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.

Frateris and Redemptionists (as an upgrade to a Frateris squad).

 pretre wrote:
Frateris and Redemptionists (as an upgrade to a Frateris squad).

I was disappointed to see that the Frateris, Redemptionists, or Zealots (from WD 292) didn't make it into the WD Sisters of Battle codex. I bashed up about forty of them from Empire Free Company, Archers, Flagellants, and a pile of pistols, uzis, heads, etc from various 3rd party companies. They're a fun addition to the army, even if they're not particularly good.

Redemptionists were ridiculously good in 3rd. Zealots not so much. I was very sad as well. I still have 60 metal necromunda models. They are chilling in my guard army for now.

 pretre wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
But it's important to know when you're picking up an army that will never, ever, get anything new made for it before you're several hundred dollars invested.

Except that's incorrect. When C:WH came out, we got multiple new sculpts and models (St C, Exo, Immo, New multi-part metal Canonesses, Banner Bearers and Superiors, etc). When WD came out, we got a new unit(Battle Conclave).

Don't confuse your dislike for an army with it not receiving support. Yes, we have a WD Codex right now. Doesn't mean that won't change in the future. Even with the limited WD codex, SoB are a fun and interesting army if you're willing to shell out the cash.

I don't dislike the army. It doesn't get supported. Stop making it seem like it does. Codex: Witch Hunters was 2003. That's going to be a decade ago next year. And it wasn't even a Sisters of Battle Codex. It was "Hey. here's a bunch of stuff we never converted from 2nd Edition, let's mash it all together." Ecclessiarchy and Inquisition in the same codex? Doesn't really even make much sense in the context of the universe, so they just made some stuff up to rationalize it. They tried to make some new models, and see if they'd sell, and well, they apparently didn't. They even changed the background and gave the Sisters magical powers to make them more attractive as an army. It obviously still didn't move the models because they've all but disappeared as a faction.

It just is what it is. Facts are facts, and have nothing to do with what my opinion is about any given army. The guy asked why the Sisters of Battle don't have any "Army Essentials". And that's because they're essentially not an army anymore, just a bunch of existing models people still play with so GW is nice enough to provide rules. Sorry if that upsets you. I think the Squats were hilarious and awesome in their own ridiculous way, and they are literally not an army anymore, lol. I've never liked the Dark Eldar, and I find their entire concept sorta juvenile and ridiculous. But I wouldn't tell somebody asking questions about them that they aren't a real army, because they are. They've gotten two new Codex books in the time that the Sisters got half of one, and two different issues of core plastics in the same time frame. The majority of the core Sisters models are stamped 1996. I know. I have them. I don't hate the Sisters as much as you think I do. I just didn't like the direction Games Workshop took them, and think they could be revamped and drastically improved to fit into the universe.

But really, who is more biased? The people who hope that more sales of models for their dead army will convince Games Workshop to reinvest in the product line, or the guy who just tells it how it is, that there's been no support, and no new models, for nearly a decade? I stand nothing to gain from this. Just doing a good deed.

I'd recommend waiting until new models come out, because the current ones aren't that great, the current "codex" (my fingers rebel while typing that) sucks more than two competing singularities, and they're all too expensive.

Sad as it might be.

The models have charm, I won't claim they are beautiful sculpts though.

The codex only pigeonholes you into certain builds if you want to play 'competitively'. For a more casual battle most units are usable, if overpriced pointswise (Priests for instance).

I don't find them too expensive (they are pricey, yes) but I do use Ebay a lot.

But really, who is more biased? The people who hope that more sales of models for their dead army will convince Games Workshop to reinvest in the product line, or the guy who just tells it how it is, that there's been no support, and no new models, for nearly a decade? I stand nothing to gain from this. Just doing a good deed.

Being rude and trying to stomp down peoples hopes by saying "GIVE IT UP! THEY ARENT GONNA BE SUPPORTED EVER" isn't exactly what one calls a good deed. It's more of a dickish reality one, considering your trying to hammer it in to people who most likely already know this. It's just rude ya know.

