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.

Using the Inquisitor with Servo Skulls prevents him from taking an additional warlord trait for you, right? My copy of C:IA still hasn't come in yet and I forget if that Warlord bit is a trait of his detachment or of the model itself.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Using the Inquisitor with Servo Skulls prevents him from taking an additional warlord trait for you, right? My copy of C:IA still hasn't come in yet and I forget if that Warlord bit is a trait of his detachment or of the model itself.

That's a grey area. Technically, both Inquisitors from C:IA and C:I are part of the 'Inquisition' faction. Because of this, they can both be taken as a part of any Inquisitorial detachment from either book. It's probably not RAI, though.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Using the Inquisitor with Servo Skulls prevents him from taking an additional warlord trait for you, right? My copy of C:IA still hasn't come in yet and I forget if that Warlord bit is a trait of his detachment or of the model itself.

that rule is part of the detachment and formation. not the model itself

terry wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Using the Inquisitor with Servo Skulls prevents him from taking an additional warlord trait for you, right? My copy of C:IA still hasn't come in yet and I forget if that Warlord bit is a trait of his detachment or of the model itself.

that rule is part of the detachment and formation. not the model itself

Right then, so no matter which source he takes the inquisitor, you won't get the extra warlord trait since he is taking the Inquisitor in the Castellan and not the Inquisitional whatever detachment. I was hoping that would be different, and we could increase the odds of Voldrak getting Infiltrate with for the Command Squad. No dice.

The inquisitor can be taken outside of the castellan on his own detachment from C:IA. That was an oversight from myself.

You lose out on him being objective secure, but that is not really his purpose after all.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Aaugh. This isn't precisely on top, but I can't stand events that try to "Fix" 40k by putting arbitrary limitations on things that just end up breaking the rules as much as they fix them.

How about non-arbitrary ones?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:


I suppose my biggest problem with most of the "balancing" rules is that they screw over Imperial players trying to make use of weaker forces, but just make Eldar and Tau stronger.

Imperial players seem to be placing very well.

 Jancoran wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Aaugh. This isn't precisely on top, but I can't stand events that try to "Fix" 40k by putting arbitrary limitations on things that just end up breaking the rules as much as they fix them.

How about non-arbitrary ones?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:


I suppose my biggest problem with most of the "balancing" rules is that they screw over Imperial players trying to make use of weaker forces, but just make Eldar and Tau stronger.

Imperial players seem to be placing very well.

By "Imperial Players" I meant "People who aren't playing maxed-out blue tide, Iron Hands or Thunderwolf deathstars, and Librarius Conclaves. Outside of the wolves, those are all the same codex, and they're all the very best stuff that Imperium forces have to offer.

So, Space Marines aren't made any weaker, because other armies have very little to offer. I *guess* you could buy some cheap warp charges or a few Inquisitors to round off an army, but it's not needed by any means, so the losses are minimal - it's not a nerf.

For every other Imperial army, though (read: The weak ones), the rule is a pointless nerf that actually hits hard. If you want to play Mechanicum, you're already bumping up on your detachment limit just by taking your whole army. And Emperor Help you if you want to play Sisters...

I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.

Some of us aren't that precise or good at 40k and need all the help we can get.

PanzerLeader wrote:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.

I hate this argument. If you're better your opponent, you would just win that much harder one of the OP armies. I used to subscribe to this philosophy as I had no trouble beating my friends with a Sisters list, but playing a few tournament games against the newer codexes . I believe there was a game where an eldar player seized the initiaive and shot 33% of my army off the table before I got to even do anything. Sure, better positioning (and/or knowing I'd be going second ahead of time) would have mitigated this, but it doesn't make his jetbikes massively undercosted. Codexes that can just spam a couple of their better units and wind up with a reasonably flexible list benefit immensely when their competition is hampered by arbitrary restrictions. Imagine an event that doesn't allow allies or FW and you have to play Sisters against a list with some flyers. Sure, you can get lucky (like I did against my friends where I brought down a flyer with two krak grenades), but you don't really have good AA options without allies.

