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.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
If you see a plastic thunderhawk, then you'll know they finally have a shot of being made

Plastic Thunderhawk sales could probably subsidize the production of an entire Sisters range, and maybe Kroot mercs and Exodites as well

I don't play current 40K but I can see one big issue with the Sisters of Battle in the current game. Inevitably GW would make their own book and their own army (because...money). But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

This, in turn, means that GW would have to likely bulk up the entire force/army, introduce new units and do a full launch - thus supporting an entire new product line. This is why I'm doubtful of this happening. I do think however they could be clever and produce 30K-esque models which could very easily be used as Sisters of Battle. This way they produce a small board-game's worth of miniatures (in plastic) without having to commit to an entire line. Much like the Genestealer Cult figures - they can release a highly desirable product without having to commit to supporting it for 20 years with more model releases and codices etc. They can fill the gap for the diehard fans in a cheaper more efficient way --- let the players sort out the rest.

Or they could do a boardgame with Sisters in 40K and accomplish the same thing. The board games have given GW a huge "out" when it comes to producing niche figures if they decide to use it. "Oh these are board game pieces only, but they happen to fit perfectly into that gap in our 40K line".

 Elbows wrote:
I don't play current 40K but I can see one big issue with the Sisters of Battle in the current game. Inevitably GW would make their own book and their own army (because...money). But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

This, in turn, means that GW would have to likely bulk up the entire force/army, introduce new units and do a full launch - thus supporting an entire new product line. This is why I'm doubtful of this happening. I do think however they could be clever and produce 30K-esque models which could very easily be used as Sisters of Battle. This way they produce a small board-game's worth of miniatures (in plastic) without having to commit to an entire line. Much like the Genestealer Cult figures - they can release a highly desirable product without having to commit to supporting it for 20 years with more model releases and codices etc. They can fill the gap for the diehard fans in a cheaper more efficient way --- let the players sort out the rest.

Or they could do a boardgame with Sisters in 40K and accomplish the same thing. The board games have given GW a huge "out" when it comes to producing niche figures if they decide to use it. "Oh these are board game pieces only, but they happen to fit perfectly into that gap in our 40K line".

I've never bought one of GW's board games so I don't know what the models in them are like. Answer some questions for me, if you please.

-Are they mono-pose like the 40k starter set minis, or multi-part multi-posable like standard plastic models?
-What's the pricing like for buying the board games for the models? Is it comparable to standard plastic kits if you assume that every model in the kit will be used?
-Are the board games available for a limited time only, or could I buy another set if I decide I need more models five years from now?

 Elbows wrote:
I don't play current 40K but I can see one big issue with the Sisters of Battle in the current game. Inevitably GW would make their own book and their own army (because...money). But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

This, in turn, means that GW would have to likely bulk up the entire force/army, introduce new units and do a full launch - thus supporting an entire new product line. This is why I'm doubtful of this happening. I do think however they could be clever and produce 30K-esque models which could very easily be used as Sisters of Battle. This way they produce a small board-game's worth of miniatures (in plastic) without having to commit to an entire line. Much like the Genestealer Cult figures - they can release a highly desirable product without having to commit to supporting it for 20 years with more model releases and codices etc. They can fill the gap for the diehard fans in a cheaper more efficient way --- let the players sort out the rest.

Or they could do a boardgame with Sisters in 40K and accomplish the same thing. The board games have given GW a huge "out" when it comes to producing niche figures if they decide to use it. "Oh these are board game pieces only, but they happen to fit perfectly into that gap in our 40K line".

Or specify certain units as available for the SoB army. Regiments of Guard, Rhino transports, possibly IG heavy support, throw whatever super heavies people care about nowadays. I mean, it's possible without even going unbound. Not to mention that with a base SoB plastic set and add on sprues, you could have enough Elites, HS, and FA to bulk out the army. Really the only reason that I can see that they haven't done a Sisters army is because they are afraid boobs won't sell. To gamers.

 Just Tony wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I don't play current 40K but I can see one big issue with the Sisters of Battle in the current game. Inevitably GW would make their own book and their own army (because...money). But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

This, in turn, means that GW would have to likely bulk up the entire force/army, introduce new units and do a full launch - thus supporting an entire new product line. This is why I'm doubtful of this happening. I do think however they could be clever and produce 30K-esque models which could very easily be used as Sisters of Battle. This way they produce a small board-game's worth of miniatures (in plastic) without having to commit to an entire line. Much like the Genestealer Cult figures - they can release a highly desirable product without having to commit to supporting it for 20 years with more model releases and codices etc. They can fill the gap for the diehard fans in a cheaper more efficient way --- let the players sort out the rest.

