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.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Good riddance.
The Inquisition can get the hell off of 40k tabletop.

I wish you would shut up sometimes Kan.

Stop telling people what armies they can and cannot have.

I wish you would actually read posts sometimes, HB.

There's nothing in my post saying "YOU CANNOT HAVE THIS".
It's me expressing my personal feelings on the Inquisition on the 40k tabletop. Namely: they can get the hell off of it.
Why? Because I feel they were shoehorned in with the Daemonhunters and Witchhunters books.

Vaktathi wrote:In the current books, Inquisitors can be taken alongside GK Grand Masters or Cannonesses bringing along their own retinues and specialties to the force, or as the leader of an army. They can do either.

And Daemonhunters are being overwritten by the Grey Knight book next month. With that, only Coteaz will be "leading armies" of any individual import, the rest will be doing what I've been saying they should be doing: acting as an advisorial role with a cadre of specialists being under their purview.

They took over direct command and integrated themselves into the planning. They didn't go into tactical stuff, but they did get involved on the operational level (where many 40k games take place) and dictated all strategic matters.

Special circumstances which made it allowable though. Daemonic incursions and Warp Portals out the wazoo mean that's one of those circumstances where it's completely believable, even encouraged that the Inquisition would be dictating strategic matters.

Except when Hector Rex was put in direct command of the 88th Siege Army as its commander?

"Supreme Commander" actually.
'With the great lord would come not only his own formidable retinue of followers but also other Inquisitors of the Ordo Malleus, allies of Rex who supported their leader and would now be placed amongst the headquarters of each Krieg regiment on Vraks."
That last part is what I'm personally in favor of. Inquisitors would have been a great advisor or if they were setup like the Techpriest Enginseers.

By what? BL books? Sorry, but they don't render Codex books obsolete.

Yeah they do, actually--at least when it comes to the background material.

Even if they did, they aren't contradictory in any way to Inquisitors leading armies.

Other than y'know, every Inquisitor they've described in detail has acted as an advisory element to the supreme commanders, who can if necessary overwrite the commanders.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Good riddance.
The Inquisition can get the hell off of 40k tabletop.

I wish you would shut up sometimes Kan.

Stop telling people what armies they can and cannot have.

Yes indeed, Muammar Gaddafi used to do that too, and look what it got him now

Kanluwen wrote:Karazmov wasn't a "Sisters" character, but an Inquisitor who could be fielded with absolutely no attachment to the Sisters or Ecclesiarchy.

I know I was just pointing out another SC in the codex Karazmov and celestine are the only ones, right?

Samus_aran115 wrote:
I know I was just pointing out another SC in the codex Karazmov and celestine are the only ones, right?

Yes you're right and now Grey Knights took him too. Actually Grey Knights have borrowed every model (literally) from the WH codex except the actual Sororitas ones. In some ways it irks me as I know I will be waiting at least a year for new stuff, but in the long run its good as it likley means that we will be getting more of our own units in codex SoB not some cobbled together crap as in codex WH. Hopefully we get a few more guns that shoot farther than 12" though. I bet that St Celestine gets a huge buff though when she's updated. She's kind of wimpy for a 200+ point character. One failed save usually means death for her since there are a lot fo 6+ Strength guns out there. Sure she can come back from the dead but after losing 1d6 faith points and possibly your ability to use faith for the rest of the game its often not worth it.

Sisters are a finesse army and it takes skill to use them against even moderately competent opponents.

I dont think we will see any Inquisition SC in the Sisters of Battle codex. If anything we will see the return of these :

SAINT PRAXEDES OF OPHELIA VII
HELENA THE VIRTUOUS
URIAH JACOBUS
REDEMPTOR KYRINOV
CARDINAL ARMANDUS HELFIRE

Two of these already have models but no longer rules.

As for henchmen we will most likely see some sort of Frateris Militia with rag tag mobs of people in them.
Maybe Arbites as well amongst those entries.

MadCowCrazy wrote:I dont think we will see any Inquisition SC in the Sisters of Battle codex. If anything we will see the return of these :

SAINT PRAXEDES OF OPHELIA VII
HELENA THE VIRTUOUS
URIAH JACOBUS
REDEMPTOR KYRINOV
CARDINAL ARMANDUS HELFIRE

Two of these already have models but no longer rules.

As for henchmen we will most likely see some sort of Frateris Militia with rag tag mobs of people in them.
Maybe Arbites as well amongst those entries.

