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.

I think with the new CEO the odds of SoB being revisited improved. I think the previous CEO was afraid of revisiting them; GW seemed to believe a an army of warrior women in armor wouldn't appeal to a game dominated by men.

I think it was a short sighted view; I don't know how many times I've heard the anecdote of some ones wife or significant other being interested in the army until finding out how much of a pain they are to buy.

Back on point; I think the odds are better. The current strategy from GW is to focus on some of the niches that they previously failed to capitalize on. SoB are certainly that. For a while the assertion was that SoB weren't being done because of technical challenges, but given the sort of models we've gotten more recently that challenge shouldn't be a problem any more. So I think its likely we'll see SoB within the next two years dependent on when GW can fit them into their crowded release schedule.

IF there is any reason not to come back to SoB, its because of how 40k is so dominated by Imperial factions, that for all intense and purposes can act as a single faction.

After having built an absurd amount of Skitarii and Sicarian, I would politely disagree on the technical side of things having been 100% cleared up.

There's still some kinks to work out into the technical side. The robes don't always line up perfectly and to get things up to my own personal standards I've had to do some green-stuffing/filing to hide the joins.

I built a significant Skitarii force myself and I think I only had one out of the 30 or so I built, where the alignment was questionable.

SoB as they currently are have only few potentially difficult areas: the pointed shoulder pads, the robed arms, and then a front and back tabbard.The skitarii had the pointed shoulder pads, on robed arms and that rarely seemed problematic; the tabbard is something that marines have had going for them for a while. I think for SoB the shoulder pads could be improved easily by making the torso assembled as a front and back piece like marines with the shoulder pads and tabbards integral to those two pieces, with only the robed arms needing to be designed and sprued to minimize undercuts.

They are scared that the idea of warrior nuns in the mould of Opus Dei and the Flagellants will raise a tide of angry social justice warriors demanding boycotts against Games Workshop for the fetishisation and objectification of women in an otherwise male-dominated game.

"Look, they're sexist pigs! They finally put women into their game, but its only so they can be kinky sex fantasies! They're raping me with their thoughts!!"

That is why a large-scale Sisters reboot is most likely remaining off the cards. Especially with their history as basically starting out as the Space Pope's Harem.

Remember: It doesn't matter how badass you are as a female, if there's sex anywhere near your concept - especially kinky sex - you're a patriarchical icon.

Even though the Sisterhoods' self-flagellation and punishment is completely non-sexual in nature, and is in fact in part done as punishment for letting their spiritual ancestors be used as sex toys.


The fact is that the Adepta Sororitas is about as politically correct as Donald Trump.

 ntdars wrote:
After seeing how successful the AdMech releases were, I can only imagine that any Sisters of Battle casts would sell insanely well. What do you think GW's reasoning is behind them not printing a whole army update (Dark Eldar is another great example)

Don't try to think about it. GW is not an organization run according to principles you'd normally recognize as being rational, information driven decisions. They don't see themselves as a company that makes games for an active and involved playerbase, they see themselves as a company that produces a premium collectible for people that hoard miniatures.

Personal Thoughts:

They won't renew them, because they are apparently trying to reduce the size of the range they produce and carry. SoB are just another range they have to make, store and carry.

I think they could be done well, and would indeed sell well, and could no doubt at all be expanded. But to do so requires a whole range to be done and carried, the same investment in marines will sell more and expand the marine range a lot more.

Cold hard numbers, this is gaming by accountants not by gamers, if GW decide to release 'x' new kits they will be the forecast top 'x' sellers, if 'x' doesn't allow SoB you won't get them.

Combined with a lack of research into the customer base, they see SoB as not selling so they seem to assume this will always be the case

They have never, ever sold well. Ever since their release the sales were poor. There is every reason to leave the range as it is, and no sales history to justify investing in a new line. If they come up with something new that they believe will show a change from their sales history then they might take the risk, but I doubt it.

@leopard companies being run by accountants, and not enthusiasts, is what keeps companies trading. Respect the bean counters.