Also, some of our best options, like priests don't do that much for us without allies. We can take DCAs and Crusaders, but have no assault vehicles for them to be in.

Mavnas wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.

I hate this argument. If you're better your opponent, you would just win that much harder one of the OP armies. I used to subscribe to this philosophy as I had no trouble beating my friends with a Sisters list, but playing a few tournament games against the newer codexes . I believe there was a game where an eldar player seized the initiaive and shot 33% of my army off the table before I got to even do anything. Sure, better positioning (and/or knowing I'd be going second ahead of time) would have mitigated this, but it doesn't make his jetbikes massively undercosted. Codexes that can just spam a couple of their better units and wind up with a reasonably flexible list benefit immensely when their competition is hampered by arbitrary restrictions. Imagine an event that doesn't allow allies or FW and you have to play Sisters against a list with some flyers. Sure, you can get lucky (like I did against my friends where I brought down a flyer with two krak grenades), but you don't really have good AA options without allies.

Also, some of our best options, like priests don't do that much for us without allies. We can take DCAs and Crusaders, but have no assault vehicles for them to be in.

I'll type a longer reply tomorrow, but that's not the argument I'm trying to make. There is a lot that can be done within the movement phase itself to offset some of those disadvantages in terms of unit positioning and army composition. Last LVO I went 4-2 overall and 3-1 against Eldar specifically with a Sisters CAD + artillery company list. If the other Eldar game had ended on 5 or 6 I would have won it as well but I just ran out of units to throw into the last Big Guns objective (also the game where Celestine died twice after attempting a total of two saves *facepalm)

PanzerLeader wrote:

Mavnas wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.

I hate this argument. If you're better your opponent, you would just win that much harder one of the OP armies. I used to subscribe to this philosophy as I had no trouble beating my friends with a Sisters list, but playing a few tournament games against the newer codexes . I believe there was a game where an eldar player seized the initiaive and shot 33% of my army off the table before I got to even do anything. Sure, better positioning (and/or knowing I'd be going second ahead of time) would have mitigated this, but it doesn't make his jetbikes massively undercosted. Codexes that can just spam a couple of their better units and wind up with a reasonably flexible list benefit immensely when their competition is hampered by arbitrary restrictions. Imagine an event that doesn't allow allies or FW and you have to play Sisters against a list with some flyers. Sure, you can get lucky (like I did against my friends where I brought down a flyer with two krak grenades), but you don't really have good AA options without allies.

Also, some of our best options, like priests don't do that much for us without allies. We can take DCAs and Crusaders, but have no assault vehicles for them to be in.

I'll type a longer reply tomorrow, but that's not the argument I'm trying to make. There is a lot that can be done within the movement phase itself to offset some of those disadvantages in terms of unit positioning and army composition. Last LVO I went 4-2 overall and 3-1 against Eldar specifically with a Sisters CAD + artillery company list. If the other Eldar game had ended on 5 or 6 I would have won it as well but I just ran out of units to throw into the last Big Guns objective (also the game where Celestine died twice after attempting a total of two saves *facepalm)

I mean, terrain also matters (that one game vs. eldar had no LoS blocking terrain, just some cover that doesn't do much against AP4 spam, but jetbikes are also more mobile. I also imagine artillery comes with barrage units that can abuse/deal with LoS blocking terrain and counter eldar mobility, but that's not a SoB unit. Sisters are squishy, generally have worse mobility than top tier armies. Some armies have to pay a lot for the combination of mobility and long-range firepower (or only get one or the other)... and some don't.

I'm with the Forge the Narrative crew in my belief that 40k can be made more competitive for more armies with good choice of points level and mission selection.
This is why I'm so excited that ITC is opening up the mission catalogue to include missions from Nova, Adepticon, and my semi-local Renegade Open.
I just wish that a lower points level would be accepted...

To me, Sisters are more competitive at 1500 than 1850. Our bargain units (minimum BSS and 4 special weapon Dominions) are better deals than space marines at those points. We have more hard counters at that points level, but then again so does every other army.

