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.

Inquisitors and Crusaders start with Carapace Armour, which confers a -1 Inititaive penalty.

(1) Does the statline for these fighters already reflect the penalty?

(2) Same question as to the Militarum Tempestus Scion. Note he is listed as I3 - same as Guardsmen wearing Flak Armour.

(3) If yes to (1) then would a Inq equipped with Power Armour become I5?

The inquisitor appears to have the same stats as w40k and has Int 4 in that, so I would say that the Carapace penalty has not been factored in.
Though, I guess it has been factored in for the scion?
I would shoot an email to GW, they are apparently assembling a FAQ.

Well I followed your advice and sent these questions to GW. Just got a "we are dealing with high volumes" type auto-reply.

This is being discussed a bit in the N&R thread but probably merits being brought up here: is the lack of a Carapace armour upgrade intentional or an oversight?

I believe it is intentional because (a) the Inq and Crusaders come with Carapace and (b) Crusaders, while called Specialists, don't actually have access to Special/Heavy weapons. Crusaders therefore do not seem to play the same role in the Inq list that Specialists play in other lists - they are "core" rather than "support." If Acolytes could be equipped with Carapace armour, Crusaders would be somewhat superfluous (Stormshields notwithstanidng).

(1) No

(2) No

(3) No

It would appear that in Shadow Wars specifically, the initiative penalty for wearing Carapace Armour is presented as a rule in and of itself, to be applied retrospectively.

This is based on logical deduction rather any position of cast iron knowledge.

You don't appear to have made a deduction, unless you count as a premise the assumption that your answers are correct - in which case, we've just arrived at a tautology.

I imagine that the statline they show on the unit page is the statline without the armour equipped, based on comparisons with those from various codecies over the years.

As for the problem of -1I, if you're buying a stormshield, you might as well just unequip the carapace right from the beginning anyway. Then you wouldn't have to waste 10 points buying power armour for a save that would be completely meaningless. Only downside is that you'd lose the carapace armour permanently upon unequipping it.

You could potentially wait until the Rearm post-game phase to pass the carapace to an Acolyte or Initiate instead, but since the actual (lazily and hastily written) equipment list doesn't say whether or not they can actually equip them, I have no idea how legal that would be.

Unfortunately if its not on the equipment list it can't be traded to them, otherwise you could swap power armour to a cultist!

It's funny how both power and carapace armour, wargear that has pretty much always been available options to Acolytes, are suddenly completely unavailable to them in this kill team.

Hell, one of the most viable ways (not that they were actually viable back then, they were pretty overcosted and bad) to run Acolytes used to be as power armour equipped meatshields.

Of course, there's a lot of stuff that's missing here. Namely all of the personality. While I don't like GW's current practice of 'no unit entries without models' for their flagship games, I can at least understand their position. But for something like Shadowmunda, where conversions shouldn't just be encouraged, but expected, GW's constant push against them is a real shame. Especially when it starts heavily affecting the quality of the rules.

The Jokaero would have been the perfect special operative - he could have some kind of temporary weapon modification effect to anyone within 3".
I think access to carapace would be enough for me, would have been nice to have the shooting skill table though.

On one hand, I hate those damned, dirty apes. On the other, I'm not obligated to use them and they'd be a better alternative than yet another Deathwatch marine that exists for the sole purpose of taunting the players who are actually interested in them as a faction. I for one would kill for Daemonhosts, but that's likely for the Ordo Malleus expansion that we'll never get. Even a Xenos mercenary if it meant sticking with the whole alien theme would be worth taking instead of more Deathwatch.

As for the shooting table, I agree, lacking it on troopers is a real killer. I understand the push to make the Inquisitional list more close-combat based to differentiate it from other human(ish) factions, but the melee toolkit for troopers is just extremely limited and the weak statline and mediocre movement does absolutely nothing to help. The troopers are more fragile and less numerous than orkz but are expected to be more willing to rush into close combat. The Ordo Xenos killteam basically exists off the back of three models (Inquisitor and two Crusaders) that can get a 3++. The focus here just doesn't make any sense.

