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.

6th Edition Warhammer 40,000 has hit, and it is an exciting time. The new Allies rules look to allow a mostly satisfying, tournament-legal Arbites force using Codex Imperial Guard with Allies drawn from Codex Grey Knights (mostly Coteaz and his Henchmen warbands - Crusaders w/ Power Mauls FTW!) However, I am never quite satisfied with these "counts-as" options as they always leave something to be desired. While the current combo is pretty good, and covers most of the units I would want to include in my Arbites force, the fact that I am limited to a maximum of two of the Henchman Warbands makes the full customization of my army a bit more difficult.

Thus, I present to you my latest home-brew Codex for the Adeptus Arbites - this one built specifically for 6th Edition Warhammer 40,000.

The "Designer's Notes" section on the front page explain most of what I want to say at the moment, so please take a look and let me know what you think!

Beyond that, I wanted to solicit opinions on whether the army list is "complete" as-is, or if there are any other units I should still add. The top of the list, in my opinion, of units not in the army list that might need added would be Penal Legion squads and PDF platoons, or maybe a single unit entry that would allow you to field something similar, as well as various other units like the Mutant Press Gangs and Citizen Levy as found in my 5th Edition Codex (see my sig for a link to that thread).

Last Updated 03/04/2014

Further links to this codex:

Scribd.com
box.com

Thank you!

One of the better home-brew dex's that I've seen in a long while.

I like the stats as they are, but I see a "spees mareens are BS 4 and they train more and....yadda yadda yadda" argument in the future.

I always liked the arbites, I'll take a look

Nocturn wrote:
I like the stats as they are, but I see a "spees mareens are BS 4 and they train more and....yadda yadda yadda" argument in the future.

SoB and IG Vets are BS4, I'm sure its fine

I'd require a fortification in the army construction.
Fluff has these guys always defending the city anytime they are doing anything bigger than a kill-team type action.

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:I'd require a fortification in the army construction.
Fluff has these guys always defending the city anytime they are doing anything bigger than a kill-team type action.

-Matt

Thats a good idea. With the fence thing only 30 points at a minimum, I dont see it as a huge downside (though their fortifications lack anything with skyfire/interceptor)

Some errors I noted

From Sentinel Pursuit

Any Sentinel may replace its multi-laser with:- Multi-laser or web cannon 10 points

So I can replace my multi laser, for a multi laser that costs 10 points more!

From Fire Support team

You may include up to three Fire Support Teams as a single Elites choice. Each team is treated as a separate unit.

Yet they are in HS

From Sentry Targeting

Sentry Targeting: When using automated fire, a gun emplacement mounted on a pre-fab barricade line may ignore any vehicle on which it would be unable to cause at least a glancing hit based on the facing it would be firing at. (For example, a twin-linked heavy bolter emplacement (S5) firing at the front facing of a Leman Russ battle tank (AV 13) would be allowed to choose the next closest target instead as the most it could roll for Armour Penetration would be an 11

Example has a russ with a front armor of 13 instead of 14

From Arbite Sector House

Add ammunition dump one of the following

Should read "Add one of the following"


In the summary the Halligan Missile Launcher is missing. The Eagle also has contradictory stats
From its profile its 12/10/10. In the summary its 12/12/11


Also I know you probably copy/pasted, but think you can remove the unneeded stat lines for non walker vehicles (The WS, S, I, and A) to give it a cleaner look?

+1, Like. I'll be running some Vassal games with it to see how things go. Might make it to LGS scene, but I don't think we have that many Arbites enthusiasts.

Thank you all for the comments. Keep them coming!


On the BS4 (WS4 for Suppression Teams) issue, I don't plan on budging there without a VERY convincing argument. As I have seen others point out, the abstractions of the BS scale we play with are more than just "Space Marines are 4 so everyone who isn't as awesome as them should be a 3 or less". Your run-of-the-mill Imperial Guardsman, who often receives little training beyond "This is your lasgun, point that end at the enemy and pull this trigger to make him die" is BS3. Their veterans and highly-trained units (Stormtroopers) are BS4. So are Sisters of Battle. None of these are genetically-enhanced super soldiers who train 23 hours every day. The Arbites train like crazy (as seen in the Shira Calpurnia novel "Crossfire" among other places), so I think upping BS (or WS) to 4 is justified.

HawaiiMatt wrote:I'd require a fortification in the army construction.
Fluff has these guys always defending the city anytime they are doing anything bigger than a kill-team type action.

-Matt

Interesting idea, and it has merit. I will keep it in mind. However, one thing I tried to do with this army list was to keep it as restriction-free as possible. In my 5th Edition Codex, I had units which required other units before they could be included (Combat Teams could not outnumber Patrol Teams, and the various "Precinct Auxiliaries" required Officer-level characters to unlock a certain number of them per choice). I also had 0-1 choices and similar restrictions. In this new version, I wanted to streamline things and let the player choose whether to limit themselves in any way to fit fluff (like your suggestion does), or just power-game the list as much as any official Codex allows. That said, I will consider your suggestion.

kenshin620 wrote:Some errors I noted

Sweet! A proofreader!!! Thank you VERY MUCH for pointing out these errors. I will correct them ASAP and upload a new version of the Codex to fix them. If you see any more, PLEASE point them out!!!!

