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.

Yeah, Repentia are not throw-away refuse. They are seeking redemption in death, but clearly their death has to mean something or they could just be executed or commit some form of ritual suicide. They are clearly seeking martyrdom through standing for a righteous cause.

That said, I still do not consider them truly an 'elite' unit. Their basic design (unarmoured human assault unit with Evicerators) was never going to be functional under the rules of the game. I like the fluff concept of the unit, but it really needs a complete rules overhaul to be practical.

Should Repentia even be a unit in and of themselves? How about if they were an upgrade to a Frateris Militia unit? Similar to how most units can upgrade one model in X to have a special weapon, one in X Frateris Militia can be a Sister Repentia fighting alongside them? She would be serving a cause, and her presence (still a holy warrior of the Ecclesiarchy) would help rile the religious fervour of the militia. Just an idea.

I think GW should definitely go for the crusaders/templar angle if they ever get around to doing a new SoB codex. Obviously they fit the role better than Space Marines. Real crusaders included civilians from all walks of life, which is what the SoB are all about (at least in older incarnations that included preachers and zealots/militia.) Marines don't just let random beggars into their ranks, and the IG has enough problems with discipline without mobs of fanatics jumping in front of their guns.

 Ashiraya wrote:
The whole 'We have boob armour so we can show off our curves and how feminine we are to everyone but we have equal protection to the walking tanks anyway because reasons!' line is bad anime level bullgak.

You sacrifice your armour integrity and wear thin armour (and yes, it's thin, the majority of depictions show it as significantly thinner than Astartes plate even if I am sure one or two pictures contradict that) so that you can show off how you are not men under arms, sure, but you don't get to magically keep all its resilience for that. There is nothing to suggest that every SoB walks around in artificer armour (which is what would be necessary for equal protection).

Hold up those are two different lines of thought.

Sisters do not need thin armour to be obviously feminine. The AdMech could layer on boob shaped plates of armor onto thick slabs of ceramite, after all.

Seems to me that Sisters do not wear SM-style armour because they cannot. No black carapace and all that. I know that there are huge sets of armour out there that I guess Inquisitors wear maybe (?) without a black carapace analog. But that seems to be pretty rare stuff. Sisters need power armour wearable by normal humans and they need thousand or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands or whatever, let's just say lots and lots of suits of it.

To some degree, we are circling the drain of discussing tech in the 40k setting as if it were real ... which is a losing proposition for all of us. Sisters (and SM and Eldar and Orks and everyone else) look the way they do because someone designed them to look a certain way, not to suit any sense of realism much less some well-developed ideas about how tech in this grim but ultimately cartoonish setting might actually work.

40k may not be entirely realistic, but it also needs to successfully suspend disbelief.

In this case, it fails to suspend mine.

 Elric of Grans wrote:
Should Repentia even be a unit in and of themselves?

Yes, at least I really really think so. So first, I think your idea of being able to take one Repentia per X Fratris Militia at X cost as an upgrade is dead cool, I mean just awesome stuff. It ties in very nicely to what I have been posting (for years) about SoB demonstrating their faith by inspiring other normal humans to greater feats of martial zealotry. The only issue I have with that, and I do think it's a biggie, is that you would not be able to access Repentia without taking Fratris Militia and I would like any prospective dex to have the flexibility so that you could take an all-Sisters list ... which needs to include all Sisters, including Repentia ... or take a "at the head of the faithful" style list. I really do love your idea but I love it mostly in addition to rather than as a substitute for a unit of Repentia.

 Ashiraya wrote:
40k may not be entirely realistic, but it also needs to successfully suspend disbelief.

In this case, it fails to suspend mine.

Sure, that is understandable. Different people are going to experience this for different things. For some, the apelike fungi warriors with cockney accents are the straw that breaks the camel's back. For others, it is the thickness to protection ratio of SoB power armour. It's just a matter of taste I think.

 Ashiraya wrote:
40k may not be entirely realistic, but it also needs to successfully suspend disbelief.

In this case, it fails to suspend mine.

