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.

BlaxicanX wrote:We'll have to disagree on there being a fluff precedent for Flesh Tearers killing Adepta Sororitas?

I was responding to the first two sentences of your post. You know, before you edited that last part in.

That third sentence I have already responded to earlier, no? I even clarified the incident you were referring to for Troike.

TiamatRoar wrote:Flesh Tearers aren't even the same chapter as Blood Angels, anyways. That's like having the SoB be desperate allies with Codex: Space Marines simply because the Sons of Malice butchered the sisters sent to reign them in when they went renegate (...or hell, having the sisters be desperate allies with space marines and imperial guard just because sometimes space marines and IG go renegade in general.

It's certainly the same problem, which is why I think that "Allies of Convenience" for C:SM fits nicely as a sort of compromise between those Chapters they'd get along well with, and those they do not.
In case of the Blood Angels and their Successor Chapters, however, it could be argued that the Sisters' distrust seems to extend beyond the Flesh Tearers.

"During my service to the Order, I have heard many strange rumours concerning the Successor Chapters of the Blood Angels, but it is evident that the Fleshtearers have devolved far beyond any point reached by a loyalist Chapter."
- Canoness Carmina on the Flesh Tearers, from the old Armageddon 3 website

"I have heard many strange rumours" wouldn't mean the SoB would distrust the "Successor Chapters of the Blood Angels" (note that she doesn't say "Blood Angels and their Successors") to the point of desperate allies, though, and she makes it very clear in the latter half of that sentence that it's the Flesh Tearers specifically that have "devolved far beyond any point reached by a loyalist Chapter", singling them out and really not saying "the rest of the Blood Angel successors might be just as bad."

Allies of Convenience with them is fine. Strange rumours could cause that and fluff-wise, Blood Angels and their successors really aren't trusted that much by outsiders by all indications I've seen. It's just people vying for desperate ally status that seem to not "get" what GW seems to have been shooting for with the thing (IE, the "best" possible situation, likely because, again, if it wasn't the "best" possible situation, you wouldn't be able to recreate a lot of battles in the fluff and that'd be stupid).

Desperate allies means just that, desperate. When was the last time any SoB fluff ever had an SoB declare "I'll never ally with blood angels/space wolves/dark angels unless there was no other option whatsoever!!!" Someone being "wary" of someone else would conceivably prevent Battle Brothers status, but Desperate Allies status should be reserved for those who'd ONLY ally with others under desperate situations. You have to consider that saying an Imperial faction wouldn't ally with another Imperial faction unless the situation is desperate is the equivalent of saying the Imperial Guard trusts the Eldar and Orks more than Imperial Organizations trust each other under the best of circumstances, and as bad as the Imperium's situation is, it's not THAT bad.

(again, the Black Templars case is arguably just a case of GW saying "Oh, that's wrong. Use Codex: Space Marines for them now", given that the Black Templars fluff in the new codex specifically states they respect them).

Personally, I never really had any huge problem with the allies chart as it is. This one is just about as good, I suppose, although I think it subscribes a bit too much to the line of thinking that says alliance level should be based on similarity of philosophy, rather than similarity of tactical approach.

TiamatRoar wrote:"I have heard many strange rumours" wouldn't mean the SoB would distrust the "Successor Chapters of the Blood Angels" (note that she doesn't say "Blood Angels and their Successors") to the point of desperate allies, though, and she makes it very clear in the latter half of that sentence that it's the Flesh Tearers specifically that have "devolved far beyond any point reached by a loyalist Chapter", singling them out and really not saying "the rest of the Blood Angel successors might be just as bad."

That's why I think "Allies of Convenience" is fine, actually. If it were just the Flesh Tearers, then they'd be Desperate Allies.

I'm not the one argueing for BA/DA to be Desperate Allies, only Space Wolves.

