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.

 Griddlelol wrote:

 pizzaguardian wrote:


force* sword.

Considering I'd never use the force part, it's essentially a power sword.

Divination or instant death melee attacks on a S3 character? Kinda imbalanced choice.

Well you can always use it on your opponents turn at least. Or maybe you cant get warlord trait that gives your +1 warp charge (malleus 6th). It has minimal use granted but minimal is more than sth.

Super Newb wrote:
Tuiman, why would you think a new Inquisition codex would have made GK gain *anything* relative to other armies? Seriously, what did you expect? A separate Inquisition codex would obviously help you less than anyone else, since you (just like me) already have the inquisition in your army.

Just a very strange thing to get upset about.

Thats just my counter arguement to anyone that says "well gk can now take 4 inquisitors so stop complaining"

I just dont like how everybody can now take coteaz+ a second inquisitor form our codex for no tax what so ever.

To be honest when GK are updated Inquisitors, assassins, etc will likely all be gone from the codex.

 tuiman wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
Tuiman, why would you think a new Inquisition codex would have made GK gain *anything* relative to other armies? Seriously, what did you expect? A separate Inquisition codex would obviously help you less than anyone else, since you (just like me) already have the inquisition in your army.

Just a very strange thing to get upset about.

Thats just my counter arguement to anyone that says "well gk can now take 4 inquisitors so stop complaining"

I just dont like how everybody can now take coteaz+ a second inquisitor form our codex for no tax what so ever.

While true if someone were to take coteaz they will surely take the "tax" as you would likely be better served with a regular inquisitor if you dont want the troop henchmen.

 tuiman wrote:
This really might be the point where I give up playing 40k.

Taking one of the few cool things left from the gk codex (which in 6th is hardly the strongest book out there anymore) in Coteaz and cheap inquisitors and give them out like candy to all the imperium armies as battle brothers and even to some xenos as allies of convenience. Yea free divination for most armies with no tax to take what so ever.

Sorry for the rant but reading all the crazy ideas of what people can do in this thread now with this supplement made me just sad panda.

I mean yea its cool that I can now take 4 inquisitors for gk, but then if pretty much every army is going to take coteaz then gk have lost more than they have gained imho. Hey forgeworld, why no love for gk stuff? haha

Grey Knights should never have had the Inquisiton exclusively but should have been (and likely will now be) a Codex on its own. This Codex is a step in the right direction but even now is constrained by them having to keep the GK codex current - what they should have donw was update the GK codex at the same time.

Its not just the divination that's amazing. A Priest with a unit of Crusaders and DCA's makes them so much better with re-rolling failed invulns.

In addition to the prescience, I think a 35 pt model that makes plasma weapons (including all Tau pulse weapons) BS1 could be beneficial in some situations. Though, I'm more in the "just take Coteaz" camp personally, he's a great force multiplier.

I find it rather fluffy to include an inquisitor in any imperial army, especially imperial guard.

I feel like inquisition should have been it's own codex from the start, I do not believe they should have been part of the grey knights so I find it pretty cool that I can include the inquisition in my army now without a tax.

I honestly don't think this ally breaks the game at all. If you plan on using this divination inquisitor in any IG army I see the blob or artillery being the biggest things this guy gives prescience to. But still he is in a fragile guard squad that can be easily killed which means it seems just to keep him alive you need a blob.

I honestly don't think this inquisition detachment will break the game or make allies any more broken I feel most imperial armies should be able to take inquisitors as aren't inquisitors usually supervising most imperial armies anyways? Also I don't believe by adding 2 divination inquisitors will break any army. Last I remember IG was rather low in competitive tournies anyways and foot guard is largely dead except if you use that as an ally for another army. So I see this inquisition codex as a boost to help some imperial armies fight broken armies such as wave serpent spam, taudar, triple riptide armies, corn air force, flying monstrous daemon circus, and the screamer star. Will an IG army really be seen at the top of tournie list with inquisitorial allies...I don't believe so but I feel this supplement will give other armies a run for their money and boost most all imperial armies.

Sorry I used IG mostly, that's just the army I play and lately I've played both mech and foot lists and have found most foot lists can't even win in a casual fun game. Most mech lists will still struggle against your average competitive list. Now that there's this inquisition supplement I may look into allying inquisitors to buff my foot guard.

I almost want to take inquisitors and legion of the damned for fluff reasons ^^.

Aside for that I think it helps a lot of builds without being tooo powerful.

Will some builds become much more powerful(possibly) but I feel that it really helps out some builds that needed just a little something to pick them up and make them more competitive.

