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.

The new GK codex has to get new things if they remove the Inquisition from it. How many competitive GK lists actually use non Inq components? Without doing something, when the new GK codex comes out a bunch of people will suddenly discover that they don't have a GK list anymore, but an INQ/Necron, INQ/Tau, or INQ/Space marine list. In fact current competitive lists will find that they may be screwed due to the GK INQ component suddenly paired with desperate allies or worse.

This INQ codex is far more game changing than people I think many people realise. Suddenly Tau can get very easy access to servo skulls (stopping the opponent from infiltrating,) Eldar much the same, etc. Without changes to the codex and without the Inq component, GKs suddenly lost most of their access to plasma, melta and cheap bodies UNLESS they ally with the INQ codex which was part of them -anyway-.

Not sure what GW are planning, but whatever it is I don't think they thought about it much or did any testing whatsoever.

chnmmr wrote:
The new GK codex has to get new things if they remove the Inquisition from it. How many competitive GK lists actually use non Inq components? Without doing something, when the new GK codex comes out a bunch of people will suddenly discover that they don't have a GK list anymore, but an INQ/Necron, INQ/Tau, or INQ/Space marine list. In fact current competitive lists will find that they may be screwed due to the GK INQ component suddenly paired with desperate allies or worse.

This INQ codex is far more game changing than people I think many people realise. Suddenly Tau can get very easy access to servo skulls (stopping the opponent from infiltrating,) Eldar much the same, etc. Without changes to the codex and without the Inq component, GKs suddenly lost most of their access to plasma, melta and cheap bodies UNLESS they ally with the INQ codex which was part of them -anyway-.

Not sure what GW are planning, but whatever it is I don't think they thought about it much or did any testing whatsoever.

That is the point, they can ally with them not taking up the other Ally slot.
Just make them a C:SM supplement, and try will have access to a lot of new things, as well as the current grey knights.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, from Natfka: Answers to the Inquisition Codex

I can see it happening that they just become a supplement like the way they used to before, take out the charecters and things non unique to gk and you pretty much have:

Grandmaster
Strikes
Terminators
Dreadknight

Although the fact that I have a gk army, I would like to be able to use it. So please gw dont remove gk's having a proper codex pretty please. But we will need some new toys definitely if no more inquisition.

The problem I guess is because gk is not a founding or successor legion, we cant get any of the stuff like, predators, bikes, speeders, stormtalons, contemptor dreads, centrurians, sternguard, devastators.

I don't think GK will go "supplement" on us and I think people are overreacting just a little. Pull out the handful of Inq stuff? Sure. Reduce the book to a supplement army? Not likely.

What's tickling me is people saying without the inq forces GK aren't just silver marines. Like BA aren't just red marines...oh wait...

 doc1234 wrote:
What's tickling me is people saying without the inq forces GK aren't just silver marines. Like BA aren't just red marines...oh wait...

Show me another Marine chapter filled with Psykers and Force Weapons and I'd agree. Yes they're Marines, but they're Marines purpose built to fight Daemons specifically. Because of this their wargear, options and generally everything is designed to do just that. So they aren't just Marines. They're purpose built for one specific task unlike most Marines.

I'm not talking fluff or i'd agree, but BA: Built for CC. Seriously? In a game where what, nearly a quarter of the factions are colour coded power ranger armour you're arguing the silver rangers are different? It's still poster boy squads of 5-10 with BS/WS4, T4 S4 3+. Only difference is they get a few more personal toys and a few less army wide toys. Take out the INQ and oh my, suddenly much more space to fill with what will likely end up being bikes, a chaplain equivalent and whatever else can be copy and pasted from the main codex.

 doc1234 wrote:
I'm not talking fluff or i'd agree, but BA: Built for CC. Seriously? In a game where what, nearly a quarter of the factions are colour coded power ranger armour you're arguing the silver rangers are different? It's still poster boy squads of 5-10 with BS/WS4, T4 S4 3+. Only difference is they get a few more personal toys and a few less army wide toys. Take out the INQ and oh my, suddenly much more space to fill with what will likely end up being bikes, a chaplain equivalent and whatever else can be copy and pasted from the main codex.

I'm speaking about from a fluff standpoint that the stuff that's being mentioned doesn't really fit because it doesn't really match what the GKs fight, or how they fight. Statline wise, yes all Marines are mostly the same, but just because we look at pulling the Inquistion out doesn't mean what's left has to be filled with generic Marine stuff. I mean they could have easily put in Predators, Thunderfire Cannons, or other things into the book that regular Marines have but they didn't. It would have cost them nothing to do it and they didn't do it. Why? Because they decided it didn't fit.

I don't see GKs changing from being a primarily short ranged army that is only effective at around 24" or less from the enemy lines. It's part of how they play that separates them from the other Marine armies who can load up on plenty that lets them get in much more stuff that works at longer ranges than the GKs do.