The Space Wolves was just a battle, though. Imperium forces fight each other pretty often. I thought it was considered standard procedure that Imperial Forces come to blows every once in a while. While I can see the Wolves distrusting the Grey Knights to the point of keeping "one eye open" around them because of the incident (assuming you take The Emperor's Gift events into account) due to them doing things like breaking parley, the sisters were just doing a job as far as I know. Sisters being desperate allies with the wolves is akin to the sisters saying they wouldn't trust the wolves' word if the wolves said "Hey, we need to work together for this" and vice-versa. Trust is a HUGE matter when it comes to whether allies are "desperate" or "convenient" (after all, the only difference is the One Eye Open rule, and that's based entirely around trust), and what reason would the sororitas have to believe that the space wolves would stab them in the back in the middle of battle if the two agreed to fight alongside each other for a battle or vice-versa?

Lorgan Grimar was chosen to be the overall leader of the Imperium's entire forces during the Black Crusade. So clearly, no matter how grating the Sororitas might possibly find the space wolves, to say "Oh, they could backstab us at any time!" when the Imperium trusted them enough to lead the largest mobilization of Imperial forces in history since the Horus Heresy would just be idiotic. Nor do the Space Wolves have any reason to think the Sororitas would do the same to them (again, the Months of Shame was just them doing their job, unlike the Grey Knights who did dishonourable things like break parlay and fire first... at least, I think it was the Ordos Malleus that did that. I could be wrong. *shrug*)

It's not just that one battle, though - that one battle was the climax of a long-simmering conflict between the SW and the Ministorum, and it could break out at any time again.

Breakdown of events ->
Ecclesiarchy: "I heard the SW do heretical rituals, we better check this out!"
SW: "Oi, this is our crib. You hear that? Stay out."
Ecclesiarchy: "We're sending an emissary, standby pls."
SW 1: *peeks over fortress wall* "They in range yet?"
SW 2: "Ayup."
SW 1: "Say hello to our macrocannon!"
Ecclesiarchy: "wft, this means war!"
SW: "Roar!"
SoB: "Roar!"
Ecclesiarchy: "Okay, this is going nowhere. Let's just call it a draw kk?"

Imperial forces do fight each other all the time. It usually ends with someone paying the price, though, and in this case the situation was never resolved. The Space Wolves are still mutant heretical priest-killers, and the SoB still don't exactly like that sort of stuff.
It doesn't have to do with rational thinking - we're talking zealots here, and someone who lobs artillery grenades at priestly delegations probably doesn't enjoy too much of a good reputation amongst the God-Emperor-fearing folks.

To me, this does have to count as more severe as the "mere scepticism" towards Dark and Blood Angels, which in turn must count as more negative than the Sisters' good relationship with the Black Templars.

That still wouldn't make them desperate allies, though. Again, the nature of desperate allies is you distrust your ally so much that you're worried they'll shoot you in the back. No matter how much the SoB and Space Wolves might dislike each other, there is nothing to indicate either of them would do that to each other.

If anything, Blood Angels with their Blood Thirst makes them a bigger threat in regards to that, although so far only the Flesh Tearers ever (possibly) let it happen to allied Imperial Forces (that's "publically" known).

Space Marines hate the Tau like crazy and the Imperium hates orks like crazy, yet they can at least trust those two damned xenos to not shoot them in the back once they come to an agreement. Why would the SoB and Space Wolves hate each other like that?

...is that the actual break down of events? Well, regardless, the Space Wolves at least gave a warning first in your breakdown so that still doesn't count as "shoot them in the back". Imperial forces firing on one another because one refused to back down is not a breach of trust (again, happens all the time). Desperate Allies means you're worried that your "ally" won't give you a warning at all.

So you're saying that what the Space Wolves did is not worse than how the Sisters would think about the Dark and the Blood Angels, with whom they at least had no direct quarrel yet, and who did not happen to kill a bunch of priests?

TiamatRoar wrote:...is that the actual break down of events? Well, regardless, the Space Wolves at least gave a warning first in your breakdown so that still doesn't count as "shoot them in the back".

I actually made that warning up, but I would hope the SW would have given one ...

Here's the quote:

The Ecclesiarchy Comes to Fenris 886.M41
A quorum of Ecclesiarchy officials approach Fenris, intending to inspect and assess the Space Wolves after hearing rumours of the worship of pagan gods. Amazingly, the Space Wolves open fire upon the Ecclesiarchy as soon as they come in range of the Fang's guns. Almost a year later, the Ecclesiarchy and three orders of the Adepta Sororitas attempt to enter Fenrisian space in force. The resultant war lasts for three weeks before the Ecclesiarchy decides to let sleeping dogs lie and withdraws its forces.