I've never been able to suspend my disbelief to the point where I can accept that 10 soldiers can fit inside a rhino or that armor will somehow protect my soldiers from artillery explosions and flamethrowers when they're not wearing their helmets.
It's not really possible to suspend your disbelief when you're watching, say, Looney Tunes. You just accept it for what it is while acknowledging that no part of it could ever correspond to reality. 40K is the same way.

Killsmith wrote:
Real crusaders included civilians from all walks of life, which is what the SoB are all about

Yes -- crusaders did constitute a varied group. But the martial orders themselves did not. So to the extent we are talking about modelling Sisters on the martial orders (and I think GW would need to tread carefully on that perilous "let's make everyone SM even in WHFB" territory they love) then you need a very stark line in the book between SoB units and "everything else" (Fratris Militia, Arbites, PDF).

 Manchu wrote:
Sure, that is understandable. Different people are going to experience this for different things. For some, the apelike fungi warriors with cockney accents are the straw that breaks the camel's back. For others, it is the thickness to protection ratio of SoB power armour. It's just a matter of taste I think.

I hope that was not a thinly veiled 'how can you consider X illogical when Y exists' argument!

 Manchu wrote:

Killsmith wrote:
Real crusaders included civilians from all walks of life, which is what the SoB are all about

Yes -- crusaders did constitute a varied group. But the martial orders themselves did not.

The martial orders could not field armies at all. They were too few in number. If there were a thousand knights on the battlefield, they'd be backed up by twenty thousand non-order infantry.
Space Marines are supposed to work this way, with thousands of support personnel/servitors for every marine. But these guys don't show up on the tabletop. Presently the Imperium has its all-elite armies and its all-cannon-fodder armies. But there is no middle ground, no army of elites supported by grunts.

If you want GW to make the sisters themselves unique, I doubt any such thing will ever happen. From 2nd edition they were conceived to be the elites of the religious/fanatical wing of the Imperium. They are nothing without the ecclesiarchy, so in my opinion it would make no sense to partition them from the rest of the ministorum. Then you have to consider that GW will probably never make another SoB codex, but they absolutely will never even consider making a unique codex for the rest of the ministorum.

GW is such a bizarre company. They give us hope and almost look like they still know how to deal with their own IP when the produce things like Harlequins or the two AdMech codexes. But then, even with nearly 30 years worth of existing fluff, they can't write their way out of a wet paper bag when it comes to writing a good CSM codex. The Ecclesiarchy angle would be so easy to approach when designing a new SoB codex for the same reason why a CSM codex *should* be a cakewalk.

And this frightens me.

As far as Repentia go, I quite like their original incarnation.

The original Repentia was a single pseudo-character attached to a regular squad. She had no armour, and was armed with a bolt pistol and a chainsword. She effectively fought as a regular member of the unit... until the unit lost a combat and broke.

At which point, the Repentia would get a stat boost (I don't remember the specifics) and Fearless, then leave the squad. The regular squad fall back normally, but the Repentia remains locked in combat and prevents the enemy from making a Sweeping Advance.

 ionusx wrote:
indeed and we are 2nd edition

Sisters of Battle are first edition.

Your argument is still complete and utter nonsense.

Also Manchu, Sisters of Battle have always been "nuns with guns" in some manner or other, IE, the female version of warrior monks-- remember Sister Sin? She actually had a wimple. Maybe it's just me being an avid roleplayer, but "crusading knight": and "warrior monk" aren't always the same thing, though they have a lot of parallels. The way they have developed since first edition makes me think of Sisters of Battle as Knights Hospitaller-- defenders of the faith, paladins of virtue, with non-militant orders that take care of the people-- as how they've always been intended to be depicted. There's no need for them to BECOME this, they've always been that at least to some extent.

I really don't like the fan-depiction of sisters as undisciplined, barely controlled fanatics. That's what Khorne Berserkers are for. Sisters, by their very nature, are bathed in discipline from day one. The strict ascetic lifestyle of the Sisters is something every Sisters codex has emphasized. They aren't Imperial Berserkers, but rather, highly disciplined and organized Ecclesiarchal Paladins.

