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.

This came up in a thread in the Tactics forum but I thought I'd air it out here rather than barge into that thread. The conversation there took a turn that suggested that some people find the Inquisitor with Servo-skulls to be dirty, cheap, irritating, frustrating, etc. in casual play and only really suited for competitive/tournament play.

For context, I play Sisters of Battle, so not exactly an overpowered army, and also not a long-range army that just wants an extra turn of shooting, but a mid-range one that needs to position itself carefully. I use the skulls to help squeeze my Seraphim into tight spots to use their template weapons, not just to jam up people's infiltrators and scout moves. Last weekend I played a 2v2 pick-up game at a GW and used the Inquisitor + skulls to create opportunities to drop Seraphim close to objectives, but in the process I shut out an AdMech player's pre-game moves. This felt like a pretty competitive match-up... I was randomly allied with a guy playing a Salamanders demi-company with the assassins formation, and we were facing a Salamanders Stormlance (move-shoot-move) and drop Sternguard army and an AdMech force with infiltrating Skitarii and the deep striking Kataphron formation. Not exactly casual lists, but still a pick-up game.

So, with me playing a dated army that is very much based on board management, in a pretty tough matchup, and not using them solely to mess with infiltrators and scouts... was I a jerk to bring the Inquisitor + skulls, or not?

No. It's just a decent choice and good for a TAC army.

Na not at all. It is just that only taking the inquisitor in a list that doesn't justify his presence fluffwise feels like a cheap move to me as an inq player. But you play sisters of battle so I don't see the problem there at all.

In a world of riptide wings, jetbiker gangs, and invisible gravcents, I don't feel like the servo skull Inquisitor really matches up to what most people classify as "too good". Can it be a competitive option, most definitely, but I don't think it even begins to edge into the power creep territory.

Bringing JUST an inquisitor with skulls is very much a jerk move.

Now, if it's part of an actual meaningful inquisitorial detachment, most will take it as reasonable, but when it's just that, you are being a jerk.

Being a jerk is fine and all when playing competitively, but not so much for casual games. Unless of course you know your opponents are into heavily optimization play that resembles competitive play.

I don't see how bringing a servo skull inquisitor is being a jerk with any Imperial army. Denying Scout to hounds, scouts, Ravenwing, and White Scars can be pretty damn important. And any player making heavy use of scouting probably can't complain about a list being competitive.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Bringing JUST an inquisitor with skulls is very much a jerk move.

Now, if it's part of an actual meaningful inquisitorial detachment, most will take it as reasonable, but when it's just that, you are being a jerk.

Being a jerk is fine and all when playing competitively, but not so much for casual games. Unless of course you know your opponents are into heavily optimization play that resembles competitive play.

But that fluff-consious pairing of Nurgle and Tzeentch daemons against Dreadknight/Wraithknight/Riptide alliance is just dandy by comparison. These jerks need to get with the program.

For context of the previous thread I was looking for a way to stop a pure tank guard force getting the gak knocked out of it by an opponent I know likes to use melta maxed squads in conjunction with infiltrate.

 MarsNZ wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
Bringing JUST an inquisitor with skulls is very much a jerk move.

Now, if it's part of an actual meaningful inquisitorial detachment, most will take it as reasonable, but when it's just that, you are being a jerk.

Being a jerk is fine and all when playing competitively, but not so much for casual games. Unless of course you know your opponents are into heavily optimization play that resembles competitive play.

But that fluff-consious pairing of Nurgle and Tzeentch daemons against Dreadknight/Wraithknight/Riptide alliance is just dandy by comparison. These jerks need to get with the program.

Deamons of tzeentch and nurgle cooperating for a goal is totally fine Fluffwise


As for that other.... Thing you brought up. This is extremely poor conduct and I've never seen anything even close to it, even in tournaments.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Deamons of tzeentch and nurgle cooperating for a goal is totally fine Fluffwise

But an inquisitor taking control of Imperial forces is totally out of line with established fluff?

Out of interest how many Riptides do you own, and how many do you regularly field?

I regularly field all my riptides.
So, one. And no plans to add more, I prefer fielding many crisis suits and tanks. (suboptimal, but fun.)


Anyway inquisitor taking command is not far fetched, but taking an inquisitor just for skulls and nothing else inquisitorial? That's a WAAC list.

 BoomWolf wrote:



Anyway inquisitor taking command is not far fetched, but taking an inquisitor just for skulls and nothing else inquisitorial? That's a WAAC list.

I do agree on the Inq + skulls part in most lists. But the inq isn't out of place in a sisters list at all.

 BoomWolf wrote:
I regularly field all my riptides.
So, one. And no plans to add more, I prefer fielding many crisis suits and tanks. (suboptimal, but fun.)


Anyway inquisitor taking command is not far fetched, but taking an inquisitor just for skulls and nothing else inquisitorial? That's a WAAC list.

Says the tau player.

No good sir, your list is in no way WAAC or too good/powerful. I have seen Servos skulls used to good effect before and this is just another case of a clever layer out thinking their opponent.

 BoomWolf wrote:
I regularly field all my riptides.

But in the fluff it's explicitly noted that the materials required are rare and therefore the XV104 isn't seen very often in battle. I'm sure your skyfire interceptor ignores cover wargear is much more reasonable than denying Eldar rangers their infiltrate move.