From the FAQ:

Page 65
– Sororitas Command Squad, Act of Faith
Change this to read:
‘
Endless Crusade:
One use only. This Act of Faith
can be used in your Movement phase. If successful, all
models in the unit gain the Fleet, Crusader and Move
Through Cover special rules until the end of the turn.’
FAQs
Q:
Imperial Agents
seems to replace existing material but
Games Workshop has indicated that players can use either
the new or older material. As
Imperial Agents
lacks certain
things present in older material, such as Servo Skulls, which do
we use?
A: If you have bought and own the existing and still
currently available digital
Codex: Adepta Sororitas
and
Codex: Inquisition
, you can use those over the rules
presented in
Imperial Agents
if you wish.
®
WARHAMMER 40,000 CODEX:
IMPERIAL AGENTS
Official Update for 7th Edition, Version 1.1

It was pretty cut and clear in Fall of Cadia that either book could be used, but it's good that they came forward and made an official statement.

There is no reason now not to use C:IA sister squads given that their AoF ruling is just superior for lasting until the end of the turn.


Now.. if they could rule out that the Apocalypse formations we have access to are actually usable in a standard game, I would be happy.

The Angelic Host formation is not game breaking by any means and being able to re-roll both Celestine and the Geminae's invulnerable saves would be fun.

Voldrak wrote:
Now.. if they could rule out that the Apocalypse formations we have access to are actually usable in a standard game, I would be happy.

The Angelic Host formation is not game breaking by any means and being able to re-roll both Celestine and the Geminae's invulnerable saves would be fun.

They specifically ruled against it.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Aaugh. This isn't precisely on top, but I can't stand events that try to "Fix" 40k by putting arbitrary limitations on things that just end up breaking the rules as much as they fix them.

How about non-arbitrary ones?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:


I suppose my biggest problem with most of the "balancing" rules is that they screw over Imperial players trying to make use of weaker forces, but just make Eldar and Tau stronger.

Imperial players seem to be placing very well.

By "Imperial Players" I meant "People who aren't playing maxed-out blue tide, Iron Hands or Thunderwolf deathstars, and Librarius Conclaves. Outside of the wolves, those are all the same codex, and they're all the very best stuff that Imperium forces have to offer.

So, Space Marines aren't made any weaker, because other armies have very little to offer. I *guess* you could buy some cheap warp charges or a few Inquisitors to round off an army, but it's not needed by any means, so the losses are minimal - it's not a nerf.

For every other Imperial army, though (read: The weak ones), the rule is a pointless nerf that actually hits hard. If you want to play Mechanicum, you're already bumping up on your detachment limit just by taking your whole army. And Emperor Help you if you want to play Sisters...

I play pure sisters all the time. with one detachment. A CAD. Lol.

I don't get what you're saying to be honest. Battle Companies which anyone can take from any Chapter are good. White Scars of course being the broken one. But thats three Detachments.

I play a ton o forces so I take a bit more global perspective on this. i am not really seeing the "distress" of Imperial armies based on formation limits. If you cannot make a viable army with three detachments, I would be very surprised indeed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mavnas wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I do quite well with sisters as my main force. Most armies are good if you know how to use the movement phase to mitigate your other weaknesses.

I hate this argument. If you're better your opponent, you would just win that much harder one of the OP armies. I used to subscribe to this philosophy as I had no trouble beating my friends with a Sisters list, but playing a few tournament games against the newer codexes . I believe there was a game where an eldar player seized the initiaive and shot 33% of my army off the table before I got to even do anything. Sure, better positioning (and/or knowing I'd be going second ahead of time) would have mitigated this, but it doesn't make his jetbikes massively undercosted. Codexes that can just spam a couple of their better units and wind up with a reasonably flexible list benefit immensely when their competition is hampered by arbitrary restrictions. Imagine an event that doesn't allow allies or FW and you have to play Sisters against a list with some flyers. Sure, you can get lucky (like I did against my friends where I brought down a flyer with two krak grenades), but you don't really have good AA options without allies.