I just got grav-cannon centurions, so now I am really intrigued by this. Thinking of sticking one in my Grav Cents and have my Librarian go biomancy while the inquisitor(s) take divination, can someone say Grav Cents overwatching at full BS (and scouting too)?

 ace101 wrote:
I just got grav-cannon centurions, so now I am really intrigued by this. Thinking of sticking one in my Grav Cents and have my Librarian go biomancy while the inquisitor(s) take divination, can someone say Grav Cents overwatching at full BS (and scouting too)?

Centurions can't overwatch, they are slow and purposeful.

 tuiman wrote:
This really might be the point where I give up playing 40k.

Taking one of the few cool things left from the gk codex (which in 6th is hardly the strongest book out there anymore) in Coteaz and cheap inquisitors and give them out like candy to all the imperium armies as battle brothers and even to some xenos as allies of convenience. Yea free divination for most armies with no tax to take what so ever.

Sorry for the rant but reading all the crazy ideas of what people can do in this thread now with this supplement made me just sad panda.

I mean yea its cool that I can now take 4 inquisitors for gk, but then if pretty much every army is going to take coteaz then gk have lost more than they have gained imho. Hey forgeworld, why no love for gk stuff? haha

you mean the codex that took these things away from all the other imperial armies anyway, yeah good times, im glad that we can all take inq allies again, like 2nd 3rd and 4th, 5th was the only one that stopped us having them.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
1) Divination inquisitors are incredibly cheap. For ~50 points you can get a basic inquisitor with ML 1 divination, and it's not hard to find units where the increase in firepower from prescience is enough to justify that cost.

Giving twin-linked to a BS4 weapon makes it 33.3% more effective at delivering damage.

Therefore, your break even point is on a 150 point unit. If your buffing a unit that costs less, your losing efficiency. If your buffing a unit that costs more, then your increasing efficiency.

I am hard pressed to think of why armies would not want to take advantage of that 50 point inquisitor. Most of the units in my army are above that threshold.

I read through this thread and wanted to address this quote especially. Going to preface my upcoming opinion with the fact that I have been playing and loving the henchmen part of GK for awhile now and Coteaz is literally my favorite model in the game (old broadside is maybe tied but...). I live by these models and know their upgrade options and how they come together well.

Your hard math is correct, but your ignoring a LOT of other benefits. These inquisitor models are insane and after playing with codex GK they really stand out.

They provide LD 10
They are a 3. WOUND. MODEL. Albeit at T3 but the value is insane.
For 100 points you get a B4 conversion beamer lvl 1 psyker with div.
They are the key to servitors.
Prescience is an amazing feature, but wait until one of these babies casts misfortune on your wraiths. I promise they have upgrade options available to get them into 24 as well.
The scariest aspect of the codex is the allies chart. Half of the games armies now have access to some of the better combos in codex GK. I really hope they re-do the Grey Knights sooner rather than later although I know it won't happen. We haven't lost anything but our unique units just got slashed in two.

I am braced to not only see 1 Inquisitor in a lot of armies but two. The bonuses are huge and there are so many battle brothers it's unreal. I am not one to make too harsh a decisions but damn. I can't see this being a boon to the game overall. I think it's going to take away some of the uniqueness a lot of armies have.

ps. why the HELL did Eldar, arguably the most competitive army in the game right now, get convenience? My goodness.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sinji wrote:
Very nice. I don't own an IPad or tablet of any kind so its a no go for me. I'll have to wait for the hard back. Are they stubborn? I'm currently running my Sabre army with a LC as the leader because he's cheep and can attach himself to an Artillary gun for T7 goodness. Might have ditch him for an Inquisitor now.

How do the Warlord traits look? Which would be your personal favourite Inquisitor?

Inquisitor's are all stubborn.

I am almost certain I've read there will not be a hardcover release. Could be mistaken.

Half of the traits of each table are unique, Xeno's stands out to me.

 Aijec wrote:


ps. why the HELL did Eldar, arguably the most competitive army in the game right now, get convenience? My goodness.

Because Inquisitors on occassion have been able to access the Black Library in the fluff. They have worked with eldar enough in the past to warrant it. Really it doesn't do much for eldar other than give them access to cheap servo skulls seeing they don't synergize well with C:I

 obsidiankatana wrote:

 Byte wrote:


How is this different from using him before the INQ release? Right out of the GK Codex made this possible.

No troop tax.