Seriously - this is one of my biggest issues. I am very good at proofreading other people's stuff, but my own work is very difficult, because I know exactly what it is supposed to say, and often just read it as if it says it right. Having someone else point out where I have botched something up in a copy/paste error or when juggling FOC slots is a BIG HELP!!! Again, THANK YOU!!!!!

kenshin620 wrote:Also I know you probably copy/pasted, but think you can remove the unneeded stat lines for non walker vehicles (The WS, S, I, and A) to give it a cleaner look?

This one is actually a conscious choice. When writing my home-brew army lists, I try to conform to GW conventions and standards. The most recent GW Codex books and the new 6th Edition Rulebook use this format, which I have come to embrace as it provides only two different types of Unit Profiles rather than three - and simplification is usually a good thing. I had a similar experience when GW switched from providing special rules and background in their Army List entries to putting those in a separate section (like the 2nd Edition days), but came to realize the benefits of being able to thumb through only a handful of pages when writing an army list rather than dozens.

chrisrawr wrote:+1, Like. I'll be running some Vassal games with it to see how things go. Might make it to LGS scene, but I don't think we have that many Arbites enthusiasts.

Sounds great - let me know how it goes. Any playtesting info I can get would be greatly helpful!

Ambience 327 wrote:

On the BS4 (WS4 for Suppression Teams) issue, I don't plan on budging there without a VERY convincing argument. As I have seen others point out, the abstractions of the BS scale we play with are more than just "Space Marines are 4 so everyone who isn't as awesome as them should be a 3 or less". Your run-of-the-mill Imperial Guardsman, who often receives little training beyond "This is your lasgun, point that end at the enemy and pull this trigger to make him die" is BS4. Their veterans and highly-trained units (Stormtroopers) are BS4. So are Sisters of Battle. None of these are genetically-enhanced super soldiers who train 23 hours every day. The Arbites train like crazy (as seen in the Shira Calpurnia novel "Crossfire" among other places), so I think upping BS (or WS) to 4 is justified.

About the BS of the Arbites. BS 3 represent the Ballistic Skill of a Trained Human Soldier. Just as LD 7 represents the Leadership of the Average trained human soldier. This is consistant over all GW material. See, Codex Imperial Guard, Codex Grey Knights, Army Book The Empire, Army Book Bretonnians (the archers arnt trained so much as spent their entire life hunting with their bows), Codex: Catachans. (Outdated). It is a staple to have Basic Trained Humans at BS 3. Same for the Vehicles. The Imperial Guard Chimeras are BS 3, same with the Sentinels. And they are soldiers actively engaged in combat zones, not in fights with gangers and criminals. Inquisitorial Chimeras arent even BS 4, and these are crews the Inquisitor has hand picked. Even Space Marine Scouts are BS 3. Having a BS of 4 only comes form active combat experience it seems, See IG Vets: Men who have fought on the front lines and are the sole survivors of months or years of battle (since IG regiments usually dont get reinforcements.) Space Marines. IG Stormtroopers (the very best the Guard has to offer) And the Sisters (Should be BS 3 in my mind really the only weak link in the Trained Humans are BS 3 argument)

As for the equipment, its accepted fluff for them to have carapace and boltguns, which just shows how much GW dislikes IG, for if you can afford to equip cops with boltguns and carapace armor why not your soldiers who actually need it. Guess gangers and mutants are a bigger threat then orks, tyranids, eldar, ect.

Also your WS should be WS 3. This seems to be the average for MOST HUMANS. Only humans who have exceptional training, Commissars, IG Officers, Canonesses ect have ws 4.

Over all nice codex, but suffers from the same problems most human centric codex do. Namely thinking that WS/BS 3 is a low skill.

Well to be fair GW already "gave" Arbites BS4 when in the WH Codex they said "You can represent the Adeptus Arbites by giving inquisitional storm troopers shotguns blah blah blah..."

So thanks to that pretty much all Arbite fan dexes I have seen gives them BS4. And I actually do think they could use a tone down, but then arbite fans will thump me with shock mauls

kenshin620 wrote:Well to be fair GW already "gave" Arbites BS4 when in the WH Codex they said "You can represent the Adeptus Arbites by giving inquisitional storm troopers shotguns blah blah blah..."

So thanks to that pretty much all Arbite fan dexes I have seen gives them BS4. And I actually do think they could use a tone down, but then arbite fans will thump me with shock mauls

So, Cops who only really fight ganger, and sometimes mutants, have the same BS as the Elite of the Imperial Guard.
Guess if you offset it with the cost of being BS 4 go ahead.

Thin Blue Line is incorrect, the PDF is reponsible for the planets protection, Arbiters are law enforcement with some ablity to wage a small war.

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:

kenshin620 wrote:Well to be fair GW already "gave" Arbites BS4 when in the WH Codex they said "You can represent the Adeptus Arbites by giving inquisitional storm troopers shotguns blah blah blah..."

So thanks to that pretty much all Arbite fan dexes I have seen gives them BS4. And I actually do think they could use a tone down, but then arbite fans will thump me with shock mauls

So, Cops who only really fight ganger, and sometimes mutants, have the same BS as the Elite of the Imperial Guard. Nice consistency GW, by that logic the standard guardsman should be BS 4 as well.

And when they are consistent, it means that orks can never be BS3 or more! Ahh GW sure can be silly



Anyways I found another error

From Suppression Team

For every five models in the team, one Arbitrator may replace his Arbites combat shotgun with one of the following

Arbitrator are not the makeup of the unit, nor do they have shotguns

kenshin620 wrote:

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:

kenshin620 wrote:Well to be fair GW already "gave" Arbites BS4 when in the WH Codex they said "You can represent the Adeptus Arbites by giving inquisitional storm troopers shotguns blah blah blah..."