Thus my argument that new units should represent this to some extent. The "bike rider with power lance" thing is just another way to depict this, as knights were often mounted. The other ways involve fast, armored transports, the "horse" as it were of the modern army-- that is to say, mechanization.

Unsurprisingly, my Sisters army is mechanized.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
At which point, the Repentia would get a stat boost (I don't remember the specifics) and Fearless, then leave the squad. The regular squad fall back normally, but the Repentia remains locked in combat and prevents the enemy from making a Sweeping Advance.

This is a great idea, and I would actually not mind that!

I wouldn't really call SoB 'paladins' - typically, Paladins are heroic Lawful Good types, whereas SoB are, like most Imperial organisations, Lawful Evil.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I wouldn't really call SoB 'paladins' - typically, Paladins are heroic Lawful Good types, whereas SoB are Lawful Evil.

The Adepta Sororitas set up and defend hospitals which hare open to all Imperial citizens, regardless of wealth or standing. That's not something Lawful Evil characters do. The Imperium itself may not be good, but people and organizations within it can be.

 Melissia wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I wouldn't really call SoB 'paladins' - typically, Paladins are heroic Lawful Good types, whereas SoB are Lawful Evil.

The Adepta Sororitas set up and defend hospitals which hare open to all Imperial citizens, regardless of wealth or standing. That's not something Lawful Evil characters do. The Imperium itself may not be good, but people and organizations within it can be.

They still set you on fire if you do not praise their religion often and fervently enough, not to mention what happens to those who choose a different religion altogether.

They're like Sauron's Mordor orcs in terms of morals, just cleaner.

I am sure individual low-ranking Hospitallers can be really good people, but the Sororitas organisation is incredibly evil.

 Ashiraya wrote:
They still set you on fire if you do not praise their religion often and fervently enough

As long as you pay your tithes, obey the laws, and don't worship Chaos, I would say the Imperium in general and the Sisters of Battle in specific aren't going to burn you alive.

 Ashiraya wrote:
not to mention what happens to those who choose a different religion altogether.

That only applies to Chaos or Xeno worship. The Imperial Cult has shown itself to tolerate (and in many cases, accept) worship of alternate religions-- so long as they can be interpreted so that the God-Emperor is at the top, and Chaos influence is not present.

I'm not saying the Ecclesiarchy is "good", but that they aren't as tyrannical or monolithic as you seem to claim.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am sure individual low-ranking Hospitallers can be really good people, but the Sororitas organisation is incredibly evil.

On the contrary, it is full of people with noble goals and who are willing to sacrifice themselves to help others-- in fact, that is the defining feature of the organization. Adepta Sororitas sacrifice themselves to help others; martyrdom for the Imperium is a core concept, and almost all mentions of martyrdom are done defending the people of the Imperium.

So what happens if the Imperium encounters an isolated human planet who has no intention of acknowledging the Emperor at all?

If conquered, they will accept the occupation, but they will remain entirely atheistic.

'Flamers' is the answer to that question.

 Ashiraya wrote:
If conquered, they will accept the occupation, but they will remain entirely atheistic.

We're really getting off topic here. Suffice it to say, if they pay their tithes and don't worship Chaos, they will be tolerated, while the Ecclesiarchy works to try to convert them. What happens at this point depends on the needs of the author; sometimes, the Ecclesiarchy will succeed in converting the world over the course of generations of effort (indeed, this is how the Ecclesiarchy generally works, subverting the cultures and religions of newly integrated worlds in to the culture and religion of the Imperium). Other times, they'll simply just keep trying, viewing the tithes from the world as justifying its continued existence while having a very tense relationship with the world's populace. And other times, a hardass puritan inquisitor or power-hungry ecclesiarchal official will instigate a purge. All three are perfectly valid ways to write in the Imperium, and variations of all three exist within 40k lore.

It does not at all match my experiences, but by all means, let us indeed return to the topic.

 Melissia wrote:

 ionusx wrote:
indeed and we are 2nd edition

Sisters of Battle are first edition.

