the GK choices for everyone that plays Imperials, you can run them as part of the Marines (like the Xenos) or you can make them part of the Sisters but I don't think shoehorning them in with the Carnival troops will be a good thing for the Sisters or the GK.

Putting the GK into the marines makes the most sense to me. They never really needed their own codex (which was really codex: IG with no doctrines, weird limits, and some super marines) in the first place. They ARE a marine chapter. So are the deathwatch. Stick them with the Astartes and call it good.

Keep the Sisters in their original identity and merge the GK and Xenos back with the rest of the marines as support elements.

Why you need differently colored marines to do the same thing the marine dex will let you do in october is also beyond me. I guess everyone will see just how redundant the Xenos hunters and the GK really are when it comes out.

sourclams wrote:I find myself leaning more toward Stelek's interpretation. It does seem to me that you could make the Inquisition codex entirely based around the Sisters of Battle as the primary force with options for Daemonhunters and Deathwatch as single troop or elite choices within that force (or separate PDF codexes) more coherently than attempting to create a giant supercodex that integrates all three exhaustively.

Really, the Grey Knights don't "deserve" to be an actual Army. It plays like a single troop, elite, and heavy support option because that's really all there is.

Sisters, on the other hand, seem to be distinctive enough on their own to warrant their own codex with plastic models. We never see Grey Knight armies because your whole army is three different models. We never see Sisters armies because they're all made out of metal and expensive as hell (this can also apply to GKs). Why not solve both by sidelining the GKs, which is in-line with their ultrarare, ultraelite status, and generating more interest for Sisters?

Deathwatch is just normal marines with black armor and multicolored shoulderpads. Give them the new Ap3 ammo that's coming out with the new marine dex if you don't feel they're special enough.

Its a fine idea, its just not quite the concept being discussed. The inquisition is not an SoB primary army, your list effectively elevates the SoB to a position where the other to Ordo's play second fiddle, when fluff dictates that the Ordo hereticus is in an inferior standing and at best only marginally weaker than the other two.

Grey Knights deserve a list more than Dark Angels, I agree they leave alot to be desired in there current form and in practical terms if it weren't for the specialized nature of their missions they'd have access to everything in the space marine list and they'd be better viable. I've seen several Daemonhunter/Grey Knight Armies and have actually seen fewer Witchhunter/SoB Armies. If GK were done properly they'd be a lot more powerful but they've been toned down to be playable as an army. Deathwatch are elite marines, everyone of them is a veteran with a high amount of experience fighting aliens. They're under developed as a concept and have had even less work done on them then the other two that is the only reason they leave something to be desired and are perceived as lacking.

The numbers don't lie, we've shown that a Codex Inquisition could be done with representation equal given to all Ordos, without taking anything away and being reasonably with in the number of unit options afforded in the new Codex: Inquisition. So when you say what your saying it can only be construed as favoritism to a particular ordo and not any desire to fairly and effectively represent the entirety of the Inquisition and their chamber militants.

Sidelining either DW or GK doesn't solve a problem it avoids it. Just because you ignore the lack of support an army has been given and you marginalize them doesn't make them any less worthy of support. DW and GK each have a stronger battle field presence than any single space marine chapter that is why deserve to be represented in a codex beyond a token unit.

This discussion is on how to unify the armies in a properly representative way and grant equal support to all Inquisition element. Anything else you should start a new thread.