So thanks to that pretty much all Arbite fan dexes I have seen gives them BS4. And I actually do think they could use a tone down, but then arbite fans will thump me with shock mauls

So, Cops who only really fight ganger, and sometimes mutants, have the same BS as the Elite of the Imperial Guard. Nice consistency GW, by that logic the standard guardsman should be BS 4 as well.

And when they are consistent, it means that orks can never be BS3 or more! Ahh GW sure can be silly



Anyways I found another error

From Suppression Team

For every five models in the team, one Arbitrator may replace his Arbites combat shotgun with one of the following

Arbitrator are not the makeup of the unit, nor do they have shotguns

Orks have BS3? On what and why?

Like I said, I am firm on the BS4/WS4 unless you give me a really convincing argument. I have heard the "IG are trained soldiers" bit, and I have also read about how much "training" they get. The average Imperial Guardsman isn't really expected to kill his enemy with accurate fire. He is expected to kill his enemy through weight of numbers.

The average Arbitrator is expected not only to "fight gangers, mutants and criminals", but also to be able to fight off, or at least hold out against, any number of foes included alien invaders, heretical cultists, corrupt PDF and more. They aren't, as many people suggest, "Space Cops". They don't sully themselves with enforcing local laws. They are concerned with strict adherence to the Dictates Imperialis - the law of the Imperium. The most common punishments for even minor infractions is either conscription into the penal legions or summary execution. The only people who even warrant a trial are upper level dignitaries and members of important organizations - and very few are "above the law" in any meaningful way.

The Arbites are deliberately better trained and better equipped than PDF forces and the Imperial Guard precisely because they are often called upon to fight corrupted PDF and IG forces. When an Imperial Governor goes rogue, his first target is often the local Arbites Precinct Fortress, since if they aren't hit hard and fast, they will turtle up inside their self-sufficient fortress and send out an Astropath message calling in the cavalry.

I don't think BS3/WS3 is low - I just think it is more of an "average level", and I don't see the Arbites as "average". They are brought up in the same Schola Progenium schools that produce Commissars, Stormtroopers and Sisters of Battle - and are hand-picked for their task because they have risen to dominate their fellows through brute force, strong will or both. After selection, they receive intensive training which they are expected to continue long into their careers (Calpurnia chided herself on letting her own training slack a bit as she began integrating herself into the Hydraphur precinct.

Beyond all of that, the BS4 decision is also made in light of game balance. I want the Arbites to cost more than Imperial Guardsmen, but still be able to hold their own in a tabletop battle with them. Their standard armament of Combat Shotguns gives them somewhat reduced range compared to IG Lasguns, but their increased BS and the Executioner shells give them an extra edge to combat the difference in numbers and range. You will also notice that the Arbites have little access to long-ranged weaponry - and most of those are in Heavy Support. Most of their guns are capped out at 24" range - meaning they need to close with the enemy or let the enemy come to them, before they can really open up on them.

The WS4 is similarly meant to help boost the Suppression team in close combat. A Poisoned(4+) close combat weapon isn't really all that dangerous in the hands of a S3 A1 model. Sure the +1A and Hammer of Wrath from the Suppression Shield help, but unlike most models with the Hammer of Wrath rule, they aren't exactly fast-movers, so they won't be getting that charge very often. The best part is, WS4 doesn't even affect the game all that much. It makes them hit WS3 targets a bit better (3+ instead of 4+), but those same WS3 people would need a 4+ to hit them back weather they were WS3 or WS4. At the ends of the scale, they hit WS7 slightly easier than would a WS3 person, while only WS1 types find them harder to hit.

You are all, of course, free to disagree with my assessment and my decisions, but unless a truly compelling argument is brought to my attention, they will remain BS4 (and the Suppressors WS4).

GW-compelling Argument: If they're BS/WS 3, you can lower their points cost, increase the unit size, and SELL MORE MODELS WOO!

I dont like it but if they're the right points them whatever.

Ambience 327 wrote:Your run-of-the-mill Imperial Guardsman, who often receives little training beyond "This is your lasgun, point that end at the enemy and pull this trigger to make him die" is BS4. Their veterans and highly-trained units (Stormtroopers) are BS4.

No they aren't, vets are BS 4 and shouldn't even be troops anyway. Nothing angers me more than an all BS4 IG army. Granted Arbites frequently are portrayed as "elite", better equipped than the Guard, spend a lot more time in low intensity combat allowing them to build up experience instead of dying because a stray artillery shell hit them, so I wouldn't mind them being BS 4.

To be fair I use vets as troops, but that is only so I can get access to the doctrines.

Also I think Arbites should be desperate allies with Tau in particular since they are often the last line of defence before the Guard arrives against any xenos threat, and Tau in particular can lead to an outright uprising among the population that the Arbites will have to hold out against. Even if the Arbites do decide to support the Tau I can't imagine the Tau trusting them very much.

chrisrawr wrote:GW-compelling Argument: If they're BS/WS 3, you can lower their points cost, increase the unit size, and SELL MORE MODELS WOO!

Thankfully not an issue I have to deal with when writing a home-brew Codex!