Maybe it's just me being an avid roleplayer, but "crusading knight": and "warrior monk" aren't the same thing. I think Sisters of Battle as Knights Hospitaller

They may not be the same thing in all cases, but the Knights Hospitaller were both crusading knights and warrior monks. They employed secular "temp" knights as well. But Sisters definitely form a closer parallel with the medieval knightly orders than marines do, because those knightly orders were literally the militant wing of the Catholic Church just as the Sisters are the (most) militant wing of the Ecclesiarchy.
Marine chapters on the other hand are independent monastic kingdoms. They have no ties to the Imperium's "Church" and are often likely to find themselves in direct conflict with it because they answer to nobody. I would compare them to the Cathars and similar non-Catholic Christian sects. They worship the same God, but they do it in their own way and that makes the ecclesiarchy unhappy.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I hope that was not a thinly veiled 'how can you consider X illogical when Y exists' argument!

I wouldn't call it thinly veiled.

But I do honestly think this "verisimilitude line" think it's purely a matter of taste ... i.e., what seems like a deal breaker to one person is invisible to another.

Killsmith wrote:
in my opinion it would make no sense to partition them from the rest of the ministorum

It could be that our wires got crossed, so to speak, as I have been arguing for a Sisters book that contains stuff like Fratris Militia. What I meant by drawing a stark line between SoB and non-SoB units in a prospective codex was along these lines:

 Manchu wrote:
I would like any prospective dex to have the flexibility so that you could take an all-Sisters list ... which needs to include all Sisters, including Repentia ... or take a "at the head of the faithful" style list.

 Melissia wrote:
Sisters of Battle have always been "nuns with guns" in some manner or other, IE, the female version of warrior monks

Whew, I thought I had dealt with this "warrior monk" issue exhaustively already. But here we go again: even if we agree that nuns are female monks, and warrior monks (in terms of medieval Christianity) were knights, female warrior monks (warrior nuns) are NOT therefore also knights. There is no iconic image in pop culture of an armored woman fighting under religious vows. That is something that's actually pretty original to GW. This is probably one of the reasons Sister Sin looks so bizarre. I think it's almost certainly the reason that the currently-canon image of Sisters are not just ladies wearing SM-style power armour, as Sister Sin seemed to be.

 Ashiraya wrote:
They still set you on fire if you do not praise their religion often and fervently enough, not to mention what happens to those who choose a different religion altogether.

That's certainly evil in our place and time. But compared to IRL the entire 40k setting shifts decidedly toward the evil end of the spectrum. Good in 40k is somewhere between Neutral and Evil in 40k and often enough also into the evil territory.

 Melissia wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I wouldn't really call SoB 'paladins' - typically, Paladins are heroic Lawful Good types, whereas SoB are Lawful Evil.

The Adepta Sororitas set up and defend hospitals which hare open to all Imperial citizens, regardless of wealth or standing. That's not something Lawful Evil characters do. The Imperium itself may not be good, but people and organizations within it can be.

I beg to differ, I have a high level Lawful Evil Cleric who does that kind of thing all of the time...now it is to piss of the LG Paladins by being able to say "So when was the last time you raised a peasant from the dead free of charge."

 Manchu wrote:
There is no iconic image in pop culture of an armored woman fighting under religious vows.

*coughJoanofArccuough*

That said, there is an iconic image of an unarmoured woman fighting under religious vows. Shaolin. Ng Mui, and Yim Wing Chun.

That's certainly evil in our place and time. But compared to IRL the entire 40k setting shifts decidedly toward the evil end of the spectrum. Good in 40k is somewhere between Neutral and Evil in 40k and often enough also into the evil territory.

Oh, no. I absolutely agree with Ashi that the Sisterhood is Lawful Evil. It's the ONLY thing I agree with her on regarding the Sisterhood, but she has that right.

A lawful evil government will provide succour to its people, because it knows that they are the only thing keeping said government in power.

A lawful evil church will look after and care for its flock, because otherwise they will overthrow the church and bring chaos.

A 'Good' church would have orphanages through out the galaxy that teach children their letters and numbers and then support them to find their own careers. It looks after the children for the childrens' sake.

The Ecclesiarchy... has orphanages through out the galaxy that teaches the privileged children of its loyal adherents their letters and numbers, and then assigns them to work in either their administrative arm, military arm, investigative arm or disciplinary arm. It raises the children to support itself and propagate its own power.