Hopefully we get some more than that. I don't really want Jacobus as I hated the fluff behind him and the look of his model. Its not a bad one, I just don't want a mad mountain man with a shotgun in my army. Its just doesn't fit to me. Kyrinov is cool. He's the pope and he's kicking butt! Really though I want a few characters that are actually alive. Praxedes and Jacobus are both dead according to their last fluff. I'm sure we'll get them too.

Kanluwen wrote:

Alpharius wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Good riddance.
The Inquisition can get the hell off of 40k tabletop. They don't belong as anything more than an HQ/Advisor option for the Imperial Guard.

Says... you?

You realize that statements like this are probably what cause you the most grief, right?

And you realize it's a personal preference, right?

But for that matter...
I do not understand this burning need people seem to have with the Inquisition being on the tabletop.
Is it really that important that you can just have the option?
Because frankly, I would actually rather have them represented based on the way they're portrayed in the background. I don't want Inquisitors being Astartes Hero Lite; I want them to be more akin to the Eisenhorns, the Grummans and the Ravenors of the 40k universe.

Given that its the ONLY race for 40k TT I like (I only like the guard when used by the Inquisition and I'm NOT talking just an Inquisitor) then yeah; its a pretty big deal to me.

You do know that there is whole groups of philosophies that a large portion of Inquisitors follow; that prefer to do their stuff out on the open? yeah.

-Lord Inquisitor Coteaz
-Lord Inquisitor Karmazov
-Lord Inquisitor Commodeus Vokes
-Lord Inquisitor Firenze

All are famous Inquisitors that do EVERYTHING out in the open. (one of the philosophies).

-Inquisitor Eisenhorn
-Inquisitor Jaq Draco
-Inquisitor Ravenor

These famous inquisitors prefer secrective methods. There is just as much right for Inquisition armies to be playable; since its WELL-NOTED that a proportion of Inquisitors are noted to have armies of followers (whom have their own followers they will give). Who says mine can't be like that?

"I do not understand this burning need people seem to have with the Inquisition being on the tabletop. "

What's your burning need to see them go away? There's nothing in the fluff that prevents an inquisitor from leading an army and there's no reasons to write new fluff to change this.

I've bought a box of Inquisitor and Retinue recently and I don't want it to become a simple HQ/Advisor in an IG army I don't have.

Der Immolator wrote:"I do not understand this burning need people seem to have with the Inquisition being on the tabletop. "

What's your burning need to see them go away? There's nothing in the fluff that prevents an inquisitor from leading an army and there's no reasons to write new fluff to change this.

I've bought a box of Inquisitor and Retinue recently and I don't want it to become a simple HQ/Advisor in an IG army I don't have.

My "burning need to see them go away" is because they were introduced in as asinine of a manner as the squats were. They were shoehorned in and the background was ignored simply so that they could have a tie-in to the shoddy Inquisitor 54mm game. If they'd done it right the first time, we'd not be stuck with a craptastic Grey Knights Codex which has basically crammed the three primary Ordos of the Inquisition in as an afterthought.

And yes, while there's "nothing in the fluff that prevents an Inquisitor from leading an army"--they don't tend to "lead armies" made up entirely of Ordo forces.

You know why? Because the Inquisitors most often operate alone, with no way to have the forces of the Inquisition constantly with them. It's why they have the Inquisitorial Rosette, allowing them to strongarm or browbeat local forces into assisting them.

Kanluwen wrote:
My "burning need to see them go away" is because they were introduced in as asinine of a manner as the squats were. They were shoehorned in and the background was ignored simply so that they could have a tie-in to the shoddy Inquisitor 54mm game.

Except they've been around as 40k army leaders since loooooooong before the Inquisitor game came out, and long since it has been relegated to a back burner game.

You know why? Because the Inquisitors most often operate alone, with no way to have the forces of the Inquisition constantly with them. It's why they have the Inquisitorial Rosette, allowing them to strongarm or browbeat local forces into assisting them.

Most often doesn't mean always. The vast majority of the Imperium's wars never see a single Space Marine boot, and of those that do, it's rarely for more than a single engagement of company or smaller size. Yet they SM's are the ubiquitous Imperial force in this game. Inquisitors sometimes lead armies, they don't always or necessarily often, but they can and do and it's always something that's been available in the game and hasn't been retconned and the imagery of an Inquisitor dirtying themselves in the business of purging is fairly iconic for 40k.

There's no reason *not* to have the option just because they don't fit with a couple of Black Library books.

andrewm9 wrote:
Hopefully we get some more than that. I don't really want Jacobus as I hated the fluff behind him and the look of his model. Its not a bad one, I just don't want a mad mountain man with a shotgun in my army. Its just doesn't fit to me. Kyrinov is cool. He's the pope and he's kicking butt! Really though I want a few characters that are actually alive. Praxedes and Jacobus are both dead according to their last fluff. I'm sure we'll get them too.