Buttons wrote:

Ambience 327 wrote:Your run-of-the-mill Imperial Guardsman, who often receives little training beyond "This is your lasgun, point that end at the enemy and pull this trigger to make him die" is BS4. Their veterans and highly-trained units (Stormtroopers) are BS4.

No they aren't

You are of course quite correct. That is one of the worst typos I have ever committed! (Note to self - when having a polite argument about numbers, make sure you type the correct numbers, or else you look like and idiot!)

I have fixed it. Obviously I meant to say standard Guardsmen are BS3, and then contrast that with the BS4 of their veterans and the well-trained Stormtroopers and the Sisters of Battle. Thank you for pointing out my error - though I am surprised it took this long for someone to do so!

Buttons wrote:, vets are BS 4 and shouldn't even be troops anyway. Nothing angers me more than an all BS4 IG army. Granted Arbites frequently are portrayed as "elite", better equipped than the Guard, spend a lot more time in low intensity combat allowing them to build up experience instead of dying because a stray artillery shell hit them, so I wouldn't mind them being BS 4.

To be fair I use vets as troops, but that is only so I can get access to the doctrines.

I think allowing veterans as troops gives you the opportunity to make your army whatever you want it to be. Do you want to field a freshly conscripted IG force? Use Infantry Platoons only, with at least one or two Conscript squads. If you want a force that has seen a bit of action, toss in a veteran squad or two as well, mostly full-strength or nearly full-strength. If you want a force that has been fighting a long, hard-fought battle for many months (or years), stick to mostly vets - with some squads at full strength and others at various sizes from 5 to 9.

It isn't the type of unit selected that bothers me. It is the spamming of one particularly effective unit (like massed 5-man melta-vet units in Chimeras) for the sole purpose of "Win at all costs". I much prefer a game with a good story to one that I table my opponent. How much fun is that really? Of course, armies need to be at least a bit competitive so you aren't constantly trounced (hence my comments about BS4/WS4 also being for game balance).

Buttons wrote:Also I think Arbites should be desperate allies with Tau in particular since they are often the last line of defence before the Guard arrives against any xenos threat, and Tau in particular can lead to an outright uprising among the population that the Arbites will have to hold out against. Even if the Arbites do decide to support the Tau I can't imagine the Tau trusting them very much.

This bears consideration. You may be correct.



EDIT:
v 1.1 added - Mostly error corrections and clarifications. Thanks to kenshin620 and Buttons for pointing out errors and one change needed to the Allies table.

Ambience 327 wrote:
I think allowing veterans as troops gives you the opportunity to make your army whatever you want it to be. Do you want to field a freshly conscripted IG force? Use Infantry Platoons only, with at least one or two Conscript squads. If you want a force that has seen a bit of action, toss in a veteran squad or two as well, mostly full-strength or nearly full-strength. If you want a force that has been fighting a long, hard-fought battle for many months (or years), stick to mostly vets - with some squads at full strength and others at various sizes from 5 to 9.

It isn't the type of unit selected that bothers me. It is the spamming of one particularly effective unit (like massed 5-man melta-vet units in Chimeras) for the sole purpose of "Win at all costs". I much prefer a game with a good story to one that I table my opponent. How much fun is that really? Of course, armies need to be at least a bit competitive so you aren't constantly trounced (hence my comments about BS4/WS4 also being for game balance).

I wouldn't mind that, except the idea of "make X troops so you can make your army whatever you want it to be" works with pretty much any model, which goes against the idea of an FoC. If you let IG take vets as troops to simulate a veteran regiment (honestly 90% of people who make fluff for their IG forces probably make them "veterans" or "elites" anyway) you should let marines take vanguard and sternguard as troops to simulate a first company. TBH the best way to imagine an Imperial Guard army isn't a single regiment (unless of course they field literally only one kind of unit) but several regiments fighting united, which is how the IG works. An infantry regiment is pretty helpless on its own, so toss in some Iron Fist squads for mobility, some tanks for a little punch, some artillery for long range bombardment and you have a balanced capable force. In that sense having vets limited to elites still makes sense, your BS 3 troops are from a different regiment as the BS 4 veterans.

But yeah, if you let IG take vets as troops just because you might as well do the same with everyone else. Not that I would hate that, I like the fact that the Ork and Dark Eldar Codexes allow you to take certain units as troops without taking an IC, but at least make them take other stuff with it (Nobz as troops if you take a Warboss, Dark Eldar get something if they take a haemonculus (perhaps it has to be ancient), etc.).

V1.2 uploaded. I made a few minor changes and corrections, and a few more significant changes. Specifically:

- Lowered the points cost on several characters and units. They were just too expensive for what they were doing.

- Adjusted the points costs of a few options for various units.

- Swapped the FOC slots for Castigators (now HS) and Eagles (now FA). It feels more right that way.

I wish GW would publish an official codex for the Adeptus Arbites, but this is very good. I have a mini-dex for the Adeptus Arbites written by another website back in 2008. It is good to have an updated version for 6th edition.

I think the Adeptus Arbites having a BS of 4 is spot on. After all, many arbitrators were trained by the Schola Progenium; the same for storm troopers, commissars and the Adepta Sororitas. All of which have a BS of 4. In the mini-dex even their Chimeras and Sentinels were BS of 4. The suppression platforms (basically artillery for 5th edition) were twin-linked.

As far as WS is concerned, the older mini-dex had a special rule for when certain units were in close combat. It basically meant that a unit could not be hit on anything better than 4+ even though the majority of the models had a WS of 3. An interesting compromise for a unit with a low WS.