 Lynata wrote:
So you're saying that what the Space Wolves did is not worse than how the Sisters would think about the Dark and the Blood Angels, with whom they at least had no direct quarrel yet, and who did not happen to kill a bunch of priests?

I editted my post.

Allies level isn't a matter of how much they like each other or how bad they think each other are. It's a matter of how much they can trust each other on the battlefield to not shoot each other.

The Space Wolves firing on those priests was not in the middle of battle. In your breakdown, they gave a clear warning first demanding the priests to stay away.


...okay, new edits needed now that your post is editted. Gimme a bit to read it.

TiamatRoar wrote:Allies level isn't a matter of how much they like each other or how bad they think each other are. It's a matter of how much they can trust each other on the battlefield to not shoot each other.

Aye, but given the history between these two forces, can either side be sure that the other wouldn't shoot them?

I see where you're coming from, I just don't think they would trust each other - and I think that the classification as Desperate Allies would serve to diversify the matrix.
The SoB in particular are fairly extreme in that they see the world in black and white, so most forces would either be Battle Brothers or Sworn Enemies to them. The SW are, I think, pretty much the only ally that could be a Desperate Ally.

TiamatRoar wrote:The Space Wolves firing on those priests was not in the middle of battle. In your breakdown, they gave a clear warning first demanding the priests to stay away.

I edited my post with the quote - decide for yourself whether or not that sounds like a surprise attack.

[edit] Sorry.

....yea, that quote leaves open whether they gave a warning first or not. Well, if they did NOT, then yea, I can see why the sisters could be desperate allies due to the One Eye Open rule. But again, that quote leaves it kinda ambiguous whether they did or not.

Also, the quote is very brief. It doesn't say whether the sisters share the Ecclesiarch's feelings or not, either. As it is, that quote is way too open to interpretation and too skimpy on the details to really get anything about how the SoB might feel about the Space Wolves in terms of trust. If the quote ended with "The sisters have not trusted the Space Wolves ever since the incident", then you'd have a point. But as it is, that quote leaves out waaaay too many details to seriously get any hard conclusions from it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:

TiamatRoar wrote:Allies level isn't a matter of how much they like each other or how bad they think each other are. It's a matter of how much they can trust each other on the battlefield to not shoot each other.

Aye, but given the history between these two forces, can either side be sure that the other wouldn't shoot them?

We can't really say for sure, because that quote doesn't give any details about... well, anything, really. Depending on the specifics, then maybe the SoB could be desperate allies based on that. But right now it's mostly in the realm of speculation.

While it'd also diversify the ally types, I'm under the impression that "Desperate Allies" exists to give you an excuse to ally two factions together that would otherwise just be silly. IE, it's there so you can slap togehter your necrons and daemons and say "Oh, they were desperate" if you wanted to. Not so you could say "Oh, these people have a wide spectrum of battle brothers, allies of convenience, and desperate allies!" I could be wrong on that, though.

TiamatRoar wrote:While it'd also diversify the ally types, I'm under the impression that "Desperate Allies" exists to give you an excuse to ally two factions together that would otherwise just be silly.

You're probably right about that - I think the Sisters are just a bit special in that they are fairly stubborn about their principles, and so would otherwise lose out on that tier completely. But this, too, is a matter of interpretation.

 Lynata wrote:

TiamatRoar wrote:While it'd also diversify the ally types, I'm under the impression that "Desperate Allies" exists to give you an excuse to ally two factions together that would otherwise just be silly.

You're probably right about that - I think the Sisters are just a bit special in that they are fairly stubborn about their principles, and so would otherwise lose out on that tier completely. But this, too, is a matter of interpretation.

Well, they're stubborn enough to only be allies of convenience with most imperial factions instead of Battle Brothers, having the least amount of Battle Brothers of all the Imperium with the exception of the Grey Knights (which I assume is because it's hard to be Battle Brothers status with a faction that in-universe officially isn't supposed to exist). I can see why some might desire them to be even more stubborn than that, but eh, at least it's apparently acknowledged somewhat.