Stelek wrote:Correct on all points.
I don't think Sisters players would bother.
Not being Astartes in any way (stats, abilities, etc) is why people like Sisters.
Not having to bring 200 guardsmen but being able to fill the gaps in a Sisters army is another reason.
Do I think it would be worthwhile to include them? Well, I'm never one for eliminating armies that have been around for a while (even craptastic unpopular nonselling ones like the GT) but to be honest I think this is the problem with a Codex: Inquisition....
If you provide a unified IG section, a unified Marine section, a unified Deathwatch section, a unified GK section, and a unified Sisters section...all built into one book...
That totally breaks the mold GW has set for themselves in trying to make each Codex stand alone. A task I think that is impossible, but whatever that's the one they've set for themselves.
See, as soon as the IG book or Marine book is redone--the Inquisition book is broken.
So, only the Sisters are a complete army (without the IG).
Since Marines + Sisters don't mix, drop the Xenos crap into the Marine Codex because that's what the Xenos hunters are. A white dwarf article will do.
Then make the GK choices for everyone that plays Imperials, you can run them as part of the Marines (like the Xenos) or you can make them part of the Sisters but I don't think shoehorning them in with the Carnival troops will be a good thing for the Sisters or the GK.
Putting the GK into the marines makes the most sense to me. They never really needed their own codex (which was really codex: IG with no doctrines, weird limits, and some super marines) in the first place. They ARE a marine chapter. So are the deathwatch. Stick them with the Astartes and call it good.
Keep the Sisters in their original identity and merge the GK and Xenos back with the rest of the marines as support elements.
Why you need differently colored marines to do the same thing the marine dex will let you do in october is also beyond me. I guess everyone will see just how redundant the Xenos hunters and the GK really are when it comes out.

Our working version so far does not provide for a "unified IG" or "unified SM" section because its too much and the list doesn't need it. If you read the posts thats something everyone agrees with, you need to catch up with the reality of this discussion.

Ordo Xenos and Ordo Malleus would have just as many unit options as Ordo Hereticus in our codex making them all just as viable.
Both DW and GK are distinct from standard marine armies in there unique mission statement and the specialized gear they utilize. They are both more unique than Dark Angels, Blood Angels, and Space Wolves. and thus deserve more support. DW are not a marine chapter, they are a collection of veteran marines from a diverse number of marine chapters.

Stelek wrote:HBMC, you want to have GK and Xenos in a Sisters army.

I don't see it as a Sisters army though, that's the major disconenct here Stelek.

I see an Inquisition Codex, representing the three major Ordos and their Chambers Militant.

Stelek wrote:Why? People don't run marines in a Sisters army now.

Which has all of what to do with anything?

Stelek wrote:You can tell me what I'm saying is crap, and that's fine. Is it really?

What you're saying isn't crap per se - as I said, I like the idea of a separate Sisters Codex - but when the idea is 'Ideas for an Inquisition Codex' and your suggestion is 'Drop everything and just make Sisters', you can see how that might run contrary to the aims of the thread.

Stelek wrote:You want to take a non-existent army (Xenos does NOT exist, no matter how often you say it does);

It doesn't exist as a Codex because the two existing Inquisitorial Codices have too much redundancy, so reprinting the same thing (given that Inquisi Stormies would be there, Assassins, Henchmen etc.) a third time doesn't make any sense, economic or otherwise. As far as existing within the fluff, the Ordos Xenos most certainly does exist.

Stelek wrote:and a army with 2 sculpts (Grey Knight, Grey Knight Termie) and 4 weapons (Psycannon, Incinerator, Power Sword, Power Halberd) and make it into a full fledged army.

People field pure GK armies now, so how would including them in a unified Inquisition Codex be any different?

Stelek wrote:Dude, Necrons are near death and they have WAY more models than the GK do.

Near death as in people aren't interested in them? I'd love to live in the world you live in. Hey, maybe I'll start belittling everyone I talk to and refer to all Marine players as Smurf players.

Stelek wrote:Deathwatch ARE just black marines, like it or not.

Because they have never been expanded upon. You seem to think that what we have now is it, and we'll never get anything more. Deathwatch have miles of room to be expanded upon. Granted, they are quite different to GKs and SoBs in that they're not a force in-and-of-themselves, as they're made up of people from other Chapters, but to simply rule them out because they've only been bothered to make a single squad for them, that's just ludicrous.

Eventually the Dark Heresy guys will finish off that Deathwatch core book, and that should expand upon the different roles within the Deathwatch. It's probably a long way off, but, then again, so is a revision on the Inquisition line.