As someone who has been an accountant, accounting doesn't actually really have squat to do with deciding what companies like GW make really, it'll be product management. Accounting is just a support function that processes money going in and out, but doesn't really make the decisions. Product management typically makes those decisions, and usually has a financial incentive tied to short term performance, which will probably tell you more about why Sisters aren't getting redone

 Vaktathi wrote:
As someone who has been an accountant, accounting doesn't actually really have squat to do with deciding what companies like GW make really, it'll be product management. Accounting is just a support function that processes money going in and out, but doesn't really make the decisions. Product management typically makes those decisions, and usually has a financial incentive tied to short term performance, which will probably tell you more about why Sisters aren't getting redone

I think its just a case of Product Management likes to have someone to blame... this week its accountants, next week its production.

 JamesY wrote:
They have never, ever sold well. Ever since their release the sales were poor. There is every reason to leave the range as it is, and no sales history to justify investing in a new line. If they come up with something new that they believe will show a change from their sales history then they might take the risk, but I doubt it.

@leopard companies being run by accountants, and not enthusiasts, is what keeps companies trading. Respect the bean counters.

I think in part their poor sales (in the begining) has more to do with the ugly sculpts. Seriously, does GW even make a good looking female model? The lack of support for the sisters (especially in the models department) plays a huge part in their lack of popularity. It is easier and probably cheaper to make a 30k army than a SoB army. I myself think the sisters are cool, but my limited income and lack of support from GW makes me starting an army of them a no go.

If it were done correctly, the sisters of battle would be extremely popular and probably bring in a few more female players. Which is exactly why GW probably won't redo them aside from the whole would be smart and bring in more money thing.

I'd like to highlight the above. I've gotten my girlfriend into the game recently cause she liked the dark eldar and harlequin range and enjoys painting. Many of my female friends have displayed interest but are turned off that there are so few female options. While it is likely that men will always be the larger demographic, if GW tried they could probably gain a lot of customers who are female.

 NorseSig wrote:

 JamesY wrote:
They have never, ever sold well. Ever since their release the sales were poor. There is every reason to leave the range as it is, and no sales history to justify investing in a new line. If they come up with something new that they believe will show a change from their sales history then they might take the risk, but I doubt it.

@leopard companies being run by accountants, and not enthusiasts, is what keeps companies trading. Respect the bean counters.

I think in part their poor sales (in the begining) has more to do with the ugly sculpts. Seriously, does GW even make a good looking female model? The lack of support for the sisters (especially in the models department) plays a huge part in their lack of popularity. It is easier and probably cheaper to make a 30k army than a SoB army. I myself think the sisters are cool, but my limited income and lack of support from GW makes me starting an army of them a no go.

If it were done correctly, the sisters of battle would be extremely popular and probably bring in a few more female players. Which is exactly why GW probably won't redo them aside from the whole would be smart and bring in more money thing.

You guys keep saying they would be popular, but nothing to really to back the statement. You have no numbers for Dark Eldar so far for an example, too.

It's those darned plastic sleeves.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You guys keep saying they would be popular...

They'd be more popular than limited edition skull-shaped rocks.

I can only go by my local store but dark eldar were a sell out army back in 5th and sold well enough to get rushed a new codex in 7th. GW needs to start doing something to combat their over all low sales and restoring a classic army is good start.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
I can only go by my local store but dark eldar were a sell out army back in 5th and sold well enough to get rushed a new codex in 7th. GW needs to start doing something to combat their over all low sales and restoring a classic army is good start.

Aaaaand that's just a local store and you miss the big picture, which quite frankly nobody knows it seems.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
They are scared that the idea of warrior nuns in the mould of Opus Dei and the Flagellants will raise a tide of angry social justice warriors demanding boycotts against Games Workshop for the fetishisation and objectification of women in an otherwise male-dominated game.

"Look, they're sexist pigs! They finally put women into their game, but its only so they can be kinky sex fantasies! They're raping me with their thoughts!!"

That is why a large-scale Sisters reboot is most likely remaining off the cards. Especially with their history as basically starting out as the Space Pope's Harem.

Remember: It doesn't matter how badass you are as a female, if there's sex anywhere near your concept - especially kinky sex - you're a patriarchical icon.