I don't see why GW would make GK into a mini-dex. They have a full codex worth of options even if you pull the Inq and Assassin stuff out (which is only in the HQ and Elite sections anyways).

One newb question, Under the Inquisitor allies tab it has Sisters as Battle brothers, and grey knights as battle brothers, If I have an Inquisitor as the warlord, I know that both SOB and GK are Battle brothers to the Inquisitor. Would they still treat each other, SOB to GK as battle brothers because of the new allies matrix, or would they still treat each other as allies of convenience?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 doc1234 wrote:
I'm not talking fluff or i'd agree, but BA: Built for CC. Seriously? In a game where what, nearly a quarter of the factions are colour coded power ranger armour you're arguing the silver rangers are different? It's still poster boy squads of 5-10 with BS/WS4, T4 S4 3+. Only difference is they get a few more personal toys and a few less army wide toys. Take out the INQ and oh my, suddenly much more space to fill with what will likely end up being bikes, a chaplain equivalent and whatever else can be copy and pasted from the main codex.

I'm speaking about from a fluff standpoint that the stuff that's being mentioned doesn't really fit because it doesn't really match what the GKs fight, or how they fight. Statline wise, yes all Marines are mostly the same, but just because we look at pulling the Inquistion out doesn't mean what's left has to be filled with generic Marine stuff. I mean they could have easily put in Predators, Thunderfire Cannons, or other things into the book that regular Marines have but they didn't. It would have cost them nothing to do it and they didn't do it. Why? Because they decided it didn't fit.

I don't see GKs changing from being a primarily short ranged army that is only effective at around 24" or less from the enemy lines. It's part of how they play that separates them from the other Marine armies who can load up on plenty that lets them get in much more stuff that works at longer ranges than the GKs do.

I don't see why GW would make GK into a mini-dex. They have a full codex worth of options even if you pull the Inq and Assassin stuff out (which is only in the HQ and Elite sections anyways).

Right, least we're on the same page then that they "shouldn't" be the same. However try to keep in mind all the other bits of army fluff they've thrown to the wind as an excuse to sell toys. Keep in mind this same company has suddenly ruled that Inquisitors don't use assassins, only the GK do, and that the inquisition would never in their lives make use of freeboota/blood axe mercenaries for their own ends. To quote you:

It would have cost them nothing to do it and they didn't do it. Why? Because they decided it didn't fit.

I'm not arguing it wouldn't fit, the GK shouldn't really be a "standing army" as it is when they spent how long as the equivalent of SAS teams (deep strike in, remove daemon taint, get out without witnesses) and that siege weapons and bikes wouldn't fit them. However with the INQ units gone from a hypothetical future edition of C:GK, suddenly the books looking empty. What do?

Also, that "full codex of their own stuff"? They have 3 SC GK's, 3 generic GK HQ's, 4 power armour units with access to identical equipment, and the dreadnight. Assassins aren't GK, they're Inquisition. Those vehicles? Marine issue in any other codex. Terminators even as troops? Dark angels and Space wolves have those up the wazoo, the DA especially. No TFC, but a tech priest which again is fairly standard marine issue.

No the GK shouldn't be rolled into a mini supplement (not if this INQ book is anything to go by at any rate), but what's more likely, they get a hypothetical update they deserve, or they get more baby carriers?

EDIT: I started to ramble a bit at the end there, by baby carriers I meant "lets just meddle and put in advertisements for plastic kits, feth the fluff", realized it sounded like I was moving the goal posts a little Sorry

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 conker249 wrote:
One newb question, Under the Inquisitor allies tab it has Sisters as Battle brothers, and grey knights as battle brothers, If I have an Inquisitor as the warlord, I know that both SOB and GK are Battle brothers to the Inquisitor. Would they still treat each other, SOB to GK as battle brothers because of the new allies matrix, or would they still treat each other as allies of convenience?

Now ask yourself what an IG force with Chaos allies does seeing as it can still that the INQ

 conker249 wrote:
One newb question, Under the Inquisitor allies tab it has Sisters as Battle brothers, and grey knights as battle brothers, If I have an Inquisitor as the warlord, I know that both SOB and GK are Battle brothers to the Inquisitor. Would they still treat each other, SOB to GK as battle brothers because of the new allies matrix, or would they still treat each other as allies of convenience?

Each detachment in the army uses their own relative allies chart when dealing with other detachments in the army.

So the fact the inquisitor is warlord, and has a battle brother stance with both GK and SoB does not change the stance SoB and GK hold towards each other.

Essentially all you use the Inquisitor Allies chart for is to see how the Inquistorial Detachment approaches each army.

Thanks, still awesome, Just wondered

Don't think they play tested this at all, you'd be dumb as an IG player not to get an inquisitor model for anti scout and prescience.