Also, some of our best options, like priests don't do that much for us without allies. We can take DCAs and Crusaders, but have no assault vehicles for them to be in.

Your frustration is understandable when it comes to jetbikes but they are sort of the "issue" for every force, which makes this NOT a Sisters of Battle issue but an Eldar issue if you see what I mean.

and Seizing is just.... I got seized on FOUR times in the Major this weekend and only went first one time. ONE. Lol. Seizing is not my favorite mechanic in the whole world.

 pretre wrote:

Voldrak wrote:
Now.. if they could rule out that the Apocalypse formations we have access to are actually usable in a standard game, I would be happy.

The Angelic Host formation is not game breaking by any means and being able to re-roll both Celestine and the Geminae's invulnerable saves would be fun.

They specifically ruled against it.

Aye I know. It makes no sense to me as to why they would do so especially when Chaos has a formation that allows them to field 3 Lord of Skulls in a non-apocalypse game. If anything was ever meant for apocalypse, that would be the one.

That is a remnant of our codex that needs to be faq'ed the other way, but it's pure wishful thinking on my part at this point.

The actual issue is power creep. I bring up Jetbikes because they were the first time I really had no answer other than rethinking my army completely. The codices they put out before eldar were actually pretty balanced and made me pretty happy with 40K.

This is a Sisters issue because we don't get as many rule updates as other armies. If we get no new formations or units and everyone just keeps getting stronger, the situation goes from being an interesting challenge to being unteneble. I'm back because the Cadia book is interesting, but everything "we" got was something that Imperial armies got.

Here's an amusing one:

Celestine and Geminae - 200
Ministorum Priest with Font of Fury - 35 (with Rets)
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Immo - 135
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Rhino - 115
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Rhino - 115
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Rhino - 115
5 Doms with 4 Melta in Repressor - 180
5 Doms with 4 Melta in Repressor - 180
Exorcist - 125
Exorcist - 125
5 Rets with 4 Heavy Flamers in Repressor - 175

1500



The return of the Easy Bake Oven!

(Reminder: The Font of Fury (10pts) – Once per game, the bearer can use this instead of another ranged weapon. Range: 8″, S3, AP-, Assault 1, Large Blast, Poison 4+, One Use Only, Bane of Evil: becomes Poison 2+ against enemy units with Chaos Space Marine, Chaos Demon or Khorne Demonkin faction)

It's the issue of options.
Let's compare Iron Hands to Sisters. If you want a detachment besides a CAD?
Iron Hands have several Decurion options that give great armywide buffs, like boosted FNP or army-wide ObjecSec. They have three very versatile options in total. They also have many, many formations for small additions to larger forces.
Sisters have a modified CAD with minimal benefits. Or, they have a small bonus detachment for taking Priests and a few melee specialists.

If you want a good, multi-wound HQ?
Sisters have Celestine, a 200-point model who is really powerful, but lacks options. They also have the Canonness, who is terrible, and Uriah, who is an overcosted priest who is pretty subpar of a choice.
Space Marines have Chaplains, Techpriests, Librarians, or Captains - Who can also be bumped to Chapter Masters. These all vary in power level, but each offer many unique bonuses, abilities, and reasons to be chosen.

As far as infantry goes, Sisters get the Crusader/DCA/Arco trio, they get Repentia, they get Seraphim, they get Command Squads, and they get variations on Battle Sisters with very little to differentiate them except for a single one-use special rule.
Space Marines get Command Squads, Honour Guard, Terminators, Centurions, Tactical marines and variants, Jump Assault Marines, Scouts, Bikes, Attack Bikes, Veterans, and scout bikes. (And Legion of the Damned.)




I could go on, but the point is that options are extremely limited. You can still build a list with them, but it gets very samey very quickly.