You do have to make allowances for every imperial faction slaughtering every other on a semi-regular basis. It just seems to be the default method of resolving disputes, kind of the way Americans file lawsuits. ("You made my coffee too hot and it scalded me!" BLAMBLAMBLAMBLAM).

It would be a very different setting if the tag line were

"LAWHAMMER 40,000: In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only BINDING ARBITRATION."

Yea, like I said above, imperial factions fighting each other is accepted standard procedure. When it comes to whether or not one should be a "Desperate Ally" instead of "Ally of Convenience", it really should boil down to trust more than anything, mainly because the only difference between the two is a trust issue (One Eye Open). Whether or not they'll ally at all or be willing to squad with each other (Battle Brothers status) would be based in part on personal preference (hence why the stubborn sisters are rarely battle brothers with anyone) as well as tactical doctrine, but AoC vs Desperate Allies is more a trust issue, and a small scale one. On a large scale, Space Marines might not trust Tau farther than a Tau could throw them, but in battle Tau can be trusted to not shoot their own allies. At least, going by the gameplay rules. All in my opinion, of course, since GW has been infuriatingly silent on the reasoning behind the various ally statuses.

Certainly the sisters aren't very trusting either (their job is to root out heresy, after all), but a first founding chapter that's been serving the Imperium for 10,000 years would have to do something pretty bad to garner so much mistrust that it'd lead to Desperate Allies status (such as say, fire on Ecclesiarchy forces without a warning). Even then, it might take multiple cases of that, because the incident in question happened in the late 40th Millenium, which means relegating sisters and wolves to Desperate Allies status based on that incident alone would lock players out who want to play Sisters allied with Wolves in the early 40th Millenium and prior (maybe someone would be in the mood to do Age of Apostacy and Unbelief mop-up battles).

TiamatRoar wrote:Certainly the sisters aren't very trusting either (their job is to root out heresy, after all), but a first founding chapter that's been serving the Imperium for 10,000 years would have to do something pretty bad to garner so much mistrust that it'd lead to Desperate Allies status (such as say, fire on Ecclesiarchy forces without a warning). Even then, it might take multiple cases of that, because the incident in question happened in the late 40th Millenium, which means relegating sisters and wolves to Desperate Allies status based on that incident alone would lock players out who want to play Sisters allied with Wolves in the early 40th Millenium and prior (maybe someone would be in the mood to do Age of Apostacy and Unbelief mop-up battles).

Well, I'd think the game "as is" takes place in 999.M41 - you'd lock out or change more armies than just the Sisters if you go back in time. Krieg, for example, supposedly didn't become a death world until 433.M40. 'Nids and Necrons haven't been around for very long either.
Campaigns or individual scenarios set in a different era should have their own Matrix, or rather have one made up by those organising or participating in the event.

And for a last comment on the Sisters vs SW, I'd like to point towards the history the Space Marine Chapters have when it comes to falling to Chaos. Heresy and mutation are, or so I believe, generally considered "obvious proof" that something is very wrong with someone. When that someone starts shooting up Imperial forces and getting into trouble with the Inquisition, is it really so far-fetched to assume they're one step from becoming that which fully half of the other First Founding Legions have become? Because that's how I think the more zealous Imperial warriors would view them.

But the game doesn't take place in 999 M41. Corbulo is playable in both his Death Company and non-death company forms. If we take the IA books into account, the Imperial Armour books take place across a wide range of dates, and both the Vraks army and Huron's pre-fall army are playable armies. The various missions and playable games in White Dwarf also take place across a wide range of dates. The first war for Armegeddon, that was playable, took place in very early 40th millennium. The world-wide Fall of Medusa campaign took place afterwards.

Well, most if not all of these events at least took place in the 40th millennium, admittingly (besides Fall of Medusa, maybe?). However, that's still more than enough to cover a date range of time that existed before this event in question (which happened in late 40th millennium)

Also, it's kinda shoehorning EVERY sister into becoming an overly zealous Imperial Warrior who sees things in the same narrow context. Again, the allies matrix is supposed to represent the best of situations (far as I can tell. Again, Tau Marine battle brothers...). Why should EVERY SoB think the Space Wolves might shoot them in the back just because of various incidents? In the inquisition's case (I assume you're referring to the Months of Shame), the Space Wolves clearly had their reasons, where even the Grey Knight protagonist saw their point of view had some validity to it (even if he overall sided with the inquisition's point of view). It's not like Sisters of Battle don't care about civilians either. The Flesh Tearers incident had them appalled at the slaughter of civilians. Surely at least SOME sisters would find the Space Wolves' reasoning and love of imperial citizens to have some validity.