No need, just bring back the Frateris Militia of old. They had rules, and they had models. We already have a Cleric HQ squad, Missionary Elites, Penitent Engines for Heavy Support ... all that's missing is the massed ranks of the faithful.

Oh I know, but I blame the Dark heresy books on the Church, they could bring in so much of the interesting church stuff.

Also, they've already designed the new models. They aren't likely to just throw the sculpts away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shandara wrote:
The codex only pigeonholes you into certain builds if you want to play 'competitively'.

Or at all!

The "codex" (barf) actually has LESS variety than C:WH, which is saying something.

Melissia wrote:Also, they've already designed the new models. They aren't likely to just throw the sculpts away.

Is this based off those rumours of sculpts that came out a couple of years back, or is there something more recent that I've missed?

The models have had consistent rumors that they were being worked on over last year, The main problem being that they wanted to get the robes to look dynamic.

So, same rumours but ongoing. Well, that they're still cropping up is enough to keep my spirits up.

 Melissia wrote:
The "codex" (barf) actually has LESS variety than C:WH, which is saying something.

We addressed this and this is actually false. Unit counts are up in the new codex. Add in allies (which we now have more variety for) and you have a much bigger 'book'. The only things really missing are the wargear choices which, I admit, were a big hit to Canonesses.

@VS: CSB. Enjoy your 'facts'.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Oh I know, but I blame the Dark heresy books on the Church, they could bring in so much of the interesting church stuff.

Like what?
I'm a bit wary. To my own taste, there are some good ideas in those books, but also lots of bad ones. I severely dislike how the vagueness of faith was turned into D&D-style divine magic there, for example.
Guess my perception of the Ecclesiarchy and the Sisterhood is that of a galaxy-spanning half-bonkers organisation shrouded in mysticism, whose clergy is part genuine zealots, part schemers conning locals into following their ravings. Not a lot of room for daily miracles like shining angels descending from the sky (aside from via technological means such as a squad of Adepta Sororitas Seraphim), but rather a grimdark circus of insane lunatics and badass crusaders that is just as likely to descend upon true enemies of the Imperium as they are to commit genocide amongst civilian mutant minorities or supposed "heretics".


... and as for GW not supporting the Sisters being "a fact", I suppose I must have imagined those SoB articles with new fluff, painting advice, and gameplay scenarios in the recent issues. Sure looks like GW is completely ignoring them. And of course, all those glossy miniature photos in the 6E Codex were intended to appeal to the old fans who already own them rather than to get new people interested in the army.

I'm a bit wary. To my own taste, there are some good ideas in those books, but also lots of bad ones. I severely dislike how the vagueness of faith was turned into D&D-style divine magic there, for example.

So you support the books returning to 2nd edition sisters? Because Witch-hunters book, the SoB book are pretty much akin to D&D style divine magic in an odd manner, though my favorite book for the church was Blood of Martyrs.

Though I was more referring to both the fluff about saints, the only angel saint there is, is Celestine really, but I wouldn't mind many of the "Saint" items being bestowed upon the army, whether they grant are all menta l "Drinking the blood of a space marine grants you their fearless nature!" Or potentially supernatural "Cutting your blood along the barbs on this item causes it to burst into flame against those without faith!"

Not a lot of room for daily miracles like shining angels descending from the sky (aside from via technological means such as a squad of Adepta Sororitas Seraphim), but rather a grimdark circus of insane lunatics and badass crusaders that is just as likely to descend upon true enemies of the Imperium as they are to commit genocide amongst civilian mutant minorities or supposed "heretics".

I am a bit weary of those like shining angels, the only angel should be celestine, and nobody knows what's up there, but I don't mind my mindless, unwashed masses led by militaristic priests hellbent on culling "The Heratic, the Mutant, the Psyker", but I do wish to see additional "Normal Saints" Those either not dead yet, or badass enough to become known as a saint for their deeds.

But I do want not only the unwashed masses, but those who do understand how to fight daemons with fire, fury, and techniques that actually hurt daemons and psykers. A mix of both I suppose.

 pretre wrote:
Unit counts are up in the new codex.

Funny how it technically has more units and yet still has less variety.

 Melissia wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Unit counts are up in the new codex.

Funny how it technically has more units and yet still has less variety.