I played one game using the Adeptus Arbites minidex against a friend. He had a minidex for a genestealer cult written by the same website. It was a very fun game. Even though every model I used had a BS of 4, it did not make much of a difference, since the army has fewer models than a horde army. I also lost virtually every close combat when based by genestealer cultists.

Keep up the good work.

Thank you for the comments. If you happen to play any games with these rules, I would love to hear about them!

Just a heads up, the defensive stance you've taken with your units has really inspired a chunk of combat options in my up and coming WARGAME;

Inspired by the tactics of the Astartes, I decided that Overwatch shouldn't necessarily be something that is done with BAD shooting, rather, something that charging units better react to. (represented by adding the chargin unit's WS to its evasion, probably a +1 or +2 to cover save)

In 40K, it would be represented by giving each weapon a close-range BS penalty (such as BS2 for bolters within 6" - shotguns and pistols, and other assault weapons wouldn't have this weakness (but still confer the added WS -> Cover)

Combined with the brace action, which is similar to defensive grenades + Hammer of Wrath attack and not having to break formation when assaulted, this could really allow for shieldwalling against assault.

I dont know how this applies to you or the astartes directly - I just thought I'd let you know that you sort of inspired it.






Well, it could apply - you could have a unit that didn't pile-in in the assault phase if it didn't shoot in the shooting phase, and would therefore actually benefit from formations.

Version 1.3 Uploaded. Various tweaks and minor changes, based on playtesting and suggestion.

Change log:

- Added the Torrent rule to the the Web Cannon as it just seemed a little lackluster and forced vehicles armed with it to advance very close to the enemy. This allows slightly more mid-ranged shooting to occur, and gives those vehicles a wider threat range and more use for the Strikedown rule.

- The Shock Lance for Judges has be restricted to mounted models only. The idea of an Arbites Judge charging headlong on foot with a long spear just didn't jive with what I wanted the Arbites to be.

- Added a note about IC's who take a Cyber-Mastiff still being allowed to join units. I want to encourage robo-puppies, and limiting IC's who take one doesn't do that.

- Added a note requiring you to declare the use of a Spotting Scope prior to shooting. This is how it was meant to be, but it could have been interpreted differently.

- Fixed a few minor formatting errors and typos, and cleaned up a few rules descriptions to make them more clear.

- Cleared up a small bit of confusion in the Shield Wall Formation rule. Their Initiative 10 from the Shield Wall rule does indeed allow them to Pile In at Initiative Step 10 before they make their Attacks.

- Cleaned up the wording on the Disciplined Fire rule a bit.

- Reduced the cost of Heavy Stubbers to 10 points across the board.

- Reduced Grapplehawk cost to 10 points. (The just weren't cost effective for what they did.) Chasteners still get their discount.

- Reduced the cost of Power Mauls for the Personal Staff to 5.

- Changed the Personal Staff to be an Elites unit rather than HQ. It still doesn't take up a Force Org slot. This will really only affect very specific scenarios where the distinction between HQ/Elites becomes important.

- Changed the response team from 2 specials/heavies per 5 to a straight 4 specials/heavies and added the option for the Proctor to take a Storm Bolter. I realized this would allow people to field the classic "Executioner Team" with their four heavy bolters on five models, and there is plenty of precedent for small squads with lots of special/heavy weapons (SM Devastators, SOB Dominions, IG Veterans etc). I also upped their cost by 1 pt/model to account for this. Hopefully being an Elites Unit will prevent them from being overly spammed.

- Allowed 10-man pursuit teams to take one more Cyber-Mastiff.

New version uploaded. Change log:



Updated the Fire Support Team to limit lascannons and plasma cannons to 1 per Heavy Support Choice.


Removed the "Assault Vehicle" rule summary from the Codex - it is in the Rulebook, so no need for it to be in the Codex too.


Simplified and toned down the Shield Wall Formation rules for the Initiative a bit, and added a special bit about improving the cover save they grant to other units if they are the intervening models.


Updated Suppression Shields to bring them closer in-line with Storm Shields while still making them an attractive option and representative of their fluff and the old "energy surge on the charge" effect by removing the "counts as a close combat weapon" but adding Counter Attack on top of the Hammer of Wrath they already had.


Removed Counter Attack from Suppression Teams, since they will now get it from their shields. Also reduced their points cost by 2 points per model to reflect the decrease in their close-combat prowess due to the changes to Shield Wall Formation and Suppression Shields.


Added Missile Lock to the Eagle, and changed it from a twin-linked missile launcher to 2 missile launchers.


Fixed the Grav Chute Insertion rule to be in-line with the new Imperial Guard FAQ.


Beefed up the Halligan a bit to make it a more attractive option in comparison to the Fire Support Team.

- Improved the Halligan Missile Launcher to Heavy 2 and Twin-Linked to make it a bit more accurate and damaging so that the Halligan can fulfill its role of armour-buster more effectively.

- Added a Transport Capacity of 6, allowing it to carry a unit forward. It was already generally advancing a bit to get in range of enemy armour, so this provides a bit more utility to the vehicle. (No fire points means it can't act as a mobile bunker - merely a nice APC.)

- Allowed it to take up to two Hunter-Killer Missiles for a bit more early-game punch - at a hefty cost though.

- Upped the cost to 70 pts to reflect some of these changes (though it was needing a bit of beefing up anyway, so I didn't raise it much).