As for the Ecclesiarchy, again, we don't know enough details, although the Astartes by right are independent and the line did say the Ecclesiarchy "decided to let sleeping dogs lie". So apparently the ecclesiarchy isn't THAT worried that they're "one step short of heresy" if they aren't going to pursue the matter further (and again, Logan was later on elected overall commander of the largest Imperium mobilization since the Horus Heresy. Not just of Space Marines, but ALL Imperial forces, which would include Battle Sisters).

The whole thing seems overly restrictive and narrow-minded on how all sisters should be shoe-horned into the same line of thought over a set of dubious circumstances with vague or nonexistent details. Admittingly I might be a bit biased here because I always thought it was dumb in general how the "female" faction of the Imperium are all shoe-horned into a narrow mindset of burn-the-heretic whereas the "male" faction can have every philosophy under the sun, but even this idea seems rather extreme relative to those pet peeves.

....at any rate, at least someone at GW agrees they shouldn't be Desperate Allies, since they're officially Allies of Convenience right now. Although I suppose that doesn't mean much when they never gave a word as to their reasonings behind each relationship level. Bah.

So, I see many instances throughout this discussion of various incidents and I am wondering if all the "facts" are coming from Games Workshop canon or not. Obviously GW canon is the official "word" in canon discussions. I have read somewhere in this forum that Black Library has also been blessed as official canon by Games Workshop and I wonder if this is true? By the way, are there any good books that are considered official canon that I could read because I have only been reading the Black Library Horus Heresy series and now I am confused on if that is official canon or not.

There isn't supposed to be a "canon" because GW wants you to have as much freedom as you need to write your own stories and narratives.... preferably using minis and rulebooks that you brought from them.

Of course, GW tends to follow its own "canon" more often than not, so whatever. All of the incidents in this thread at least appeared in a work produced by either GW or one of its subsidiaries or business partners (Black Library in particular. The particular ones of relevance however being discussed in this thread are from "core GW studio" fluff (the codexes). Which basically means "as close to what could be considered 'canon' as you can get". Some are from Black Library but they're mostly just there to provide circumstantial evidence.

Chris_P wrote:So, I see many instances throughout this discussion of various incidents and I am wondering if all the "facts" are coming from Games Workshop canon or not. Obviously GW canon is the official "word" in canon discussions. I have read somewhere in this forum that Black Library has also been blessed as official canon by Games Workshop and I wonder if this is true? By the way, are there any good books that are considered official canon that I could read because I have only been reading the Black Library Horus Heresy series and now I am confused on if that is official canon or not.

This should help solve the confusion - a couple statements directly from the people who write the material, rather than word of mouth of the community:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/462296.page#4527011

TiamatRoar wrote:Why should EVERY SoB think the Space Wolves might shoot them in the back just because of various incidents?

Because unlike the Space Marines or the Imperial Guard the Adepta Sororitas share a single identity, with a single origin, and a singular leader at the top - and lots of transfers between the orders. Them having this peculiar level of uniformity is kinda their thing and part of what sets them apart from the Space Marines - where you see it as a bug, I see it as a feature.

TiamatRoar wrote:But the game doesn't take place in 999 M41. Corbulo is playable in both his Death Company and non-death company forms.

This is a good point, though.

TiamatRoar wrote:and again, Logan was later on elected overall commander of the largest Imperium mobilization since the Horus Heresy. Not just of Space Marines, but ALL Imperial forces, which would include Battle Sisters

Source? I have read that he was elected commander of all Space Marines. Not all Imperials. If you're just quoting from Lexicanum, I'd like to point out that the German version of that wiki article tells it differently, too.