Or they could do a boardgame with Sisters in 40K and accomplish the same thing. The board games have given GW a huge "out" when it comes to producing niche figures if they decide to use it. "Oh these are board game pieces only, but they happen to fit perfectly into that gap in our 40K line".

Or specify certain units as available for the SoB army. Regiments of Guard, Rhino transports, possibly IG heavy support, throw whatever super heavies people care about nowadays. I mean, it's possible without even going unbound. Not to mention that with a base SoB plastic set and add on sprues, you could have enough Elites, HS, and FA to bulk out the army. Really the only reason that I can see that they haven't done a Sisters army is because they are afraid boobs won't sell. To gamers.

In fairness, they're fully armored boobs.

But on the other hand, I've seen enough Warhammer 40k "fan art" to know that no, that doesn't matter at all.

 Elbows wrote:
I don't play current 40K but I can see one big issue with the Sisters of Battle in the current game. Inevitably GW would make their own book and their own army (because...money). But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

Sisters have a current Codex that can field an entire army by itself, so I'm not really sure what you're talking about. It's just not a top-tier army without allies, which is not unique to the faction.

 Pouncey wrote:
I've never bought one of GW's board games so I don't know what the models in them are like. Answer some questions for me, if you please.

-Are they mono-pose like the 40k starter set minis, or multi-part multi-posable like standard plastic models?
-What's the pricing like for buying the board games for the models? Is it comparable to standard plastic kits if you assume that every model in the kit will be used?
-Are the board games available for a limited time only, or could I buy another set if I decide I need more models five years from now?

The GW board game models tend to differ in complexity. Sometimes you get mono-pose figures, sometimes you get the equivalent of standard models, with all the options you'd expect. Sometimes, as is the case with the Betrayal at Calth models, you get something which is better than the standard models. Sometimes you get both.

Betrayal at Calth was easily worth what I paid for it. If you compare the board game to the boxed sets GW began selling a couple of months ago, then the models from the board game cost less than half of what GW is selling them for individually. I haven't compared the other board games with the GW range, and it would be much harder to do, given that in most cases, models that debut for a board game tend to only be available with that board game.

All the board games Games Workshop has ever produced have limited print-runs. Sometimes some, or all of the models are sold independently of the game afterwards, but not always. Fortunately, you will find people selling you parts on eBay. Long before GW decided to sell the Calth models independently of the board game, you'd have sellers who bought the board game solely to divide the sprues into squad sized kits and then re-sell them on eBay at a profit. I bought an extra squad of Calth Space Marines that way in April, and I paid less, than I would have had to do now, had I bought the same set directly from GW.

 Zingraff wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I've never bought one of GW's board games so I don't know what the models in them are like. Answer some questions for me, if you please.

-Are they mono-pose like the 40k starter set minis, or multi-part multi-posable like standard plastic models?
-What's the pricing like for buying the board games for the models? Is it comparable to standard plastic kits if you assume that every model in the kit will be used?
-Are the board games available for a limited time only, or could I buy another set if I decide I need more models five years from now?

The GW board game models tend to differ in complexity. Sometimes you get mono-pose figures, sometimes you get the equivalent of standard models, with all the options you'd expect. Sometimes, as is the case with the Betrayal at Calth models, you get something which is better than the standard models. Sometimes you get both.

Betrayal at Calth was easily worth what I paid for it. If you compare the board game to the boxed sets GW began selling a couple of months ago, then the models from the board game cost less than half of what GW is selling them for individually. I haven't compared the other board games with the GW range, and it would be much harder to do, given that in most cases, models that debut for a board game tend to only be available with that board game.

All the board games Games Workshop has ever produced have limited print-runs. Sometimes some, or all of the models are sold independently of the game afterwards, but not always. Fortunately, you will find people selling you parts on eBay. Long before GW decided to sell the Calth models independently of the board game, you'd have sellers who bought the board game solely to divide the sprues into squad sized kits and then re-sell them on eBay at a profit. I bought an extra squad of Calth Space Marines that way in April, and I paid less, than I would have had to do now, had I bought the same set directly from GW.