This is supposed to be the same faction that does all the dirt digging in the deepest corners and crevices in the galaxy while being perfectly at home with dissecting both heretic and xenos alike for catharsis and curiosity in equal measure. Inquisitors and their buddies are supposed to be scary melon-fethers in a really subversive way just as much as they can be in an oppressive one. The 3++ is a nice starting point, but everything falls completely flat when it comes time to actually flesh things out, leaving the be-all-end-all of it being a stormshield and powersword combination that's just so terrifyingly boring.

 Fafnir wrote:
On one hand, I hate those damned, dirty apes. On the other, I'm not obligated to use them and they'd be a better alternative than yet another Deathwatch marine that exists for the sole purpose of taunting the players who are actually interested in them as a faction. I for one would kill for Daemonhosts, but that's likely for the Ordo Malleus expansion that we'll never get. Even a Xenos mercenary if it meant sticking with the whole alien theme would be worth taking instead of more Deathwatch.

As for the shooting table, I agree, lacking it on troopers is a real killer. I understand the push to make the Inquisitional list more close-combat based to differentiate it from other human(ish) factions, but the melee toolkit for troopers is just extremely limited and the weak statline and mediocre movement does absolutely nothing to help. The troopers are more fragile and less numerous than orkz but are expected to be more willing to rush into close combat. The Ordo Xenos killteam basically exists off the back of three models (Inquisitor and two Crusaders) that can get a 3++. The focus here just doesn't make any sense.

This is supposed to be the same faction that does all the dirt digging in the deepest corners and crevices in the galaxy while being perfectly at home with dissecting both heretic and xenos alike for catharsis and curiosity in equal measure. Inquisitors and their buddies are supposed to be scary melon-fethers in a really subversive way just as much as they can be in an oppressive one. The 3++ is a nice starting point, but everything falls completely flat when it comes time to actually flesh things out, leaving the be-all-end-all of it being a stormshield and powersword combination that's just so terrifyingly boring.

except they're not shooting dependent. Their access to armour sucks, but acolytes can all be BS4 right off the bat, and all have access to bloody stormbolters...... the amount of dakka an inquisition team can put down is, I suspect, impressive...

I do wish there was a daemonhost specialist too. That's even how cherubael introduces himself....

The problem with that is that there's no real sense of identity in the faction. Storm bolter spam covering stormshield advance is basically the beginning and end of the kill team.

The Inquisition should be so much more. I wanted a whacky combination of fear, oppression, and sheer force (see oppression).

And cam-cloaked snipers, scout-fashion. And expendable meat-shield shotgunners, guard-fashion. And, for that matter, plasma pistoleers without needing specialists.

For that matter, don't underestimate a basic ws4 dude with a chainsword and combat blade. Yes, he only has flak armour but he shouldn't take hits from a lot of opponents (2 attacks, ws4, 2 parries) and you're not allowed to shoot at him because of the 'must shoot closest target' rule - and the closest target can be the storm shield wielding crusader. But even then, running target and cover puts most attackers hitting on a 6, and everyone has guerilla skills.

Combat blade can't parry, it's a knife. That's only one parry. In fact, Inquisition can't get normal swords at all. The only parries they get come from chainswords and power swords.

 Manchu wrote:
Inquisitors and Crusaders start with Carapace Armour, which confers a -1 Inititaive penalty.

(1) Does the statline for these fighters already reflect the penalty?

(2) Same question as to the Militarum Tempestus Scion. Note he is listed as I3 - same as Guardsmen wearing Flak Armour.

(3) If yes to (1) then would a Inq equipped with Power Armour become I5?

Sounds like you've put more thought into this than the people who wrote the rules.

 Fafnir wrote:
Of course, there's a lot of stuff that's missing here. Namely all of the personality. While I don't like GW's current practice of 'no unit entries without models' for their flagship games, I can at least understand their position. But for something like Shadowmunda, where conversions shouldn't just be encouraged, but expected, GW's constant push against them is a real shame. Especially when it starts heavily affecting the quality of the rules.