Man, this thread really brings back the memories. Wasn't there a reason you stayed out of SOB threads?

Every SOB unit available in C:WH is still available in C:SOB. Inquisition units were moved to another dex but are still available through allies (something that C:WH did first). In fact, I would say that more is available now that allies have been expanded to more armies than just some specific units from C:IG and C:SM. Overall, SOB won out in the switch to 6th edition.

Keep on hating the WD dex though.

 pretre wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Unit counts are up in the new codex.

Funny how it technically has more units and yet still has less variety.

Man, this thread really brings back the memories. Wasn't there a reason you stayed out of SOB threads?

Every SOB unit available in C:WH is still available in C:SOB. Inquisition units were moved to another dex but are still available through allies (something that C:WH did first). In fact, I would say that more is available now that allies have been expanded to more armies than just some specific units from C:IG and C:SM. Overall, SOB won out in the switch to 6th edition.

Keep on hating the WD dex though.

They changed almost nothing, except for how Faith points worked. Instead of giving every squad access to every Act (for a decent way of making every unit a bit more versatile), they gave every unit its own Act shared by no others (making every unit a mediocre specialist unit). The old book worked pretty well, the new one isn't very effective. Allies are good, certainly, but bringing back the old Acts of Faith system would have helped a lot more.

I suppose it is a case of variety in availability, and variety in viability ... but I would say that the huge reduction in wargear (how much was it, about half or more?) gets noticeable throughout the army. Arguably the Canoness takes the biggest hit, though. :(
And whilst I actually like the "roll Faith per turn" more than the previous "one pool for the entire battle", I have to say that making AoF unit-specific feels wrong, too.

Technically, one could also argue that whilst we have that new Ecclesiarchy conclave, we no longer have Zealots.
And surely, potential allies from another 'dex do not count as "more units"?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:So you support the books returning to 2nd edition sisters? Because Witch-hunters book, the SoB book are pretty much akin to D&D style divine magic in an odd manner, though my favorite book for the church was Blood of Martyrs.

Nothing actually changed in the Witch Hunter Codex - the SoB had rituals giving them special perks in 2E already, they just were triggered at the start of the battle rather than in the midst of it, and were completely random. (I'd actually like to see those return in addition to 3E Acts of Faith fueled by a 5E Faith Point pool modified for army size ... basically a mix of all the systems so far)

Note how the Witch Hunter Codex even outright states that their abilities "may seem miraculous to the unschooled". That was the beauty of it - everything was so vague, you could argue they were true miracles, just like you could argue that it was all just sheer willpower. "Mind over matter", if you so will, such as a Sister stuck in her single-minded zeal simply ignoring an injury as long as she is fighting, whereas a random Guardsman would break down and start crying for a medic and/or his parents (-> essentially be removed from play).
Both interpretations were valid, but "Blood of Martyrs" only allows one.

I should note that I just do not believe 40k has a place for divine magic. Stuff that happens is either tech, or it's the Warp - and neither would truly fit for what the Sisters do in that department (with the exception of Celestine, which I believe to be a benign entity from the Warp, basically a "Daemon of Order" created by emotion somewhat similar to how Slaanesh and possibly all the other Chaos Gods came to be).
Anyhow, it's an interpretation that is simply incompatible to what FFG came up with. I'll stick to what I think is more awesome and in line with how I think the universe works.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:but I wouldn't mind many of the "Saint" items being bestowed upon the army

Well, if it's relics you want, I would of course support that idea - as long as it retains the vagueness of miracles that I still see throughout GW's material, rather than fancy magics like that second item...

Not that we'd have to tap Dark Heresy there, anyways. There exists quite a number of cool items in GW's fluff already - some of them we still have available as Wargear, whereas others are no longer available as of 5E, and yet others that have only been mentioned in the background fluff. Then again, all these relics are unique and already have a solid story attached to them, so much that they would only be usable by a specific Order Militant if you want to stay true to the studio fluff (such as Saint Orlanda's Blade of Admonition, currently held by the Order of the Argent Shroud) ... similar to the Gauntlets of Ultramar, I suppose.