About a year ago when Stickmonkey first reported on the Sisters 3ups he had seen he said he saw a female model with a storm bolter on each hand, the type Grey Knights use that are part of their gloves. He also said he saw a female with twin cat o flails but that could be a new Repentia Mistress model.

Either way there are sure to release some new SCs, at least 2-4 new ones compared to what we have now. Most likely a SC Canoness of some sort.

Kanluwen wrote:My "burning need to see them go away" is because they were introduced in as asinine of a manner as the squats were. They were shoehorned in and the background was ignored simply so that they could have a tie-in to the shoddy Inquisitor 54mm game. If they'd done it right the first time, we'd not be stuck with a craptastic Grey Knights Codex which has basically crammed the three primary Ordos of the Inquisition in as an afterthought.

And yes, while there's "nothing in the fluff that prevents an Inquisitor from leading an army"--they don't tend to "lead armies" made up entirely of Ordo forces.

You know why? Because the Inquisitors most often operate alone, with no way to have the forces of the Inquisition constantly with them. It's why they have the Inquisitorial Rosette, allowing them to strongarm or browbeat local forces into assisting them.

Even if it was badly integrated, Inquisition as an army was still an addition to WH40k and I'm sure people playing them don't regret it. What you propose is subtracting content from the game. Don't be surprise if most people won't agree.

"Don't tend to", "most often" =/ never, always.

" with no way to have the forces of the Inquisition constantly with them.", "allowing them to strongarm or browbeat local forces into assisting them."

Those forces can't be worth 2000pts?

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
My "burning need to see them go away" is because they were introduced in as asinine of a manner as the squats were. They were shoehorned in and the background was ignored simply so that they could have a tie-in to the shoddy Inquisitor 54mm game.

Except they've been around as 40k army leaders since loooooooong before the Inquisitor game came out, and long since it has been relegated to a back burner game.

"Long since it has been relegated to a backburner game"? Oh you mean that they just haven't updated the books, same as Necrons.

I gotcha now.

Oh...wait. It looks like Necrons are undergoing a dramatic background shift. Funny how that works.

You know why? Because the Inquisitors most often operate alone, with no way to have the forces of the Inquisition constantly with them. It's why they have the Inquisitorial Rosette, allowing them to strongarm or browbeat local forces into assisting them.

Most often doesn't mean always. The vast majority of the Imperium's wars never see a single Space Marine boot, and of those that do, it's rarely for more than a single engagement of company or smaller size. Yet they SM's are the ubiquitous Imperial force in this game. Inquisitors sometimes lead armies, they don't always or necessarily often, but they can and do and it's always something that's been available in the game and hasn't been retconned and the imagery of an Inquisitor dirtying themselves in the business of purging is fairly iconic for 40k.

And the Marine thing is something that irks me too, yet the explanation of 40k representing a "snapshot of an important part of a larger battle" makes the Space Marine presence far, far more acceptable than the supposed "imagery of an Inquisitor dirtying themselves in the business of purging" which is so fairly iconic for 40k it really doesn't happen in the majority of the background pieces out there.

There's no reason *not* to have the option just because they don't fit with a couple of Black Library books.

And there's no reason to have the option just because it was there to begin with.
Squats were there to begin with.
They were dropped for a damned good reason. Just do the same thing with the Inquisition and refinesse the background/placement of them to make more sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Der Immolator wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:My "burning need to see them go away" is because they were introduced in as asinine of a manner as the squats were. They were shoehorned in and the background was ignored simply so that they could have a tie-in to the shoddy Inquisitor 54mm game. If they'd done it right the first time, we'd not be stuck with a craptastic Grey Knights Codex which has basically crammed the three primary Ordos of the Inquisition in as an afterthought.

And yes, while there's "nothing in the fluff that prevents an Inquisitor from leading an army"--they don't tend to "lead armies" made up entirely of Ordo forces.

You know why? Because the Inquisitors most often operate alone, with no way to have the forces of the Inquisition constantly with them. It's why they have the Inquisitorial Rosette, allowing them to strongarm or browbeat local forces into assisting them.

Even if it was badly integrated, Inquisition as an army was still an addition to WH40k and I'm sure people playing them don't regret it. What you propose is subtracting content from the game. Don't be surprise if most people won't agree.

I don't give a flying crap if "most people won't agree". I'm expressing an opinion, just like you're doing it too.