Oh, and since I'm just browsing through the books ... snippet from the 5E SW Codex:

"It is not just against the enemies of the Imperium that Grimnar has waged his war. He has willingly, some would say joyfully, led his forces into battle against Imperial institutions whose agendas and actions he deemed threatening to those within his sprawling domain. This has led to many accusations of rebellion, heresy and treason being levelled at Logan and his Chapter, along with the usual rumours of genetic deviancy. The fact that the Old Wolf is so ready to meet his detractors on the field of battle is undeniably one of the reasons why these allegations are not taken further - the senior adepts of the Administratum know from experience that it is better to have the Space Wolves as allies than as enemies."

Really, if I'd belong to the factions of "detractors", I'd keep One Eye Open on those trigger-happy Wolves.

Again though, presumably these alliances involve the two parties agreeing to ally beforehand. As trigger happy as the space wolves are, the thought of them actually attacking fellow Imperium forces in the middle of battle after agreeing to ally with them for that battle seems unthinkable to me, even for the sisters. The sisters might be zealous and stubborn, but that's paranoia, not zealousness.and stubborness. The Space Wolves have been around for 10,000 years, so anyone with any brains at all can look at their history and see if they're prone to backstabbing in the middle of battle, and they aren't. Logan actually honors the idea of parley and agreements, after all (judging by how PISSED he was at the Grey Knights for breaking it).

If the Orks can be trusted to stick to their agreement by the Imperial Guard, I'm sure the Space Wolves can unless shown otherwise. And they haven't shown otherwise in 10,000 years, as far as we know (though the possibility exists that they've shown otherwise given how often they've openly defied the Imperium, we've yet to be explicitly told that or indicated of that). Sure, SoB are less trusting than the IG, but less trusting to the point that they'd keep one-eye open to the Wolves while the IG is battle brothers with them seems like a hell of a stretch to me. And IMHO, it'd paint the sisters out to be idiots, that they'd waste time worrying about the wolves shooting them in the back when there are heretics in front of them.

As for Logan Grimnar, I misread it. It says in the wiki that he just led the Space Marines, but Creed "established his support for him". Well, it does show that at least Creed trusts Logan on a very high level. Again, it paints the sisters out to be paranoid idiots when Creed can trust the wolves but, should the sisters be on the same battlefield as the wolves and presumably agree to team up before hand, they'd be watching their backs and being distracted from the heretics in front of them.

Really, think about that. SISTERS DISTRACTED FROM THE HERETICS IN FRONT OF THEM. Doesn't that seem just a bit wrong? I mean, in the case of sisters teamed up with filthy xenos it makes sense, but teamed up with the Wolves when they haven't done anything on THAT level in their 10,000 years of history? (to my knowledge. Again, open defiance is a far cry from shooting an ally in the back in the middle of battle). That's just stupid.

Of course, I could always be interpretting things wrong, and maybe the wolves really did do a bunch of shooting of their allies in the past and we just never heard of it, or something else atrocious enough to warrant the sisters being worried that they'll shoot them in the back and break agreements in the middle of battle, despite how the Imperial Guard and several other Space Marine chapters are willing to squad up with them and elect them leaders of hte Space Marines for the 13th Black Crusade. The fact that the official allies matrix makes them allies of convenience with the sisters leads me to believe otherwise, though, so burden of proof lies elsewhere.

The IG practically worship the Sisterhood, mostly due to the presence and skill of the Orders Hospitaler. It'd make a lot more sense for the Sisters to trust the average IG Regiment, filled as it is with proper, God-Emperor-fearing men and women of the Imperium, than a bunch of abhuman bio-mutated barbaric pagans.

 Psienesis wrote:
The IG practically worship the Sisterhood, mostly due to the presence and skill of the Orders Hospitaler. It'd make a lot more sense for the Sisters to trust the average IG Regiment, filled as it is with proper, God-Emperor-fearing men and women of the Imperium, than a bunch of abhuman bio-mutated barbaric pagans.

If this is in regards to battle brothers status with the Space Marines, that comes from the 6th Ed Space Marine fluff that said they fought "side by side" (with the Black Templars, in this case). Fighting that close to each other possibly implies Battle Brothers status, because taken literally, "side by side" means close enough to squad with each other. There's a little leg room to say they fought as allies of convenience anyways under that wording, though, but... not very much, in my opinion (and of course, you'd REALLY be stretching things to say they did such a thing under a Desperate Allies relationship, which is why it contradicts the allies matrix)

While open defiance is a far cry from shooting an ally in the back... open defiance is open heresy. Worse, it's open blasphemy.