Much of this could be fixed by giving in Allies, though. A decent, cheap HQ? Buy an Inquisitor! Psychic support? Take an Imperial Psyker and some Wyrdvanes, you're all set. Maybe you want some Deep Strikers to help ouy better than Seraphim could? Try Legio-ZZT.
Sorry, you're out of detachment slots.

And I'm actually considering this one pretty heavily:

Castellan's with Easy Bake:

Celestine - 200
Ministorum Priest with Font of Fury - 35 (with Rets)
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Immo - 135
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Rhino - 115
5 Doms with 4 Melta in Repressor - 180
5 Doms with 4 Melta in Repressor - 180
5 Rets with 4 Heavy Flamers in Repressor - 175
Coteaz - 100
Inquisitorial Henchman Band with 2 Acolytes with Plasma, 3 Acolytes, 2 Servitors with Plasma in Chimera with Psybolt - 140
Exorcist - 125
5 Scouts with BP/Bolter - 55
5 Scouts with 3 Bolter/BP, 1 BP/CCW, 2 Shotgun/BP - 55
1495

5 Points to play with.

I was going to take sniper rifles, but it looks like that squad finally sold, so I don't have them anymore. Everything except the vehicles is ob sec, so that's nice.4 Troops and 2 Transports to regen. Hatred for everything. Probably Celestine warlord for the bubble of faith.

So what is the best bike group to use celestine in? I'm not use to using space marines (ever)

Oberron wrote:
So what is the best bike group to use celestine in? I'm not use to using space marines (ever)

Castellans? I would go with a IH Captain with Chain and TH on Bike, Command Squad with Apoth, Gravs and some SS.
Non-Castellans? I would go with TWC instead of bikes.

Pretre, with all your castellan's lists, one thing I'm not getting is why you don't bump up all the troop transports to at least immolaters?

 pretre wrote:
And I'm actually considering this one pretty heavily:

Castellan's with Easy Bake:

Celestine - 200
Ministorum Priest with Font of Fury - 35 (with Rets)
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Immo - 135
5 BSS with Melta/Flamer in Rhino - 115
5 Doms with 4 Melta in Repressor - 180
5 Doms with 4 Melta in Repressor - 180
5 Rets with 4 Heavy Flamers in Repressor - 175
Inquisitorial Henchman Band with 2 Acolytes with Plasma, 3 Acolytes, 2 Servitors with Plasma in Chimera with Psybolt - 140
Exorcist - 125
5 Scouts with BP/Bolter - 55
5 Scouts with 3 Bolter/BP, 1 BP/CCW, 2 Shotgun/BP - 55
1495

5 Points to play with.

I was going to take sniper rifles, but it looks like that squad finally sold, so I don't have them anymore. Everything except the vehicles is ob sec, so that's nice.4 Troops and 2 Transports to regen. Hatred for everything. Probably Celestine warlord for the bubble of faith.

How are they obsec? I don't see Coteaz listed. Secondly I'd suggest droping some points 10pts in the hench band or font of fury to grab a second troop immolator, with the detachment bonuses immolators are incredibly superior to rhinos.

Also, I always have a generic character be warlord so I can Master of Ambush my dominions in turn 1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:

Oberron wrote:
So what is the best bike group to use celestine in? I'm not use to using space marines (ever)

Castellans? I would go with a IH Captain with Chain and TH on Bike, Command Squad with Apoth, Gravs and some SS.
Non-Castellans? I would go with TWC instead of bikes.

This is correct, She always goes really well with Ravenwing Command Squads.

Coteaz is in there. I mustn't have pasted it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fixed it. I could make the priest warlord if I really wanted to. The faith bubble is more important to me though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Too bad you can't take Lias in a Castellans.

 pretre wrote:
Coteaz is in there. I mustn't have pasted it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fixed it. I could make the priest warlord if I really wanted to. The faith bubble is more important to me though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Too bad you can't take Lias in a Castellans.

I always stick a laud hailer on one of the domi vehicles for that purpose, gives me more freedom for where Celestine can go without gimping the dominions.

That's a possibility too.

Of course the benefit of having Celestine be warlord is that she's hard to remove.