If the Hospitallers run field hospitals, it is because they recognise that the church needs followers. It's a microcosm of the entire Imperium in that way. The High Lords don't give a rat's arse about the menials in hives... but they'll send an army to protect them against invading orks, because without the common menial, there is no Imperium.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
There is no iconic image in pop culture of an armored woman fighting under religious vows.

*coughJoanofArccuough*

Joan wasn't a member of any religious order.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
That said, there is an iconic image of an unarmoured woman fighting under religious vows. Shaolin. Ng Mui, and Yim Wing Chun.

So you want to see see Codex: Kung Fu Sisters? Not following your argument here.

I think you are being a mite hard on the Imperium and not really considering the setting in its own context. I firmly agree with Melissia on this one.

Straying back on Topic

I would like to see the following in a new Codex:

1) Order tactics for the main Orders and their descedant minor Orders
2) Several "new" Special Characters such as Canoness Praxedes of Ophelia VII and Canonness Grace from the recent Shield of Baal Campaign - ie:



3) Palatine as another viable HQ option
4) Frateris Militia Band as a Troops option
5) Dominca pattern Drop Pod

If the SoB get Frateris Militia, it would be cool if you could get Redemptionist Cults as an option, either as an upgrade or possibly be unlocked by a special character. I just like the idea of a squad of, even by Imperial standards, religious extremists who's only goal is to set fire to something and then gloriously martyr themselves in the name of Emperor. Maybe even give them exterminators (one-shot flamers) to provide a nice distraction - if you don't gun them down, they will spew a load of fire over your units.

Redemptionists would just be Frateris Militia with exterminators. :p

I think adding some non-Sister units to the codex would be good, so i guess im advocating codex Ecclesiarchy. I think treating the Sisters as "Warrior Monks" is a good idea as it does present a certain image, which is generally how i have viewed them. Except Repentia, ive always thought of them as a bit Berzerker ish, but i feel a religious army needs a few of those.

Anyway, im largely ok with the Sister's current book. I mean its not great but it isnt unusable past 1500 points. Im looking at you 5th ed. I just dont like a few things about it.

1. The Living Saint doesnt have Eternal Warrior. This isnt negotiable, she needs this.
2. Not enough cheap infantry. Yes i can ally Guard but i like my book being mostly self contained.
3. Not enough uses of Acts of Faith

Honestly i liked the system the 5th ed "codex" used for Acts of Faith, you just didnt get enough frelling points to actually use them in games over 1000 points, if that could be remedied i think Sisters would be in a much better place.

I think in general more options would help tremendously.

Also this Fan-dexis apparently not terrible, though it seems more Witch Hunter-y (which im ok with)
http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Codex_-_Sisters_of_Battle:_/tg/_edition

 Grimmor wrote:
I think treating the Sisters as "Warrior Monks" is a good idea as it does present a certain image, which is generally how i have viewed them. Except Repentia, ive always thought of them as a bit Berzerker ish, but i feel a religious army needs a few of those.

A lot of warrior monks in history were berzerkers, more or less. In the west the word "monk" has connotations of tranquility, meditation, discipline and asceticism. But that only describes one type of monk. Tibetan Buddhist monks used to be some of the meanest and bloodthirstiest people in history, and the crusader orders were basically guys who turned genocide into a business.

Killsmith wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:
I think treating the Sisters as "Warrior Monks" is a good idea as it does present a certain image, which is generally how i have viewed them. Except Repentia, ive always thought of them as a bit Berzerker ish, but i feel a religious army needs a few of those.

A lot of warrior monks in history were berzerkers, more or less. In the west the word "monk" has connotations of tranquility, meditation, discipline and asceticism. But that only describes one type of monk. Tibetan Buddhist monks used to be some of the meanest and bloodthirstiest people in history, and the crusader orders were basically guys who turned genocide into a business.

Im not disagreeing, but they didnt fight like berserkers. They were far more disciplined and controllable. Now i feel the army should have a few crazed Berserker type units as thts what religion does to people in WH40k