And it's not like the Sisters haven't been used to take out other Space Marine Chapters that have gone heretical. Why would the Space Wolves, even given their vaunted position as a First Founding Chapter, not be a bit leery that the go-to organization for culling Space Marines is fighting next to them.

TiamatRoar wrote:Really, think about that. SISTERS DISTRACTED FROM THE HERETICS IN FRONT OF THEM.

By the heretics behind them? Yes, I could see that.

I guess two of us should just agree to disagree, though, as the discussion seems to run in circles - it largely is a matter of how we interpret the available fluff.

Psienesis wrote:The IG practically worship the Sisterhood, mostly due to the presence and skill of the Orders Hospitaler. It'd make a lot more sense for the Sisters to trust the average IG Regiment, filled as it is with proper, God-Emperor-fearing men and women of the Imperium, than a bunch of abhuman bio-mutated barbaric pagans.

And every single Imperial Guard regiment is, by Ecclesiarchal decree, accompanied by at least one Confessor of the Frateris Clergy to care for the spiritual needs of the soldiery, and kept in check by Commissars raised in the Ministorum-run Scholae Progenium the Sisters themselves hail from.

(in truth there's probably a fair bit of IG regiments that have strange customs or a weird interpretation of the faith, but those details are discernible only upon closer look - see the purges of supposed heretics by the Argent Shroud amongst lmperial forces on Armageddon that basically resulted out of the Sisters in that sector having had nothing else to do thanks to lacking a "proper" enemy to fight)

 Psienesis wrote:
While open defiance is a far cry from shooting an ally in the back... open defiance is open heresy. Worse, it's open blasphemy.

And it's not like the Sisters haven't been used to take out other Space Marine Chapters that have gone heretical. Why would the Space Wolves, even given their vaunted position as a First Founding Chapter, not be a bit leery that the go-to organization for culling Space Marines is fighting next to them.

Because in a hypothetical situation involving the Arch-Enemy, the Wolves still know that the Sisters are, at least obstensibly, loyal to the Imperium and therefore more-or-less on the same side. In these situations you just have to remember the scale of threat that both armies are supposed to be under. Maybe they're both trying to escape from a world that's over-run with chaos?

 Lynata wrote:
By the heretics behind them? Yes, I could see that.

They're accused of heresy. They've yet to be convicted of it, and we've yet to see any fluff that it's specifically the sisters of battle that accused them of it. Maybe the accusations just come from ecclesiarchs or the Inquisition, with the sisters having a neutral stance on the matter, like was the case with the Grey Knights during the months of shame. We don't know.

Well, at any rate, like I said, GW's current allies matrix agrees with my interpretation by all indications. So I'll stick to that. You're welcome to take an interpretation that contradicts the allies matrix as it is though if you'd like. I suppose even GW contradicts it sometimes (mainly, the "side by side" thing and presumably-renegade IG only being allies of convenience with other Chaos forces. The former technically isn't a contradiction if you assume the Black Templars to be deleted from the allies matrix after being rolled over to the rest of the Marines, though)

GK and SoB have a special relationship

TiamatRoar wrote:
They're accused of heresy. They've yet to be convicted of it, and we've yet to see any fluff that it's specifically the sisters of battle that accused them of it. Maybe the accusations just come from ecclesiarchs or the Inquisition, with the sisters having a neutral stance on the matter, like was the case with the Grey Knights during the months of shame.

Not meaning to stretch this debate too much further, but the Sisters would side with the Inquisition and Ecclesiarchy if one organisation accused somebody of heresy. I highly doubt that they'd "stay neutral" if one of their closest allies, and organisations specifically tasked with combating heresy, deemed someone a heretic. Especially when it's regarding an organisation that they distrust to begin with. Furthermore, they'd certainly see an attack on an investigative Ecclesiarchy force as concrete proof of heretical elements.

Perhaps. However, the Ecclesiarchy "let sleeping dogs lie". So that matter's settled. Again, burden of proof that it isn't doesn't lie on my shoulders, becaues the allies matrix right now agrees with me.