Stelek wrote:Sisters are a viable army as they stand now (though I'd love to see the carnival units not suck like they do).

Yes they are, but I'd prefer to see them in a unified Inquisitorial Codex... which is what this thread's about!!! Funny that...

Stelek wrote:There is NO need for a "Ordo" book. GW knows this, that's why DH are at the end of the codex cycle (close to being dropped IMO) and the Xenos Hunters are DEAD and GONE.

Since when does need come into anything? We don't need 10000 different Chapters of Marines. We didn't need a friggin' Daemon Army book (or wouldn't have if GW had made a decent Chaos Marine Codex in the first place).

DH, along with Witch Hunters will either be dropped completely (the Sisters Champion - Andy Chambers - is long gone), or subsumed into a single Inquisition book that adds Xenos units and options. Now given GW has said that they're going to continue to support all the current armies, I very much doubt that GKs and Sisters will go the way of the Squats, so a unified Inquisition Codex is infinitely more likely.

Of course, Jervis could go the way of the Squats soon and the company could go belly-up, in which case we get nothing.

Stelek wrote:Sisters could be made viable with plastic models, and a revamp of the carnival units--more Sisters would be nice, but they really do have a completely viable army running just Sisters.

I don't disagree, but that's not what this thread is about.

Jesus H. Christ Stelek. Have you not got that through your head. Perhaps I'll simplify this for you:

Rough idea for Codex - Inquisition

See. That's the title of the thread. Not 'How would you do Codex: SoBs' or, 'The Inquisition shouldn't exist as a Codex - so what would you do?'.

If you want to discuss a standalone SoBs Codex, then by all means go ahead, just do it in a different thread rather than telling everyone why we shouldn't have an Inquisition Codex in a thread about brainstorming an Inquisition Codex!

Gah!

*deep breath*

Moving on...

Stelek wrote:GK teleport attack? Lame. GK sit back and shoot with psycannons, or LR charge with GKT. Gee, there's a winner of an army...can't imagine why an army with 3 blisters on the rack isn't exciting GW enough to make a full-fledged book out of it.

I dunno. The Grey Knight armies we've used have always added a richness and depth to campaigns and to the ongoing story that our group has been playing for the past 4 years. I don't deny that Grey Knights, as an army, have very few different unit types (so-much-so we actually invented a unit called a Purification Squad, which is basically a elite unit of Power Armour GK's who teleport around the table with holy melta bombs and other such things), but to cut them just because you haven't got the imagination to include them? No.

Stelek wrote:Everything else is just IG and pretend IG.

In your opinion.

Stelek wrote:Do I want the GK army to go away? Not really, and while I don't completely oppose the idea in this thread--I don't want the Sisters to be tainted by marines in their codex.

But it's not 'their' Codex. It's an Inquisition Codex, one that includes all Ordos and all Chambers Militant. I can live with the fact that you despise the very notion of a unified Inquisition Codex - and that's cool, no problems - just don't crap on here about it when we're trying to discuss what we'd do if a unified book were to be made.

Stelek wrote:Know why? That's the death knell for the uniqueness that ARE the Sisters of Battle.

Uniqueness? They're the half-way point between Guard and Marines. They're glorified Storm Troopers with fancy Faith rules. Sisters exist because of an ancient pic from Rogue Trader. I like them, but to claim that having non-sister units would be a 'death-knell' for a SoB army is just a silly overreaction.

Stelek wrote:They are NOT marines. THAT is why people buy them. I will gladly spend a THOUSAND DOLLARS on a Sisters army rather than buy three marine armies off ebay for that price.

That's great. In the meantime, most people play Marines. Why can they just get along?

Stelek wrote:Now if you separate out the GK and the Deathwatch into their own little bonus sections in a Codex: Inquisition, fine so be it...so long as the Sisters retain their identity.

I would see the unified Inquisition Codex as a book that had 4 sections to it. It would be one army list, but it'd have 4 distinct sections. The first section would be the Inquisition itself, with the units it has access to, the inducted units, plus all the freakshow and wild-card units (made useful of course). The next three sections would be for the Chambers Militant, going over the units they had access to, identifying them as part of the Inquisition but separate in identity and organisation.