Even tau and Eldar can take the anti scout inquisitor to stop Corn dogs and white scar armies.

I bet it was tested Ravenous D, but not to the kind of standards you're thinking of. They want stuff that's fun to play narratively, you're thinking of stuff that is balanced competitively.

War Hymns on Crusaders sure sounds narrative to me.

Doc1234 I agree with what you are saying. Gk are so different to any of the other marine codexs in what we dont have. Bikes, drop pods, predators, thunderfires, whirlwind, scouts, devestaors.

If the inquisition stuff is taken out there is not much left. They would have to suddenly make up 3-4 new units and put it into fluff that they have been on the gk all the time.

 Ravenous D wrote:
War Hymns on Crusaders sure sounds narrative to me.

You don't like rerollable 3++ saves

If you're going to bring a knife to a gun fight you have to be "that good."

Rerollable 3++ knifes in a land raider at that.

 Ravenous D wrote:
War Hymns on Crusaders sure sounds narrative to me.

Sisters can already do it, so it's not really breaking the game when Inquisition does it too. The only real difference is the Inquisition can shove them in a Land Raider.

Or 12 servitors with heavy bolters/multi meltas with an inquisitor with prescience and 3 servo skulls for 184pts.

169pts for 5 in a chimera doing drive bys.

All the narrative, all the time!

You can only take a max 3 heavy bolters or meltas on a servitor squad though

The only thing I care about are the three words "Ulumeathi Plasma Syphon".

I play Tau. With an Ethereal.

Not being able to shoot with about 75% of my army annoys me.

(Yes I know it's not really that good, but I've had some annoying experiences with someone who used it before I figured out it's not really that broken)

 tuiman wrote:
You can only take a max 3 heavy bolters or meltas on a servitor squad though

Noticed that, then just drop it to 3 servitors with heavy bolters/multimeltas/plasma cannons with a ML 1 inquisitor with 3 servo skulls. 94 to 124pts.

 Ravenous D wrote:
War Hymns on Crusaders sure sounds narrative to me.

Wait, I though Eldars could get a rerollable 2+...

Could anyone tell me what the min is i have to take to get an inquisition crusader landraider loaded with dca and crusaders as allies for my sob. So sick of taking an "assault unit" that must sit and get shot for a turn before it can assault.

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
War Hymns on Crusaders sure sounds narrative to me.

Wait, I though Eldars could get a rerollable 2+...

That's screamer star. Eldar can get a lone HQ model with a 2+ rerollable cover save that most people can easily ignore.

canadianguy wrote:
Could anyone tell me what the min is i have to take to get an inquisition crusader landraider loaded with dca and crusaders as allies for my sob. So sick of taking an "assault unit" that must sit and get shot for a turn before it can assault.

Well first you get Codex: Inquisition, then you look at the Inquisitoral Warband option, and when you're done changing your pants you stick 3 Priests (one for each of the Hymns) with Power Mauls, 4 Crusaders and 5 DCA in there and laugh manically when your Crusader with Psybolts slams into their lines. Feel free to drop a Crusader for an Ordos Xenos Inquisitor with a Plasma Siphon, Rad Grenades and Prescience too (for those re-roll to wounds).

Overall a very crummy book. I wasn't even sold on the fluff portions of the book, so all-in-all a monstrous waste of money. Wish I could have known I just need to look at my Grey Knight Codex to get the gist of it.

Yeah I can't see how they did any play testing for this one, it's somewhat embarrassing in my mind that this book came out and is so obviously under-thought. At least pretend that you're trying.

Another set of broken allies rules... bleh, is anyone else getting tired?

 Matt1785 wrote:
Overall a very crummy book. I wasn't even sold on the fluff portions of the book, so all-in-all a monstrous waste of money. Wish I could have known I just need to look at my Grey Knight Codex to get the gist of it.

Yeah I can't see how they did any play testing for this one, it's somewhat embarrassing in my mind that this book came out and is so obviously under-thought. At least pretend that you're trying.

Another set of broken allies rules... bleh, is anyone else getting tired?

Well one of the Devs at games day did say that they aren't interested in balancing the game and the more stuff they add the more it levels the playing field.... somehow.

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Matt1785 wrote:
Overall a very crummy book. I wasn't even sold on the fluff portions of the book, so all-in-all a monstrous waste of money. Wish I could have known I just need to look at my Grey Knight Codex to get the gist of it.

Yeah I can't see how they did any play testing for this one, it's somewhat embarrassing in my mind that this book came out and is so obviously under-thought. At least pretend that you're trying.

Another set of broken allies rules... bleh, is anyone else getting tired?

Well one of the Devs at games day did say that they aren't interested in balancing the game and the more stuff they add the more it levels the playing field.... somehow.

It does make some sense...balance comes when it sucks for everyone.