Even though the Sisterhoods' self-flagellation and punishment is completely non-sexual in nature, and is in fact in part done as punishment for letting their spiritual ancestors be used as sex toys.


The fact is that the Adepta Sororitas is about as politically correct as Donald Trump.

I agree. I think the the SoB could do with a huge modernising redesign to make them look less sexist. Currently they look like an army of BDSM mistresses, which isn't doing them much good. I would like to see less boobplate and more power armour. Make the SoB look like the fearsome warriors they are. Unfortenately, that would cost a huge lot of money, so GW is probably not going to redo the Sisters in a very long time. Maybe if the AdMech/Skitarii proves to be really successful.

I honestly don't get why the Sisters line isn't updated, especially if some of the rumours about the models being done is true. I remember I actually bought some models from the line they put out way back when the first time around, but that was what ten years ago?

Heck, really the only true problem with Sisters is they basically have two special weapons, which are flamers or meltas, so it's not like the army isn't good without a minor update, especially if they push up some of the worse units, and then offer them some nice new toys in weapons. It's just kind of a cool army.

 Tinkrr wrote:
I honestly don't get why the Sisters line isn't updated, especially if some of the rumours about the models being done is true. I remember I actually bought some models from the line they put out way back when the first time around, but that was what ten years ago?

Eighteen years. It's been twelve years since they got an upgrade sprue for the Immolator and a handful of other models, and since then they've received nothing except a pseudo-codex in White Dwarf.

Heck, really the only true problem with Sisters is they basically have two special weapons, which are flamers or meltas, so it's not like the army isn't good without a minor update, especially if they push up some of the worse units, and then offer them some nice new toys in weapons. It's just kind of a cool army.

The Sisters have three special weapons: flamers, meltaguns and storm bolters. They also have three heavy weapons: heavy flamers, multi-meltas and heavy bolters. And I'm okay with that.

I don't agree with Iron_Captain that the Battle Sisters need to be toned down, but I would like to see the Repentia reimagined as something I can take seriously. They're not worthy to wear the Sisters' power armour? Fine - have them go into battle wearing a bodyglove with a tabard for modesty, the equivalent of a disgraced knight going into battle in an arming doublet rather than in plate armour. And have them lead by a whip-wielding woman not to flog her charges, but to disrupt melee opponents who would otherwise be a deadly threat to her charges.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
I honestly don't get why the Sisters line isn't updated, especially if some of the rumours about the models being done is true. I remember I actually bought some models from the line they put out way back when the first time around, but that was what ten years ago?

Eighteen years. It's been twelve years since they got an upgrade sprue for the Immolator and a handful of other models, and since then they've received nothing except a pseudo-codex in White Dwarf.

Heck, really the only true problem with Sisters is they basically have two special weapons, which are flamers or meltas, so it's not like the army isn't good without a minor update, especially if they push up some of the worse units, and then offer them some nice new toys in weapons. It's just kind of a cool army.

The Sisters have three special weapons: flamers, meltaguns and storm bolters. They also have three heavy weapons: heavy flamers, multi-meltas and heavy bolters. And I'm okay with that.

I don't agree with Iron_Captain that the Battle Sisters need to be toned down, but I would like to see the Repentia reimagined as something I can take seriously. They're not worthy to wear the Sisters' power armour? Fine - have them go into battle wearing a bodyglove with a tabard for modesty, the equivalent of a disgraced knight going into battle in an arming doublet rather than in plate armour. And have them lead by a whip-wielding woman not to flog her charges, but to disrupt melee opponents who would otherwise be a deadly threat to her charges.

It couldn't have been eighteen years, as the Eye of Terror came out around the same time which was 2003.

Why not just make the Repentia have normalish clothing, but then have something like bomb collars, which don't do anything unless they fail, in which case they go boom, and that way they can do more harm in close combat, along with motivation to not explode.

Maybe they didn't sell well back when they were first released. They came out around the same time Necrons did but Necrons actually got picked up.

Maybe there's something to do with what Furyou said too, that they don't want to release something that could be construed as sexist nor do they want to take the risk of toning them down to something more realistic.