Truth be told, I'd rather GW would give us some sort of rule for creating custom relics. The old "Blessed Weapon" was perfect in that it could be anything you wanted. But this could also be expanded upon by something like a tiny toolset with two or three tiny tables, and you are allowed to buy one perk of each and slap that on any weapon or wargear item in possession of your army, with a maximum of one relic per army.
Faith is an extremely important aspect of the Sisters of Battle / Ecclesiarchy in general, so whilst such a rule would be fairly special throughout the TT, I believe this could be very fitting in that it stresses the unique character of such items.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:but I do wish to see additional "Normal Saints" Those either not dead yet, or badass enough to become known as a saint for their deeds.

Sounds like Saint Joachim. Apparently he died during the 13th Black Crusade, but he was badass enough to sport a relic now carried by some Sister Anastasia of the Ermine Mantle.

"The Blade of Saint Joachim: This is the blade Anastasia recovered from the ruined shrine in Hive Siana, and it has saved her life on many occasions to date. It is a power sword, and in addition, when fighting against any opponent deemed by the GM to be affiliated to the forces of Chaos, has a parry 'penalty' of +15% rather than -15%."
- GW's Inquisitor RPG

That guy was a priest, by the way. Given how the Ecclesiarchy's clergy was always described, the priests do seem fairly badass in general. The Imperial Cult was described as a "warrior church", after all. They're just simply fanatics on top of it. I'm not sure separating religious zeal from combat prowess would be the right approach for this army ... we'd stray dangerously close to Space Marine territory here, when it should be an army whose entire focus is burning faith.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
They changed almost nothing, except for how Faith points worked. Instead of giving every squad access to every Act (for a decent way of making every unit a bit more versatile), they gave every unit its own Act shared by no others (making every unit a mediocre specialist unit). The old book worked pretty well, the new one isn't very effective. Allies are good, certainly, but bringing back the old Acts of Faith system would have helped a lot more.

Tournament evidence would disagree with your assessment of the efficacy. Sisters have had some high showings at US tournaments recently.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:
Technically, one could also argue that whilst we have that new Ecclesiarchy conclave, we no longer have Zealots.
And surely, potential allies from another 'dex do not count as "more units"?

Zealots weren't part of C:WH either. They were a CA addon that saw little use since it wasn't fully accepted by the populace/tournament scene. As for allies, since allies were a core mechanic of C:WH, I would count them as a separate, but important, part of the new codex.

pretre wrote:Tournament evidence would disagree with your assessment of the efficacy. Sisters have had some high showings at US tournaments recently.

Yeah, but how did those armies look, exactly? Celestine and Uriahbomb again?

I do believe that good players will be able to achieve excellent results when using a very specific set-up. But is this truly how a Codex should look like?
The Minidex is ... "viable". Especially when you're just into it for the fun and the style rather than competetive play. But it really doesn't strike me as good or balanced.

That said, I suppose we all just have our own opinions based on what we want from a ruleset, and how we picture our own army. Some will be better able to cope with the changes than others. Needless to say, with my aversion against trading the Canoness for one of them fancy SC, I feel quite gimped and just remain hopeful that, in time, we will receive an update with improvements.

pretre wrote:Zealots weren't part of C:WH either. They were a CA addon that saw little use since it wasn't fully accepted by the populace/tournament scene. As for allies, since allies were a core mechanic of C:WH, I would count them as a separate, but important, part of the new codex.

Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree there, too. No hard feelings, though.

 Lynata wrote:

pretre wrote:Tournament evidence would disagree with your assessment of the efficacy. Sisters have had some high showings at US tournaments recently.

Yeah, but how did those armies look, exactly? Celestine and Uriahbomb again?

They were actually pretty far apart. Nova 2nd place general was Celestine, Seraphim, Doms, Rets, Bastion and GK allies. 11th Co 4th place was traditional mech sisters. Uriahbomb died out at the end of 5th.

I do believe that good players will be able to achieve excellent results when using a very specific set-up. But is this truly how a Codex should look like?
The Minidex is ... "viable". Especially when you're just into it for the fun and the style rather than competetive play. But it really doesn't strike me as good or balanced.