The list itself would be similar to what others have proposed here, with options from all 4 sections within the same list, but still retain flexibility that would allow you to take a SoB army without using an Inquisitorial or other Chamber armies.

Stelek wrote:You do know alot of Sisters players HATE the Witch Hunters name and won't use it? Why? Because Sisters are their own army, and people like that about them.

I've never heard of anyone saying how they 'won't' call their army a Witch Hunter army. That's just childish.

But please, again, for the last time:

I don't care whether you want Sisters to be a separate list or not. That is so inconsequential to this thread that your constant spamming of it is becoming mind numbing, even moreso than Jonny-boy's attempt at winning the Bland Olympics for Bland GW-esque Codex Design.

This thread is about a Unified Inquisition Codex. I know you don't want that, and, again, that's fine, but either discuss that, or leave. This isn't the place to bitch endlessly about how the Sisters need their own book.

Stelek wrote:Being some stupid mishmash (like the ordos are right now) is bad for the hobby

No, having 2 (or 3) books with redundant unit entries is bad for the hobby, as it confuses players, which is why there shouldn't be a Codex: Daemonhunters or a Codex: Witch Hunters and there should only be a single, solitar, Codex: Inquisition.

Stelek wrote:I hope you understand better now.

There's nothing to understand. This thread is about a unified Inquisitorial Codex and all you want to talk about is that you want Sisters to have their own book. Non sequitur.

Stelek wrote:Or you can keep being dismissive and rude.

But I do like emulating you Stelek. You're my hero!!!

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:No, having 2 (or 3) books with redundant unit entries is bad for the hobby, as it confuses players, which is why there shouldn't be a Codex: Daemonhunters or a Codex: Witch Hunters and there should only be a single, solitar, Codex: Inquisition.

There should be a Codex: Marines and a Codex: Sisters of Battle.

GK are not unique, stop pretending they are. SILVER space marines.
Deathwatch are not unique, stop pretending they are. BLACK space marines.

As soon as you have a real rebuttal for why the whole concept isn't just 'Space Marines, Girly Men, and Girls', let me know. Cause that's where it stands now and it won't sell.

aka_mythos wrote:Our working version so far does not provide for a "unified IG" or "unified SM" section because its too much and the list doesn't need it. If you read the posts thats something everyone agrees with, you need to catch up with the reality of this discussion.

Really? I did read it.

I see: Storm troopers (IG units), Land Raiders and Dreadnoughts (Space Marine units), Deathwatch (more Space Marines), Grey Knights (more Space Marines), and the removal of all the other IG stuff because it was too complikikateded for ya?

Right. The reality is, this is a SMURF book and no ing thanks.

aka_mythos wrote:Ordo Xenos and Ordo Malleus would have just as many unit options as Ordo Hereticus in our codex making them all just as viable.

Still the same stupid stat lines, still marines...WHY is this good?

Explain how it's good for the hobby? Do you actually think you'll get a good Codex out of GW from this? I assure you Dark Angels sell FAR better than GK do, and look at how they got handled.

aka_mythos wrote:Both DW and GK are distinct from standard marine armies in there unique mission statement and the specialized gear they utilize. They are both more unique than Dark Angels, Blood Angels, and Space Wolves. and thus deserve more support.

Total bull.

DW are marines with new shoulder pads and heavy bolters with new ammo.
GK are still marines, again, new shoulder pads and new weapons.

DA are marines in robes.
BA are marines in jump packs.
Space Wolves are marines with teeth and wolf pelts.

I mean, do you really think I'm stupid or what?

BLACK, SILVER , GREEN, RED, GREY.

Gee, original.

aka_mythos wrote:DW are not a marine chapter, they are a collection of veteran marines from a diverse number of marine chapters.