And for all this talk of "subtracting content from the game", people are constantly whining that they want my Dark Angels to receive the same treatment I'm proposing here. What do I tell them? That yeah, it's easily doable to just "drop them" into the main SM book. But you lose all the damned character involved with the depicted force. That is why I think the Inquisition either should have been relegated to a background role in a mainline book ala the Imperial Guard or held off on, their entire background, organizational methods, etc overhauled and given their own full-sized book.

I understand that people "don't want their armies dropped" and I completely understand that people like the Inquisition. I really do.
But things with the Inquisition either need to be reworked or just plain dropped and started over from scratch again. It's completely unfreaking acceptable that all three Ordos have been crammed into the Grey Knights book.

It's even more unacceptable that you just know the only reason it was done was to placate the die-hard Inquisition fans, the kinds who are here arguing against me right now.

"Don't tend to", "most often" =/ never, always.

Of course they don't. But by that same token, it doesn't mean that Inquisitors always travel in Black Ships loaded with Inquisitorial Stormtroopers and seconded Guard regiments to serve as meatshields.

" with no way to have the forces of the Inquisition constantly with them.", "allowing them to strongarm or browbeat local forces into assisting them."

Those forces can't be worth 2000pts?

You tell me. Do you really think a strike team led by an Inquisitor and consisting of Inquisitorial Stormtroopers backed up by an orbital asset which launches pinpoint strikes should be worth 2k points?

Kanluwen wrote:[
"Long since it has been relegated to a backburner game"? Oh you mean that they just haven't updated the books, same as Necrons.

Irrelevant, the point was that they weren't shoe-horned in for the Inquisitor game, that was pure fantasy on your part. The Inquisitor game wasn't released until nearly a decade and a half after 40k was released, and inquisitors are still largely the same now as they have been in the past in regards to their station on the battlefield and the tabletop. The point was that they've been in the game as army leaders for nearly two and a half decades and are a defining feature of tabletop Inquisitorial forces, and really don't have much to do with the Inquisitor tabletop game.

Oh...wait. It looks like Necrons are undergoing a dramatic background shift. Funny how that works.

Um...ok this has what to do with what we are talking about and is based on what exactly?

And the Marine thing is something that irks me too, yet the explanation of 40k representing a "snapshot of an important part of a larger battle" makes the Space Marine presence far, far more acceptable than the supposed "imagery of an Inquisitor dirtying themselves in the business of purging" which is so fairly iconic for 40k it really doesn't happen in the majority of the background pieces out there.

It hasn't happened in Black Library books you mean. ZOMG! Get over it. Black Library doesn't cover everything, much of it is little better than entertaining war porn, and isn't the real authority on 40k background, the design studio is. Hell, half the Black Library books don't even make sense next to other Black Library books. In some books you have Tac squads taking on thousands of Dark Eldar troops and butchering them, in others you have a squad of guardsmen and some mud hut dwellers taking out Space Marines with relatively inconsequential casualties.

And there's no reason to have the option just because it was there to begin with.

Except that its been a defining feature of inquisitorial forces for decades and removing it removes a well known, long established trait from that army that has helped define it since its inception?

Squats were there to begin with.
They were dropped for a damned good reason. Just do the same thing with the Inquisition and refinesse the background/placement of them to make more sense.

Squats were dropped because it was felt they were too comedic and nobody on the design studio wanted to work on them to fix that. Inquisitors leading armies aren't even in remotely the same situation. You're pretty much the only person arguing that Inquisitors should not be allowable army leaders that I've ever seen. I don't think I'm alone in this assertion judging by the responses here.

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:[
"Long since it has been relegated to a backburner game"? Oh you mean that they just haven't updated the books, same as Necrons.

Irrelevant, the point was that they weren't shoe-horned in for the Inquisitor game, that was pure fantasy on your part. The Inquisitor game wasn't released until nearly a decade and a half after 40k was released, and inquisitors are still largely the same now as they have been in the past in regards to their station on the battlefield and the tabletop. The point was that they've been in the game as army leaders for nearly two and a half decades and are a defining feature of tabletop Inquisitorial forces, and really don't have much to do with the Inquisitor tabletop game.

Yeah...so, about that "shoehorning in"?
There was no Inquisition "force" until the Inquisitor game was released. They were options, sure. But they weren't their own entire army.

But you can keep believing that there was "no shoehorning" in that regard.

People, stop feeding the troll. Please.

That's funny coming from you, Grizgrin.

But eh. I made my point. The Inquisition needs to be heavily redone, given the full Dark Eldar treatment when it comes to their background and how they behave on the tabletop.

Cramming them into the Grey Knights book as a "fanservice" wasn't the right answer though.