 MarsNZ wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
I regularly field all my riptides.

But in the fluff it's explicitly noted that the materials required are rare and therefore the XV104 isn't seen very often in battle. I'm sure your skyfire interceptor ignores cover wargear is much more reasonable than denying Eldar rangers their infiltrate move.

Have you even read the very next sentence, or did you hear tau and went berserk?



Anyway, back to topic.
There is nothing wrong with taking servo skulls for your inquisitor, but once you take an inquisitor for the servo skulls this is where it's getting WAACy, and that's the most common way inquisition is used (with random "just happened to be here" coteaz being a close second)

Rule 1 please people.

Seeing that inquisitors used to be part of the SoB army back when they were witchhunters, thematically, I’d have no problems with it.

I know allies are a core part of the game now. But while they do open up some nice fluffy, iconic, and fun lists, they can also bring some min-max cheesefests. Taking a servo-skull inquisitor is mechanically very nice. It acts as a hard counter to a lot of lists, and is very effective for the points. It is an element that while not required for a very competitive list, is indicative of the type. Casual vs. Competitive is not a binary state. It’s a spectrum. And people like to play all over it. Allying in a hot unit like an inquisitor does push you up the chart a little. Is it enough to cross some people’s “this is the level of 40k I’d like to play” level? Almost certainly. Tons of people out there, and they all have different break points.

Just because something is fluffy does not mean it’s not competitive.

Thanks for all the replies, and I'm glad some voices from the original discussion surfaced here. Looks like we have opinions ranging from 'total cheese' to 'if it feels fluffy' to 'if it's legal, play it.'

Here's my conundrum. I used to run the Inquisitor with the Liber Heresius in a meched-up unit of flamer sisters to give them Scout and advance them behind the melta Dominions to roast survivors, but that isn't an option with the new FAQ. I'd have to say there's room for charges of cheesiness in that build... single allied Inquisitor, loaded with wargear, sharing a dedicated transport for a single tactical purpose: get up close and burn things.

Now, however, I run the Inquisitor + skulls for tactical flexibility in placing deep strikers, as opposed to for a single purpose. I'm okay with that, even if it leaves infiltrating armies and scout armies in a tight spot. The question is, how to run him without annoying my opponents?

Option 1: Lone Inquisitor + skulls, now unable to mount up with a flamer unit, so he stands in the back and guides the Seraphim down while jamming up infiltrators and scouts, but not much else. This clearly provokes charges of cheeseiness.

Option 2: Inquisitor + skulls + Liber Heresius, with an acolyte warband loaded with plasma and Jokaero in a Chimera, so he Scouts his own transport up and blasts things. This will also inevitably provoke accusations of cheese, given that the Inquisitorial Chimera is unrevised and still sports extra fire points...

Option 3: Inquisitor + skulls + mastery levels + extra psykers for warp charge, so he stands in the back and tries to make good use of the Psychic phase with Prescience, etc. This will also be accused of violating fluff for game effect, because what would Battle Sisters be doing hanging around with the very witches they are so effective at denying?

I do want to run an Inquisitor, partly for tactical advantage, but also because of the rich fluff between Sisters and the Ordos, and for the opportunity to build and paint a variety of models. Which of the above options is least offensive?

I’d go with option 2.

By taking acolytes, it feels less you you are just abusing the ally rules to just get the good stuff. Plus it feels right for the inquisitor to have his retinue with him. But by not exploiting both the skulls and psychic shenanigans, you keep the cheese level down a bit.

Option 1-its cheesy. I'll play you, but I won't be pleased. (and if your entire list is of similar flavor, probably won't "chase" games against you)

Option 2-that's cool. sure, the inqui chimera is a bit odd, but you're making an investment there and while the annoying inquisitor is there, he has his merry warband and your inquisition detachment makes a real force in the army that serves a purpose beyond mere "lul servo skulls, your deployment option is invalid", so nobody will argue being WAACy. not everything that is good is WAAC.

Option 3-This is practically like option 1, but worse. against people who pull that kind of things off, I'd probably not bother playing outside of leagues/tournaments.

Not really. Is it annoying? Yeah, but it also forces me to think critically, and it's something I rarely see, so bring it on.

I'm also curious where the line falls on the Servoquisitor. I have one because I wanted to scratch build servo skulls. That project eventually turned into a full company of Red Hunters with vehicles and airforce as well as a small mechanism detachment. My Inquisitor is from the sect that focuses on Tech Heresy (can't remember the name and don't have my codex handy), so I also have a Skitarri Battle Maniple.

The Inquisitor has a Valk. for a transport as well as a small retinue of Acolytes although it's very rare that I use those. So if I field my Inquisitor with an army of Red Hunters and/or Skitarri, but no other "Inquisitorial" elements ... some of you would find that cheesy?

Option #4: ignore the "casual at all costs" crowd, continue to make good strategic choices in constructing your army, and take whichever inquisitor option fits best with those strategic choices.

I personally see no issue, i would have an issue if the guy playing against you whined about it however.

I feel they can fit in a list, even without the infiltrate debuffs if you also use Blast weaponry.

34 pts for something that may or may not affect the game. At this point, at least you have to pay for it...