I'm not saying there is a ton of variety. There wasn't a ton of variety in lists with C:WH. But I am saying that it is viable, which is what I was responding to. He was saying that the army is not effective, which is simply not true.

Nothing actually changed in the Witch Hunter Codex - the SoB had rituals giving them special perks in 2E already, they just were triggered at the start of the battle rather than in the midst of it, and were completely random. (I'd actually like to see those return in addition to 3E Acts of Faith fueled by a 5E Faith Point pool modified for army size ... basically a mix of all the systems so far)

Sacred rights was DRASTICALLY different compared to how Acts of faith works in 3E, acts of faith in Witchhunters granted boosts such as extra strength, speed, penetration of armor, Armour saves became invulnerable, faster.

Sacred rights was more about "Mental" Aptitude, rather than sudden changes in body, immunity to fear and terror, frenzied, higher leadership, hatred, psychic defense (okay this ones a bit more supernatural), passing all psychological tests, firing once again.

The difference was Sacred rights was more something about mental fortitude and couldn't be confused with the supernatural, Acts of Faith can be confused, or looks drastically supernatural.

Sacred Rites were done away with well before C:WH. You had Black Book SOB and C: Chapter Approved SOB between 2nd ed and C:WH.

Black book had no faith.
C: CA created the system that was copied in C:WH.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although, I'm not disagreeing with Zebio's premise. Just clarifying.

 pretre wrote:
Sacred Rites were done away with well before C:WH. You had Black Book SOB and C: Chapter Approved SOB between 2nd ed and C:WH.

Black book had no faith.
C: CA created the system that was copied in C:WH.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although, I'm not disagreeing with Zebio's premise. Just clarifying.

Bleh, should've read better, but yeah I remember the CA had acts of faith, never saw the black book though, or are you referring to 2nd edition's one.

When third edition launched, all codexes were made obsolete and all armies had to use the army lists in the back of the main rulebook (the Big Black Book). They were VERY stripped down, but were the first army list most people used for 3rd.

You didn't miss much if you never had to play with it. It had practically no special rules for more armies (including faith).

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

But really, who is more biased? The people who hope that more sales of models for their dead army will convince Games Workshop to reinvest in the product line, or the guy who just tells it how it is, that there's been no support, and no new models, for nearly a decade? I stand nothing to gain from this. Just doing a good deed.

Being rude and trying to stomp down peoples hopes by saying "GIVE IT UP! THEY ARENT GONNA BE SUPPORTED EVER" isn't exactly what one calls a good deed. It's more of a dickish reality one, considering your trying to hammer it in to people who most likely already know this. It's just rude ya know.

Cirrusly? Calling me biased is rude. I would have never hammered anything if they hadn't argued with me and called me names. /shrug Living in glass houses and throwing stones and all that. Get over it.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

But really, who is more biased? The people who hope that more sales of models for their dead army will convince Games Workshop to reinvest in the product line, or the guy who just tells it how it is, that there's been no support, and no new models, for nearly a decade? I stand nothing to gain from this. Just doing a good deed.

Being rude and trying to stomp down peoples hopes by saying "GIVE IT UP! THEY ARENT GONNA BE SUPPORTED EVER" isn't exactly what one calls a good deed. It's more of a dickish reality one, considering your trying to hammer it in to people who most likely already know this. It's just rude ya know.

Cirrusly? Calling me biased is rude. I would have never hammered anything if they hadn't argued with me and called me names. /shrug Living in glass houses and throwing stones and all that. Get over it.

Nobody has called you anything from the posts I've checked, and yes you do seem biased.

Still waiting to start a Sisters of Battle Army. Been..four years now?

 ShatteredBlade wrote:
Still waiting to start a Sisters of Battle Army. Been..four years now?

Never got past buying a sister superior to paint up as Smurfette. Just really hate metal models.

 Papasmerv wrote:

 ShatteredBlade wrote:
Still waiting to start a Sisters of Battle Army. Been..four years now?

Never got past buying a sister superior to paint up as Smurfette. Just really hate metal models.

Bwahaha, I do not blame you for that. The metal models, while I do not hate them, just seem to be in poor taste. Especialy the boob plate.