They call that the Astral Claws chapter (on the spikey "evil" marine team). You take all of your failed marine army projects and test paint jobs, give them a new shoulderpad, and BAMMO you're a whole new legion of traitors.

I feel dumb just having to point the obvious out.

Concession accepted then Stelek.

If you're not going to bother reading my entire post, then you're not worth dealing with.

Grey Knights are not Silver Marines. They're nothing like Marines, much like Space Wolves and Black Templars are nothing like Marines.

Now, again, if you want to discuss Codex: Inquisition, please, stay in the thread. If you want to discuss how much you want a Codex: Sisters of Battle, then start a thread about Codex: Sisters of Battle. Don't clog up a thread about Codex: Inquisition with your ignorant, overblown bs.

BYE

aka_mythos wrote:Its a fine idea, its just not quite the concept being discussed. The inquisition is not an SoB primary army, your list effectively elevates the SoB to a position where the other to Ordo's play second fiddle, when fluff dictates that the Ordo hereticus is in an inferior standing and at best only marginally weaker than the other two.

....

The numbers don't lie, we've shown that a Codex Inquisition could be done with representation equal given to all Ordos, without taking anything away and being reasonably with in the number of unit options afforded in the new Codex: Inquisition. So when you say what your saying it can only be construed as favoritism to a particular ordo and not any desire to fairly and effectively represent the entirety of the Inquisition and their chamber militants.

Sidelining either DW or GK doesn't solve a problem it avoids it. Just because you ignore the lack of support an army has been given and you marginalize them doesn't make them any less worthy of support. DW and GK each have a stronger battle field presence than any single space marine chapter that is why deserve to be represented in a codex beyond a token unit.

....

This discussion is on how to unify the armies in a properly representative way and grant equal support to all Inquisition element. Anything else you should start a new thread.

First off, I am just about always in favor of more options, not fewer. More options = dynamic and good, fewer options = stagnant and bland. The wall I'm running into when I read this web project that clearly several people have put a lot of time and thought into and are taking enjoyment from, is that we may as well go whole hog and make it Codex: Imperium. I mean honestly, we've got by your own admission, three different armies in this book. What, then, would be so difficult about just adding IG and Space Marines and be done with the whole matter? If taking HQs unlocks successive options, add a Force Commander and Lord Militant, throw in a basilisk, hellhound, and Librarian, and we're basically done with the humans in 40k. That is my problem. The Inquisition has access to *everything*. In order to really do it up accurately, you just have to give it access to *everything*. And that kind of kills all the other codices. Why would I bother buying an IG and a SM codex when I can just do it all with my Inquisition codex?

That's why I say, to avoid homogenization, sideline the stuff that already exists or is better done in the existing material. You have not, and I say this with respect, shown me that the Inquisition can be done with equal representation to the three Ordos in one codex. What you have shown me is a plug-and-play flow chart that lets me buy one book and play Space Marines, Sisters of Battle, and Imperial Guard that are somehow different because there's 'I's stamped onto their armor. Ordo Xenos is guardsmen and space marines. Ordo Malleus is space marines and better space marines. Ordo Hereticus is Sisters of Battle.

And see, there's my problem. By making the Codex: Inquisition exhaustive, you're homogenizing it. In order to be exhaustive you need to have the entire Imperium in there because fundamentally, all that an Inquisitional army is is an Inquisitor + a pre-existing army. I never say to ignore the Grey Knights or the Deathwatch, rather I support minimizing their role in a new codex because, as Stelek has expounded upon, Marines have already been done. Guard have already been done and are being done again. Inquisition Leman Russes shouldn't be radically different just because there's an 'I' stamped on the side. Rather than re-do what we've already got, let's instead take the single unique element, the Sisters of Battle, and have something completely different. What I'm saying is directly relevant to this thread because it's impossible to properly represent the Inquisition in one codex without diluting it to the point of losing any elements that make the Inquisition unique. Trim the excess or go all out. Call it Codex: Adepta Sororitas or Codex: Imperium.

I could live with Codex: Imperium, but then you'd have to bring the Adeptus Mechanicus in as well, and I'd prefer they got their own list (which FW will hopefully do soon).