They also weren't BB. A decision I payed close attention too. Always thought SM having access to div without spending points on Tig was a conscious decision.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Glocknall wrote:

 Aijec wrote:


ps. why the HELL did Eldar, arguably the most competitive army in the game right now, get convenience? My goodness.

Because Inquisitors on occassion have been able to access the Black Library in the fluff. They have worked with eldar enough in the past to warrant it. Really it doesn't do much for eldar other than give them access to cheap servo skulls seeing they don't synergize well with C:I

Sticking an Inquis in even an unassuming guardian blob is pretty gross. I don't really care about the fluff from a gameplay perspective, giving them more options just doesn't sit well with me.

They are allies of conveience, got ahead of myself a little. Point still stands.

 Aijec wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Glocknall wrote:

 Aijec wrote:


ps. why the HELL did Eldar, arguably the most competitive army in the game right now, get convenience? My goodness.

Because Inquisitors on occassion have been able to access the Black Library in the fluff. They have worked with eldar enough in the past to warrant it. Really it doesn't do much for eldar other than give them access to cheap servo skulls seeing they don't synergize well with C:I

Sticking an Inquis in even an unassuming guardian blob is pretty gross. I don't really care about the fluff from a gameplay perspective, giving them more options just doesn't sit well with me.

When you say Convenience? Do you mean allies of convenience?

If so, Allies of Convenience can't join or be joined by independent characters and can't benefit from their abilities or psychic blessings.

The only real benefit for Eldar is that it gives them the ability to have an actually useful CC unit or coteaz which basically prevents seize against them.

Other than that, probably doesn't add very much for Eldar

StarTrotter wrote:To be honest when GK are updated Inquisitors, assassins, etc will likely all be gone from the codex.

This is what I am most worried about, that this leads on to 6th ed gk codex being a complete different book to what it is now. That we loose are status as a stand alone army and just become a couple of selections that you can add to any imperial list like before.

Jakobokaj wrote:

 tuiman wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
Tuiman, why would you think a new Inquisition codex would have made GK gain *anything* relative to other armies? Seriously, what did you expect? A separate Inquisition codex would obviously help you less than anyone else, since you (just like me) already have the inquisition in your army.

Just a very strange thing to get upset about.

Thats just my counter arguement to anyone that says "well gk can now take 4 inquisitors so stop complaining"

I just dont like how everybody can now take coteaz+ a second inquisitor form our codex for no tax what so ever.

While true if someone were to take coteaz they will surely take the "tax" as you would likely be better served with a regular inquisitor if you dont want the troop henchmen.

I dont quite undersatnd this, but what I was trying to say was that now you can just take coteaz and a second inquisitor and not have to worry about taking any troop choices.

Mr Morden wrote:

 tuiman wrote:
This really might be the point where I give up playing 40k.

Taking one of the few cool things left from the gk codex (which in 6th is hardly the strongest book out there anymore) in Coteaz and cheap inquisitors and give them out like candy to all the imperium armies as battle brothers and even to some xenos as allies of convenience. Yea free divination for most armies with no tax to take what so ever.

Sorry for the rant but reading all the crazy ideas of what people can do in this thread now with this supplement made me just sad panda.

I mean yea its cool that I can now take 4 inquisitors for gk, but then if pretty much every army is going to take coteaz then gk have lost more than they have gained imho. Hey forgeworld, why no love for gk stuff? haha

Grey Knights should never have had the Inquisiton exclusively but should have been (and likely will now be) a Codex on its own. This Codex is a step in the right direction but even now is constrained by them having to keep the GK codex current - what they should have donw was update the GK codex at the same time.

Yea im intrigued by what this means to codex gk. The problem is now that inquisition has been made open to anyone and that gk is so differnt to any other marine armies. That there is not really a whole lot of stuff left to make a codex out off tbh.

Formosa wrote:

 tuiman wrote:
This really might be the point where I give up playing 40k.

Taking one of the few cool things left from the gk codex (which in 6th is hardly the strongest book out there anymore) in Coteaz and cheap inquisitors and give them out like candy to all the imperium armies as battle brothers and even to some xenos as allies of convenience. Yea free divination for most armies with no tax to take what so ever.

Sorry for the rant but reading all the crazy ideas of what people can do in this thread now with this supplement made me just sad panda.

I mean yea its cool that I can now take 4 inquisitors for gk, but then if pretty much every army is going to take coteaz then gk have lost more than they have gained imho. Hey forgeworld, why no love for gk stuff? haha

you mean the codex that took these things away from all the other imperial armies anyway, yeah good times, im glad that we can all take inq allies again, like 2nd 3rd and 4th, 5th was the only one that stopped us having them.