It's also inconsistent in the strangest of places. If anyone has the Tau Pathfinder kit you'll know you can make six Drone types from that kit, the three special ones plus the basic Gun/Shield/Marker Drones. But there are no options for those in the Tau Pathfinder list. Also the Ion Rifle and Rail Rifle have basically the same stats, making it look like a copypasta error (the Ion Rifle's rules don't even match its fluff!). There's also no indication of how Drones actually function. Do they have to climb ladders to move up? Do the two special Drones (not the big one) continue to function even whilst down? Can a Drone get an advance from rolling a 6 on the Injury chart?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sounds like you've put more thought into this than the people who wrote the rules.

I didn't see an answer in the FAQ, either. Did I miss it?

Outside of the FAQ saying that Inquisitional troopers can never equip carapace, essentially establishing the lack of armour availability as intentional, nothing regarding it pops up.

Which is a shame, really, since Crusaders using carapace is pretty useless when you'll be equipping them with storm shields as soon as possible anyway.

I would argue the naked statline is the model with nothing added.

Wearing Carapace armor in a game then activates it's special rules, much like having a Flesh Wound in a game activates it's special rules.

To be clear, you're saying a Scion is I3 until the game begins and at that point - because he comes with carapace - he should be treated as I2? Or?

 Manchu wrote:
To be clear, you're saying a Scion is I3 until the game begins and at that point - because he comes with carapace - he should be treated as I2? Or?

yes, statline is the naked model. Adding equipment then increases or decreased stats.

If a model comes with carapace armor, a pistol, and a sword, during the game you would subtract 1 Initiative and also add 1 Attack in close combat.

FAQ2 - still no answer ...

Does it need to be addressed? This is one of those things where Rules As Written seems pretty clear.

Yeah, I'd say that it's pretty airtight. Unless the profile for the character made a point of saying that their wargear is included in their profile (I don't believe anything in SWA does), you should count it on top.

It is not clear. The profile neither says it already factors into the starting equipment nor that it doesn't.

The analogy to a Flesh Wound is inapt - unlike equipment, Fighters can never start with Flesh Wounds.

As far as I can tell, there is no analogous case from which to convincingly reason.

Therefore, clarification from the designers would be welcome.

In pretty much all previous works that GW has released, wargear that affected a model's statline that has the modifications included would specifically note that the wargear modifications had already been included if it already had been so.

Unless it says otherwise, you should always assume that a model's statline does not include modifiers from any other wargear or rules.

I'd be happy to accept that the statline is modified by starting equipment - if GW clarifies that or if someone can make a logical argument based on the ruleset in question. Neither condition is met at this point.

I very much doubt anyone would have played Scions as I2 absent the scrutiny attracted by choosing between PA and carapace for Inquisitors.

I was pretty much content with I2 scions from day one.

Granted, not that they'll be likely to see much use, spending a promethium cache for that I2 guardsman is a bit of a waste. But Special Ops are horribly implemented and all over the place in terms of balance (or absolute lack thereof) in SWA, so it's not exactly surprising.

 Fafnir wrote:
Yeah, I'd say that it's pretty airtight. Unless the profile for the character made a point of saying that their wargear is included in their profile (I don't believe anything in SWA does), you should count it on top.

Yes, one need look no further than a Tech-Priest Enginseer, as their profile has 1 attack and three close combat weapons with no ability to get Basic/Special/Heavy Weapons. If one assumed that a profile included all relevant characteristic modifiers, than the A profile would be 2. Unless you wanted to argue that a Tech-Priest Enginseer has 0 attacks base and the profile includes the +1 attack for two close combat/pistol weapons...

Yes, that is an example of credible reasoning. The A stat has no other use beyond CC, therefore if a stat line already factored in equipment then a model that started with more than one CC weapon (and no non-CC weapons) would have at least A2.

 Manchu wrote:
Yes, that is an example of credible reasoning. The A stat has no other use beyond CC, therefore if a stat line already factored in equipment then a model that started with more than one CC weapon (and no non-CC weapons) would have at least A2.

Which is pretty much everyone given that they have a knife (default) and start with a combat blade for the most part and they all also have 1 attack.