BYE

Stelek wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:No, having 2 (or 3) books with redundant unit entries is bad for the hobby, as it confuses players, which is why there shouldn't be a Codex: Daemonhunters or a Codex: Witch Hunters and there should only be a single, solitar, Codex: Inquisition.

There should be a Codex: Marines and a Codex: Sisters of Battle.

GK are not unique, stop pretending they are. SILVER space marines.
Deathwatch are not unique, stop pretending they are. BLACK space marines.

As soon as you have a real rebuttal for why the whole concept isn't just 'Space Marines, Girly Men, and Girls', let me know. Cause that's where it stands now and it won't sell.

This is a discussion on the combined codex Inquisition, separate Codex: SoB is off topic. Please refrain from that line of discussion.

Other than GK name another Space Marine chapter where the basic troops are armed with force weapons and storm bolter and fight daemons with there collective psyker power.
Other than DW name another Space Marine "chapter" whose basic troop sgts are actually Captains and Librarians, and are a force of around 1000 marines from the first companies of other chapters; where the totality of the force is equivalent to 10, Space Marine 1st Companies.

If you can name a single space marine chapter that fit either of those it proves they are not unique.

Stelek wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Our working version so far does not provide for a "unified IG" or "unified SM" section because its too much and the list doesn't need it. If you read the posts thats something everyone agrees with, you need to catch up with the reality of this discussion.

Really? I did read it.

I see: Storm troopers (IG units), Land Raiders and Dreadnoughts (Space Marine units), Deathwatch (more Space Marines), Grey Knights (more Space Marines), and the removal of all the other IG stuff because it was too complikikateded for ya?

Right. The reality is, this is a SMURF book and no ing thanks.

No need to be profane.
Yes you see a single IG unit *gasp* which we've proposed to make more unique but even still an Inquisitor has access to the elite of the IG.
The land raider is once again a unit an Inquisitor has access to. The dreadnought is in their for the Grey Knights because they are a specialized marine chapter tha t maintains them. I'm however insistent on them being not generally available without a Grey Knight Hero; nor should DW should have them.

Deathwatch is a unique space marine organization. Far more unique than many of the other supported chapters. A full chapter sized force where all ten companies each have the strength of a chapter's first company. Where the warriors are specially equipped to fight the worse alien threat, threats equal to or worse than a C'tan.

Grey Knights are a specially armed chapter of daemonhunters armed with force weapons and a collective psyker power. Name another marine force like this.

IG were left out because in practical terms they'd inflate the codex with units that are not part of the Inquisition. The Inquisition does however maintain its own stormtroopers thats why they are included while other IG units are not.

Yeah, smurfs... good cartoon... I'm glad you think our list is nice and well loved by children all around the world.

This list does not include any more than 5 DW units and 5 GK units, with the addition of a landraider. 11 out of 30 units does not a "marine list" make, there are more special characters than that in the new space marine codex.

Stelek wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Ordo Xenos and Ordo Malleus would have just as many unit options as Ordo Hereticus in our codex making them all just as viable.

Still the same stupid stat lines, still marines...WHY is this good?

Explain how it's good for the hobby? Do you actually think you'll get a good Codex out of GW from this? I assure you Dark Angels sell FAR better than GK do, and look at how they got handled.

There is more to an armies identity than their stat line; it is everything else that goes into their rules that define them. You are using selective reasoning, fixating on similarities to make your call on how unique they are. While if you were serious about understanding their uniqueness you'd focus on the other rules they have that generic marines do not.

Its good for the hobby because people want to play it and they know they'd have fun and that what this hobby is about. A codex done in the way we're proposing would be better than the current Chaos Space Marine Codex or Codex Daemon and infinitely better than no codex at all. Dark Angels have been redone recently of course they sell better; I think the Codex: Dark Angels was well handled, fluffish and only disappointing in light of the new additions to the Codex: Space Marines. Regardless if the new marine codex allows for ravenwing or deathwing better than Codex Dark Angels, than there is something to complain about.