And will you stiull be glad when every imperial army is just taking coteaz beacuse he is one of the best 100 point HQ multipliers in the entire game.

Having Inquisition open to everyone is a good idea. Just the way they have implemented it, so basically everyone will just take Coteaz and an inquisitor is not really the right way to make it surely?

Rynner wrote:

 ace101 wrote:
I just got grav-cannon centurions, so now I am really intrigued by this. Thinking of sticking one in my Grav Cents and have my Librarian go biomancy while the inquisitor(s) take divination, can someone say Grav Cents overwatching at full BS (and scouting too)?

Centurions can't overwatch, they are slow and purposeful.

Endurence, however, gives them relentless, on top of FNP and IWND, which is why i have the librarian on biomancy.

 ace101 wrote:

Rynner wrote:

 ace101 wrote:
I just got grav-cannon centurions, so now I am really intrigued by this. Thinking of sticking one in my Grav Cents and have my Librarian go biomancy while the inquisitor(s) take divination, can someone say Grav Cents overwatching at full BS (and scouting too)?

Centurions can't overwatch, they are slow and purposeful.

Endurence, however, gives them relentless, on top of FNP and IWND, which is why i have the librarian on biomancy.

Ya but does Relentless override SNP?

I don't see why it would. Anyone care to clue me into the advantage here?

Please tell me the (Unique) tag on Coteaz will prevent people from taking 1 Coteaz from C:I and 1 Coteaz from C:GK. Already seeing this on another board, surely this does not work. Do we have a precedent for the same unique IC existing in two codices?

Was trying to run my Raven Guard using the 'scout' rule with vehicles and Shrike with a bare bones VVS with infiltrate today. I'm trying to use the craptastic Chapter Trait they got because everyone keeps telling me how good it is. Opponent had two Inq's, each with three servo skulls, put up a belt of servo-skulls outside my deployment zone, and a couple on the only bits of cover they didn't have occupied in their half of the table. Best 18pts you'll ever spend IMO. Couldn't move a single model forward with scout, and infiltrate left me no options. This is going to put a serious dent in some of the advantages of Ravenwing, White Scars, Raven Guard, SoB/Dominions, CSM/Huron armies. As far as my Raven Guard go, think I'll head back to my drop pod lists.

Pyrrhus of Epirus wrote:
Please tell me the (Unique) tag on Coteaz will prevent people from taking 1 Coteaz from C:I and 1 Coteaz from C:GK. Already seeing this on another board, surely this does not work. Do we have a precedent for the same unique IC existing in two codices?

Can people take Two Aun'Shis or Two Farsights or Two Abaddons and so on? Because they all appear in two books.

 Krellnus wrote:
Can people take Two Aun'Shis or Two Farsights or Two Abaddons and so on? Because they all appear in two books.

It's not quite the same. Those books say "choose your units from this army list", which means you'd be choosing the exact same unit twice. With the inquisition codex you have two different army lists that happen to both have a unit with the same name but different rules, kind of like how various marine codices have tactical squads with different rules.

I'll give you that, but I guess what I meant is that, if it were any other game, then the precedent is similar enough you could apply it to the problem at hand, given that this is GW however who the hell knows?

 Krellnus wrote:
I'll give you that, but I guess what I meant is that, if it were any other game, then the precedent is similar enough you could apply it to the problem at hand, given that this is GW however who the hell knows?

No, we know. You can't take two Coteazes because it would be bloody silly. GW writers never even stopped to consider that anyone might try it, as it was so obvious to them. And because this thread is not in YMDC, no one needs to try to rules-lawyer some pants-on-head counter-intuitive interpretation on this.

 Crimson wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
I'll give you that, but I guess what I meant is that, if it were any other game, then the precedent is similar enough you could apply it to the problem at hand, given that this is GW however who the hell knows?

No, we know. You can't take two Coteazes because it would be bloody silly. GW writers never even stopped to consider that anyone might try it, as it was so obvious to them. And because this thread is not in YMDC, no one needs to try to rules-lawyer some pants-on-head counter-intuitive interpretation on this.

Creating FAQs directly in contradiction to your own RAW is also silly and yet....

 Krellnus wrote:

Creating FAQs directly in contradiction to your own RAW is also silly and yet....

Not similarly. GW sees this as a fluffy game with a narrative and in such a game there will be no two of the same named character. It does not even occur to them that anyone would think that there could.

And yet, the issue has arisen, making GW incompetent (at worse) or hopelessly naive (at best). They shouldn't assume this issue won't arise, they should make sure it cannot.