It may or may not factor in as well, but GW's heroic scale is not conducive to female models. Most of GW's female models just look like dudes with boobs. Because GW's heroic scale = squat with thick features, a female with thick features tends to look like a dude.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Maybe they didn't sell well back when they were first released. They came out around the same time Necrons did but Necrons actually got picked up.

Maybe there's something to do with what Furyou said too, that they don't want to release something that could be construed as sexist nor do they want to take the risk of toning them down to something more realistic.

It may or may not factor in as well, but GW's heroic scale is not conducive to female models. Most of GW's female models just look like dudes with boobs. Because GW's heroic scale = squat with thick features, a female with thick features tends to look like a dude.

Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

I can really see that, the claim of sexism in any light is a really horrifying thing for a company, even if innocent, which is rather sad.

This had more to do with just the fact that most people, or even creatures, don't look distinctly male or female in combat gear. Even a knight's breast plate could just as easily fit a male or female without much difference if made for them, and Joan of Arc was convicted on terms of cross dressing, when they couldn't find any other reason, to which her defense was that an armoured dress was stupid and couldn't exist D:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Why not just make the Repentia have normalish clothing, but then have something like bomb collars, which don't do anything unless they fail, in which case they go boom, and that way they can do more harm in close combat, along with motivation to not explode.

"Normalish clothing" was what I intended - not civilian clothing, but something that is close enough to be wearable. I don't agree with giving them bomb collars - a repentia doesn't need it for motivation, and as a weapon taking cues out of ISIL's playbook is a bit on the nose these days.

 Tinkrr wrote:
Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

This is incorrect. The first Necron models were released with White Dwarf 217, and I believe by WD218 they had already had a battle report against the Sisters of Battle, who had a codex prior to that point.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Why not just make the Repentia have normalish clothing, but then have something like bomb collars, which don't do anything unless they fail, in which case they go boom, and that way they can do more harm in close combat, along with motivation to not explode.

"Normalish clothing" was what I intended - not civilian clothing, but something that is close enough to be wearable. I don't agree with giving them bomb collars - a repentia doesn't need it for motivation, and as a weapon taking cues out of ISIL's playbook is a bit on the nose these days.

I was going for more of that one pizza guy than ISIS, since one does it willingly while the other is under duress D:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

Nah, Sisters came out before Necrons, I think by about a year, or maybe just a few months. I have the the first 2 White Dwarf magazines when Necrons were released which contained the free Necron, in one of them was a battle report of Necrons vs Sisters, so the Sisters were already around.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

Nah, Sisters came out before Necrons, I think by about a year, or maybe just a few months. I have the the first 2 White Dwarf magazines when Necrons were released which contained the free Necron, in one of them was a battle report of Necrons vs Sisters, so the Sisters were already around.

I'm not talking about the release, I mean the last codex before I took my ten year break from the game D:

I remember I bought a box of Necrons, painted them like Christmas trees, then went to Chaos, and then eventually the Sisters codex came out and I bought them because they were cool D:

 Tinkrr wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

Nah, Sisters came out before Necrons, I think by about a year, or maybe just a few months. I have the the first 2 White Dwarf magazines when Necrons were released which contained the free Necron, in one of them was a battle report of Necrons vs Sisters, so the Sisters were already around.

I'm not talking about the release, I mean the last codex before I took my ten year break from the game D:

I remember I bought a box of Necrons, painted them like Christmas trees, then went to Chaos, and then eventually the Sisters codex came out and I bought them because they were cool D:

Ah ok, I'm talking about when they first came out, which is the period the metal Sisters models date back to. The metal Sisters models we have date back to 1997 (2nd edition), which is when their first codex came out.

It's possible they didn't sell well enough back in 2nd to get swept up in the era of GW swapping to plastics like Necrons did, which was in 3rd edition.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

Nah, Sisters came out before Necrons, I think by about a year, or maybe just a few months. I have the the first 2 White Dwarf magazines when Necrons were released which contained the free Necron, in one of them was a battle report of Necrons vs Sisters, so the Sisters were already around.