Stelek wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Both DW and GK are distinct from standard marine armies in there unique mission statement and the specialized gear they utilize. They are both more unique than Dark Angels, Blood Angels, and Space Wolves. and thus deserve more support.

Total bull.

DW are marines with new shoulder pads and heavy bolters with new ammo.
GK are still marines, again, new shoulder pads and new weapons.

DA are marines in robes.
BA are marines in jump packs.
Space Wolves are marines with teeth and wolf pelts.

I mean, do you really think I'm stupid or what?

BLACK, SILVER , GREEN, RED, GREY.

Gee, original.

I say I think you're what... I'm mean stupid... When you say stuff like that I do think so.
You ignore the fluff of each chapter of marines by making such a comparison at which point I have to question why you're in this hobby. If you don't allow the fluff to come into play in your analysis, you ignore what makes the overall game 40k. Even if that aspect of the hobby isn't your cup of tea, doesn't mean you got to piss on it.

Stelek wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:DW are not a marine chapter, they are a collection of veteran marines from a diverse number of marine chapters.

They call that the Astral Claws chapter (on the spikey "evil" marine team). You take all of your failed marine army projects and test paint jobs, give them a new shoulderpad, and BAMMO you're a whole new legion of traitors.

I feel dumb...

No actually astral claws are space pirating marines that are on the side of Chaos. They don't fight aliens as their stated mission, they don't have specialized equipment, they are not composed solely of veteran marines. They are not an elite strike force of the Ordo Xenos. Insert Coin and Please Try Again.

aka_mythos:

Just extend what I said in my PM to cover Stelek, and we can move on.



So, going back to Deathwatch for a second, what do you think they should have to expand upon the army?

As I've mentioned elsehwhere, probably in this thread, I have a full Deathwatch army.

It's organised like this:

Deathwatch Captain w/Thunderhammer
9-strong Deathwatch Command Squad w/Librarian, two Vets with Power Weapons & two Vets with Combi-Meltas

Deathwatch Sergeant w/Power Fist
9-strong Deathwatch Tactical Sqaud w/2 Heavy Bolters

Deathwatch Sergeant w/Power Fist
9-strong Deathwatch Tactical Sqaud w/2 Heavy Bolters

Deathwatch Sergeant w/Power Fist
9-strong Deathwatch Assault Sqaud w/2 Power Weapons

Deathwatch Sergeant w/Power Weapon
9-strong Deathwatch Devastator Sqaud w/4 Missile Launchers

Deathwatch Sergeant w/Thunder Hammer
7-strong Deathwatch Assault Terminator Sqaud w/2 Thunder Hammers, 5 Lightning Claws & 2 Cyclone Missile Launchers

Deathwatch Sergeant w/Power Weapon
5-strong Deathwatch Terminator Sqaud w/2 Cyclone Missile Launchers


Generally the idea behind it was to expand Special Ammunition types to include missile launchers (regular & Cyclones), and any special weapons they had (like a Plasma or Melta) would a Combi-Weapon, so they could continue to use the special bolt ammunition if they wanted to. This allows for a bit more than squads with Hellfire Heavy Bolters, and allows more modelling opportunities as well (hence my army, which was done just to do the models).

The two Tactical Squads and the Devastator Sergeants also have those funky special backpacks from the plastic Dev Squad sprue, and my intent was to write rules for that as well.

A thread from a while back went into the Deathwatch a little, and the concensus ('cept for good ol' Stelly up there) was that the Deathwatch should focus on technology as their means of defeating the Alien. Not Xenos technology, but the most advanced, cutting edge Imperial technology.

I also want to eventually add Deathwatch Dreads in there, the idea being a Dread from another Chapter doing a tour of duty with the Deathwatch, or a particular Marine who served the Deathwatch several times as to earn a permanant place after death, and so on.

Anyway, all very pie-in-the-sky broad brush-strokes concept stuff, but that was my starting point.

BYE