Raised the cost of the Twin-Linked Web Cannons on the Castigator just a tad. The addition of Torrent to the Web Cannon made this just a wee bit too effective for the cost.


Added a small selection of special characters for a bit of extra flavor. (I wanted to get the main codex more or less working properly before adding them - that point has been reached I think.)

Version 1.5 uploaded!


- Removed the requirement for characters attached to a Suppression Team to be equipped with suppression shields for the Shield Wall Formation rule to work, but added a restriction that at least 3 models in the unit must be equipped with suppression shields.


- Swapped in Mastopper Shells for Standard Shells on the Arbites Combat Shotgun. Now they are a bit more powerful, but still don't outshine the basic bolter. They are more flexible thanks to the Assault 2 Manstoppers, better against units in cover due to the Executioners, at slightly better in the 13"-18" range band. Bolters still equal or beat the Shotguns in pure firepower in the 1"-12" range band, and still outrange them with their 24" max range.


- Added the Riot Shield as an option for Characters, Patrol Teams, Response Teams, Pursuit Teams and the Personal Staff. For now, I have them granting the Stealth special rule, and adding +1 to the model's Armour Save in close combat only. I figure this allows them to add some protection in all cases, without being OP and still being vulnerable to some things (AP4 or better templates, AP3 or better close combat weapons).


- Raised the cost of plasma guns and melta guns on Response Teams to 15 points to take into account how useful these can be in large numbers.


- Added the Book of the Law as an option for Judges, allowing him to provide a bit of inspirational support for those under their command. Also added as an option for Judge Spartacus, and as standard wargear for Judge Schindler. (Raised her cost a bit to compensate.)


- Added the Forensus and Medi-pack as an either/or option for Judges, allowing them to provide a bit of support in smaller games where you wouldn't want a full Personal Staff, or to spread around extra support in larger games. I figure since Judges can come from anywhere within the Arbites hierarchy, they might have skills from either the Investigative or Medicae branches that they continue to practice.


- Reduced the base cost of the Judge to 60 points.


- Reduced the base cost of the Detective to 30 points.


- Added shroud grenades as an option for most characters and Suppression Team and Response Teams.


- Added the ability for Choke Grenades to grant an additional +1 to cover saves when a unit equipped with them goes to ground. (Requires at least 3 grenade-armed models in the unit to use.)


- Added a new special character - Lord Marhsal Luthir Verremon Goreman, who appears in the "Book of Judgement" supplement for the Dark Heresy role playing game.

Small update this time, so I am only incrementing to 1.51 (or maybe because I feel like being an odd duck).



- Cleaned up a number of minor typos and errors.


- Updated the Summary page, which I had forgotten to do with the 1.5 update.


- Added the "Independent Character" rule to the Detective. This was an ommission that has now been rectified.


- Updated the Transport Capacity sections of many vehicles, indicating which are unable to carry models with any of the Bulky special rules.


- Added a list of Judge-specific Warlord Traits.


- Added default Warlord Traits for all HQ Special Characters.

Bunch of random thoughts written as I read it...

Seems pretty good. Not a huge fan of BS 4, but I don't find it nearly as annoying as GW stats for Chaos Cultists or Imperial Assassins, for example.

Special rules seem a little over-complicated and maybe unneccessary. Call for Backup seems like it could be easily replaced by re-rolling reserve rolls, Units Inbound seems like it could be replaced by Acute Senses, The Thin Blue Line just seems unnecessary (and surely it should be The Thin Black Line?) and while I like the concept of Shield Wall Formation, I can't help but think there must be a more elegant way to do it.

Disciplined Fire is good though. Simple and characterful.

Choke grenades seem underwhelming. Can't see much use for them being fired from launchers... maybe Poison 5+, AP 5 and Ignores Cover would be better?

Maybe replace frag grenades in the launchers with shock grenades? Seems a bit more suitable for Arbites.

Cover save bonus for going to ground with choke grenades doesn't really work for me. Seems like they do too many different things.

Shroud grenades just seem too complex... plus I don't like any rule which requires leaving a large blast marker on the table. Too easy for it to get mixed up and what if you don't have a spare one? Personally, I'd just have them give the unit using them a cover save or something. I'd prefer giving a cover save to a cover save bonus, because smoke should be more useful in open ground.

Not convinced by the need to let the Large Bore Stubber be used in close combat when no other pistols in the game work like that.

Shock weapons getting Poison but not Concussive seems odd to me. On the other hand, it's consistent with Ork Grot-prods.

I like your rules for Shotguns, Mancatchers and Webbers (but I prefer the name 'Heavy Webber' to 'Web Cannon'... just seems a bit more traditional).

The Forensus needs to clarify who it grants Preferred Enemy against.

Any particular reason that the Spotting Scope can grant Tank Hunters but not Monster Hunters?

I'm not convinced that you need Riot Shields as well as Suppression Shields. Kind of confusing from a modeling/WYSIWYG point of view.

For Allies, I prefer the Forge World method of saying that an army is treated as one of the main armies and then adding exceptions. This allows it to interact with other non-standard lists which haven't been thought of yet.

I like the Special Characters (although a few of the references in the backstories are maybe a little too obvious, even for 40k), but they seem to have a lot of options, which is kind of odd.

Medi-Pack doesn't really seem like an appropriate option for the Arbites Judge.

Special Weapons generally seem a bit pricey.