There is a difference between making a point and making a Dalmatian

Kanluwen wrote:Good riddance.
The Inquisition can get the hell off of 40k tabletop. They don't belong as anything more than an HQ/Advisor option for the Imperial Guard.

Aaaaand a couple pages later:

Kanluwen wrote: I think the Inquisition either should have been relegated to a background role in a mainline book ala the Imperial Guard or held off on, their entire background, organizational methods, etc overhauled and given their own full-sized book.

Ever notice how when someone is losing in a long argument they start to subtly change their stance untill it looks more like their opponents so they don't seem as wrong? Most of the Inquisition fans are arguing that they should get their own book. Kanluwen went from "They should be at most advisors" to "They should get their own book". Suddenly this was his stance all along and you are just misreading him.

But this is all off-topic. I'm getting realling jazzed about this new With Chunter book. I don't know how to chunt a With, but I bet it's going to be awesome!

Ever notice how when someone is losing in a long argument they start to subtly change their stance until it looks more like their opponent's so they don't seem as wrong?

Subtly? I wouldn't say subtly. LOL. It's a regular habit for people who argue with everything and spam every thread with tons of rebuttals long after they've been proven incorrect.

Chunting will be the new Rending. Mark my words.

Wit Chhunter is a new Inquisition special character kind of like how Lionel Johnson became Lion El'Johnson after GW writers got hold of his name.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Chunting will be the new Rending. Mark my words.

They should have made the Eversor assassin's neural gauntlet chunting instead of "counts as lightning claw" I hate "counts as" for items with unique sounding names. But that's a different rant.

According to Google.

Definitions of chunter on the Web:

* To speak in a soft, indistinct manner, mutter; To grumble, complain
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chunter

So, all of you that say Kan is off topic. Lies, he is totally on topic!!!

One thing I really really REALLY wanna know.

What sort of Inquisition army player...actually uses an Inquisitor with NO retinue or power in his army? (aka the majority of the sneaky ones)

Mr Hyena wrote:One thing I really really REALLY wanna know.

What sort of Inquisition army player...actually uses an Inquisitor with NO retinue or power in his army? (aka the majority of the sneaky ones)

I can't speak for everyone but I know I don't/didn't.

I used to, as a cheap way to get an assassin into the list without using up an hq slot.

I haven't played WH in years though.

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
My "burning need to see them go away" is because they were introduced in as asinine of a manner as the squats were. They were shoehorned in and the background was ignored simply so that they could have a tie-in to the shoddy Inquisitor 54mm game.

Except they've been around as 40k army leaders since loooooooong before the Inquisitor game came out, and long since it has been relegated to a back burner game.

I started playing in 3rd Edition, and back then you could take an Inquisitor as an HQ choice (either the sole HQ or complementing one from your own army). I've been using an Inquisitor as the leader of my army (be it Sisters of Battle or Imperial Guard) since then, which was well before the Inquisitor game came out.

So, now that Codex: Grey Knights is out, I am finding myself, for the first time in more than a decade, unable to bring an Inquisitor as the commander of my army. I am not too upset, though, because I find that Col. Iron Hand Straken makes a pretty nifty Inquisitor (certainly better in combat than the ones in the GK codex) complete with a modest retinue. And regular IG storm troopers with red uniforms and black armour make more than adequate Inquisitorial Storm Troopers.

Still and all, I would have much preferred the ability to still use them as allies. Or a pure Inquisition codex would be great also.

Inquisitors were part of a White Dwarf preview / rules release before the DH/WH codex came out. I believe it was only a few months before the codex release. (I still have the WD downstairs.)

Inquisitors were definitely not part of the 2nd Ed SoB Codex or the Codex Chapter Approved codex from 3rd. I believe they were part of 2nd edition Codex Imperialis until that was squatted with the move to 3rd. So saying they've always been part of the game is a bit of a misrepresentation.

And right now you can still bring WH inquisitors to your IG army as that codex and the rules for allies in it have not changed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just checked. It was WD274 in Nov 2002. And it didn't have HQ inquisitors. So from the end of 2nd until DH/WH Inquisitors were not an option for IG.

pretre wrote:So saying they've always been part of the game is a bit of a misrepresentation.

Hardly. They were available from the word go throughout all of 2nd Ed as an Imperial Agent for any Imperial army (my Guard army almost always had an Inquisitor leading them - they were his army!). Before then, in Rogue Trader, there are rules for Inquisitors (including the first rules for the Psycannon) as far back as the Realms of Chaos books.

They've always been around - even if they were from Citadel Journal rules or something obscure like the Ordo Hereticus Strike Force.