I'm not talking about the release, I mean the last codex before I took my ten year break from the game D:

I remember I bought a box of Necrons, painted them like Christmas trees, then went to Chaos, and then eventually the Sisters codex came out and I bought them because they were cool D:

Ah ok, I'm talking about when they first came out, which is the period the metal Sisters models date back to. The metal Sisters models we have date back to 1997 (2nd edition), which is when their first codex came out.

It's possible they didn't sell well enough back in 2nd to get swept up in the era of GW swapping to plastics like Necrons did, which was in 3rd edition.

The weird thing is that Sisters released after Necrons with kits that were metal, while Necrons were plastic. I don't get why they took the time to make Sisters an army, with a bunch of kits I had never seen before, but didn't swap them over like they did with Necrons D:

 Tinkrr wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

Nah, Sisters came out before Necrons, I think by about a year, or maybe just a few months. I have the the first 2 White Dwarf magazines when Necrons were released which contained the free Necron, in one of them was a battle report of Necrons vs Sisters, so the Sisters were already around.

I'm not talking about the release, I mean the last codex before I took my ten year break from the game D:

I remember I bought a box of Necrons, painted them like Christmas trees, then went to Chaos, and then eventually the Sisters codex came out and I bought them because they were cool D:

Ah ok, I'm talking about when they first came out, which is the period the metal Sisters models date back to. The metal Sisters models we have date back to 1997 (2nd edition), which is when their first codex came out.

It's possible they didn't sell well enough back in 2nd to get swept up in the era of GW swapping to plastics like Necrons did, which was in 3rd edition.

The weird thing is that Sisters released after Necrons with kits that were metal, while Necrons were plastic. I don't get why they took the time to make Sisters an army, with a bunch of kits I had never seen before, but didn't swap them over like they did with Necrons D:

Back then (3rd-4th edition) GW were still only using plastic for core units while everything else was metal. Sisters and Necrons already had a core of metal models.

GW decided that they would convert the Necron core to plastics while the Sisters were left metal, which to me would suggest that they didn't do brilliantly back in 2nd edition. They took the cheap option.

There is also the idea that they couldn't do nice sleeves in plastic so completely gave up.... I don't really believe that one though, lol.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Necrons came out at least a year or two before Sisters, my first kit in the game was Necron Warriors but Sisters came out as I was getting out of the game for Warmachine.

Nah, Sisters came out before Necrons, I think by about a year, or maybe just a few months. I have the the first 2 White Dwarf magazines when Necrons were released which contained the free Necron, in one of them was a battle report of Necrons vs Sisters, so the Sisters were already around.

I'm not talking about the release, I mean the last codex before I took my ten year break from the game D:

I remember I bought a box of Necrons, painted them like Christmas trees, then went to Chaos, and then eventually the Sisters codex came out and I bought them because they were cool D:

Ah ok, I'm talking about when they first came out, which is the period the metal Sisters models date back to. The metal Sisters models we have date back to 1997 (2nd edition), which is when their first codex came out.

It's possible they didn't sell well enough back in 2nd to get swept up in the era of GW swapping to plastics like Necrons did, which was in 3rd edition.

The weird thing is that Sisters released after Necrons with kits that were metal, while Necrons were plastic. I don't get why they took the time to make Sisters an army, with a bunch of kits I had never seen before, but didn't swap them over like they did with Necrons D:

Back then (3rd-4th edition) GW were still only using plastic for core units while everything else was metal. Sisters and Necrons already had a core of metal models.

GW decided that they would convert the Necron core to plastics while the Sisters were left metal, which to me would suggest that they didn't do brilliantly back in 2nd edition. They took the cheap option.

There is also the idea that they couldn't do nice sleeves in plastic so completely gave up.... I don't really believe that one though, lol.

The thing I don't get, is that GW isn't selling directly for the most part, they're mostly a distributor. So while Sisters might not do well at a local level, that shouldn't really stop GW from making plastic models for them, as plastic is cheaper given a certain quantity, and GW has enough small retailers to sell to in order to make the plastic option more profitable than the metal one. It's also not like GW doesn't want to punish small retailers, they do almost anything in their power to squash those guys, so it's not like they're worried about looking out for them by not sticking them with product they don't think would sell in exchange to saving themselves a couple bucks.