The Combat Team doesn't really seem to have anything to distinguish it as a unit, either as a concept or for a battlefield role. I'd be tempted to just dump them. Maybe move suppressors to Troops and add another Eite unit.

Making cavalry and bike pursuit teams the same unit seems like a clumsy way of doing it. I'd rather see cavalry as an Elite choice with totally different options, possibly with Suppressor statlines.

Fire Support teams don't really work well for me as a concept. I'd rather seperate Snipers and Heavy Weapons into different units and I'm dubious about the use of two-man units. Not a great fan of the larger weapons being wieldable by single guys either... also, why no heavy stubbers in there?

Perfect Organism wrote:
Bunch of random thoughts written as I read it...

Thanks for the input!

Seems pretty good. Not a huge fan of BS 4, but I don't find it nearly as annoying as GW stats for Chaos Cultists or Imperial Assassins, for example.

The BS4 has been debated quite a bit. I am sticking with it, as I think it suits their level of training.

Special rules seem a little over-complicated and maybe unneccessary. Call for Backup seems like it could be easily replaced by re-rolling reserve rolls, Units Inbound seems like it could be replaced by Acute Senses, The Thin Blue Line just seems unnecessary (and surely it should be The Thin Black Line?) and while I like the concept of Shield Wall Formation, I can't help but think there must be a more elegant way to do it.

Lots of folks have "Re-roll Reserves" or "Add/Subtract Reserves". Call for Backup give them something unique, and it really isn't all that complicated in practice. It allows them to bring what they want, when they want it, at least to a point.

Units Inbound is a bit more debatable, but again, it is just a re-roll. This one also has precedent in things like the Orks codex and such. It has worked so far.

The name of Thin Blue Line is kind of a running joke/tradition, so it stays. As to whether the rule is necessary - probably not, but again it adds additional character to the army. You can always rely on getting to choose your deployment zone and get your forces where you want them to make the best use of available cover, etc - but it comes at a price. (i.e. the enemy can react to your deployment and choose who goes first)

Shield Wall Formation has gone through several iterations, and this is the one that seems to work best. The general idea is to give them some added resilience and close combat punch (inv. save, improved Initiative), and the rule as it is now works well for that. The extra bonus of improved cover saves for shooting through allows you to protect other units with them as well, representing the way riot troops work in a nicely visual way.

Disciplined Fire is good though. Simple and characterful.

Thank you.

Choke grenades seem underwhelming. Can't see much use for them being fired from launchers... maybe Poison 5+, AP 5 and Ignores Cover would be better?

Hmmm.... Poison 5+? Maybe. I didn't want them too powerful, or outshining the Frag grenades in kill tally too much - as they are meant to add more to the Pinning tools in the army rather than the killing tools. That might be a really good idea. Not sure about the AP5, though I guess that could make sense seeing as most 5+ save models don't seem to have much in the way of enclosed armour/helms/respirators/etc. Consider this under advisement.

Maybe replace frag grenades in the launchers with shock grenades? Seems a bit more suitable for Arbites.

I hadn't really considered this. While I like the thought, the Arbites have pretty much always had access to Frag & Krak Grenades. Also, I think the ability to "reach out and touch someone" with the Blind rule at more than 8" might be a bit too powerful.

Cover save bonus for going to ground with choke grenades doesn't really work for me. Seems like they do too many different things.

This one is in right now for playtesting. Others share your concerns, and I am on the fence. I want some more experience with how they work before deciding fully. However, keep in mind that they already grant Stealth under certain circumstances (being Defensive Grenades), and this just builds on that when they Go to Ground.

Shroud grenades just seem too complex... plus I don't like any rule which requires leaving a large blast marker on the table. Too easy for it to get mixed up and what if you don't have a spare one? Personally, I'd just have them give the unit using them a cover save or something. I'd prefer giving a cover save to a cover save bonus, because smoke should be more useful in open ground.

These are also in the playtesting stage. The general idea is to give you "portable cover" that you can move around the battlefield (remember, Shrouded gives you a 5+ cover save if you are in the open) without actually blocking line of sight. If you don't have extra blast markers, just use a token and place a blast marker as necessary. (I might even update the rule note that instead.) The fact that it is a scattering large blast marker means it is a little unreliable in placement, but that more than one unit can make use of them.

Not convinced by the need to let the Large Bore Stubber be used in close combat when no other pistols in the game work like that.

I'm going with rule of cool on this one. I could give them some other way of getting a Rending weapon, but I love the imagery presented by this tool. I figure the shortened range of the shooting version (8") helps justify the different ability. Also, with the advent of close combat weapons using full weapon profiles, something tells me GW may start doing similar things.

Shock weapons getting Poison but not Concussive seems odd to me. On the other hand, it's consistent with Ork Grot-prods.

This was a conscious choice. Squads full of Concussive weapons are something I have tried to avoid. While it is possible in official armies right now (Thunder Hammer Terminators, Power-Maul wielding Crusader Henchmen, etc), I personally think the potential slowdown of the game with that much bookkeeping for a close combat isn't worth it.

I like your rules for Shotguns, Mancatchers and Webbers (but I prefer the name 'Heavy Webber' to 'Web Cannon'... just seems a bit more traditional).

Thanks. Can't really take credit for the Mancatchers though - those rules are pretty much verbatim from the old Witchhunters book. I never really liked the pattern of calling all larger weapons "Heavy". I think it works for some, but not others. To me, Web Cannon just sounds better.

The Forensus needs to clarify who it grants Preferred Enemy against.

No it doesn't. According to the Preferred Enemy rule "If the special rule does not specify a type of foe, then everyone is a Preferred Enemy of the unit." The Forensus allows a model to study the enemy to find their weaknesses - so they gain Preferred Enemy against the whole enemy army once he has been on the board for a full turn.

Any particular reason that the Spotting Scope can grant Tank Hunters but not Monster Hunters?

Nope. I just didn't think of it. I will most likely add that to the list of rules it can grant. Thank you!

I'm not convinced that you need Riot Shields as well as Suppression Shields. Kind of confusing from a modeling/WYSIWYG point of view.

Riot Shields were added because some of my other commenters were begging for shields for the non-Suppression Teams. I didn't want full Suppression Shield level protection on those units, so I came up with the Riot Shield as a compromise. They give minimal extra protection against both shooting and close combat.

For Allies, I prefer the Forge World method of saying that an army is treated as one of the main armies and then adding exceptions. This allows it to interact with other non-standard lists which haven't been thought of yet.

I like more finite control over who they will and won't ally with. I can easily update the list with any future armies that are released.

I like the Special Characters (although a few of the references in the backstories are maybe a little too obvious, even for 40k), but they seem to have a lot of options, which is kind of odd.

Yeah, I know some of the references are too obvious, but I find that funny, so...

As far as "too many options", I did that on purpose. Some of them are dead set in their ways (Judge Schindler, Arco Arbitor), but others are just as flexible as their fellow Arbitors. I think some of GW's special characters could do with more options personally.

Medi-Pack doesn't really seem like an appropriate option for the Arbites Judge.

The idea is that the Judges can be elevated from any previous careers, and so may have skills and equipment as hangovers from that. This is why they also have the option for a Forensus, and Grapplehawk or Mancatcher. (i.e. he may have been a Medicae, Investigator or Chastener).

Special Weapons generally seem a bit pricey.

Specific examples? Remember they are BS4 and have a 4+ Armour save, so they are more effective with their guns than your typical Imperial Guard squad. Also note that certain weapons for the Response Team have been elevated due to them having easy access to four weapons.

The Combat Team doesn't really seem to have anything to distinguish it as a unit, either as a concept or for a battlefield role. I'd be tempted to just dump them. Maybe move suppressors to Troops and add another Eite unit.

They carry boltguns and have access to different special weapons than the Patrol Team. The idea is that Patrol Teams are the "beat cops", and don't carry the highly lethal stuff (Plasma Guns, Meltaguns). When they run into stuff they can't handle on their own, they call in the Combat and Response Teams to back them up. I used to have a requirement of 1 Patrol Team per Combat Team, but I dropped that for more flexibility.

Making cavalry and bike pursuit teams the same unit seems like a clumsy way of doing it. I'd rather see cavalry as an Elite choice with totally different options, possibly with Suppressor statlines.

They have basically the same role, and the option to upgrade them to bikes simply improves their ability to fulfill that role. They get a bit faster, and gain some survivability and shooting punch, but are still fast assault troops who can quickly ride up an enemy's flank and cut down a vulnerable backfield unit. I see no reason to separate them. The idea of WS4 cavalry is mildly appealing, but not enough to sway me I'm afraid.

Fire Support teams don't really work well for me as a concept. I'd rather seperate Snipers and Heavy Weapons into different units and I'm dubious about the use of two-man units. Not a great fan of the larger weapons being wieldable by single guys either... also, why no heavy stubbers in there?

These exist as they do primarily due to fluff. In the 2nd Calpurnia book, really heavy guns were assigned to Calpurnia's command by another Arbitor Senioris who was in charge of the armoury and the dispensation of small heavy support teams armed with missile launchers. I liked the idea, and decided that the "big guns" should all come this way. The concept works quite well, with spotters granting them rules that help offset the risks of taking small units like this.

Heavy stubbers just aren't "big" enough for me.

New version updated!

- Changed Choke Grenades to S1, AP5 and added Poisoned(5+).

- Added "Monster Hunters" to the list of rules the Spotting Scope can grant.

- Moved Dark Angels from Battle Brothers to Allies of Convenience. This just makes a bit more sense.

- Added "Goreman's Mandate", allowing the Personal Staff to count as a scoring unit, as well as allowing members to split off from it in order to join other units (like Wolf Guard).

- Updated the Personal Staff entry, clarifying that they may be taken along with Special Characters as well.

I have an important question. I am thinking about changing the rules for Riot Shields, as I have had a new version proposed to me which I feel more accurately represents the way they would be used in combat and makes for a characterful rule that avoids "adding one more way to improve cover", since we already have quite a few. I wanted to see if anyone here had an opinion about this:

A model with a Riot Shield may re-roll any failed armour saves (but not invulnerable saves or cover saves), but may never claim the +1 Attack bonus for being armed with two close combat weapons in an assault. A model may carry either a riot shield or a suppression shield, but never both.

This is striking me as a very simple, elegant solution and one that people really would need to think about, since re-rolls to standard armour saves aren't nearly as straightforward a benefit as adding Stealth or +1 to the armour save. Do I pay X points for the Riot Shield and gain my re-roll, or do I skip it and save some points while keeping the possibility of +1 Attacks for 2 weapons?

I am thinking this might even warrant a reduction in points cost, possibly 2 pts for squads and 3 pts for characters.