If their idea of Sisters of Battle plastics involves a limited-edition board game, they'd damned well better start selling those minis on their own at some point really quick.

Also I don't trust random strangers enough and I've heard too many horror stories to use eBay. To the point where when I was making models of a friend's vulpine RP character, I was buying Space Wolves Pack boxes straight from GW exclusively for the two wolf helms contained in each to use as conversion bitz. I don't even play Space Wolves. Perhaps not-so-coincidentally after I started uploading pictures of those kitbashes/conversions to a popular furry art site, finding eBay auctions for those heads became very difficult. I'm normally not that egotistical, but one of the comments I received was something about how my furry Marines were some of the best furry model conversions on the site, so there is at least some reason to believe that maybe people were taking inspiration from me.

At this point if I were a Sister player I would look into buying a new army. GW seems to be showing little to no interest in updating the faction besides a token Codex update.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
At this point if I were a Sister player I would look into buying a new army. GW seems to be showing little to no interest in updating the faction besides a token Codex update.

If I had much interest in the other armies, I probably would have by now.

Honestly, I think if Sisters of Battle were ended as an ongoing faction, I'd do one of two things.

1-Quit Warhammer 40k tabletop altogether, play some of the better video games about it.
2-Play 5th edition 40k tabletop with my Witch Hunters Codex, never buy another rulebook again.

I don't think they will squat Sisters, the interest is there in the fan base for them to justify making them. But like Chaos, they are going to need a massive investment of time from the design department. One day, someone there is going to have a lightbulb pop up and say...hey we should do sisters.

 General Kroll wrote:
I don't think they will squat Sisters, the interest is there in the fan base for them to justify making them. But like Chaos, they are going to need a massive investment of time from the design department. One day, someone there is going to have a lightbulb pop up and say...hey we should do sisters.

GW doesn't know the interest is there.

They have openly said that they do zero market research at any time, and rely exclusively on sales numbers to decide what to invest in making.

 Pouncey wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
I don't think they will squat Sisters, the interest is there in the fan base for them to justify making them. But like Chaos, they are going to need a massive investment of time from the design department. One day, someone there is going to have a lightbulb pop up and say...hey we should do sisters.

GW doesn't know the interest is there.

They have openly said that they do zero market research at any time, and rely exclusively on sales numbers to decide what to invest in making.

It takes real leadership to blindly pick an option. Anybody can pick something they know about.

pm713 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
I don't think they will squat Sisters, the interest is there in the fan base for them to justify making them. But like Chaos, they are going to need a massive investment of time from the design department. One day, someone there is going to have a lightbulb pop up and say...hey we should do sisters.

GW doesn't know the interest is there.

They have openly said that they do zero market research at any time, and rely exclusively on sales numbers to decide what to invest in making.

It takes real leadership to blindly pick an option. Anybody can pick something they know about.

I was elected to lead, not to read.

 Psienesis wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

Sisters have a current Codex that can field an entire army by itself, so I'm not really sure what you're talking about. It's just not a top-tier army without allies, which is not unique to the faction.

Aye, the SoB can easily field a full army. They're not top stuff like SM, Eldar or Tau (or Necrons) but they are solid. The real problem is that you have to pay hard cash and lots of it to get special/heavy weapons in enough quantity to use the SoB well.

 Pouncey wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
I don't think they will squat Sisters, the interest is there in the fan base for them to justify making them. But like Chaos, they are going to need a massive investment of time from the design department. One day, someone there is going to have a lightbulb pop up and say...hey we should do sisters.

GW doesn't know the interest is there.

They have openly said that they do zero market research at any time, and rely exclusively on sales numbers to decide what to invest in making.

My gut feeling is, that has changed, along with a lot of things at GW.

Spetulhu wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

Sisters have a current Codex that can field an entire army by itself, so I'm not really sure what you're talking about. It's just not a top-tier army without allies, which is not unique to the faction.

Aye, the SoB can easily field a full army. They're not top stuff like SM, Eldar or Tau (or Necrons) but they are solid. The real problem is that you have to pay hard cash and lots of it to get special/heavy weapons in enough quantity to use the SoB well.

I don't EVER want Sisters of Battle to be a top-tier overpowered army.

Because I saw that happen to Grey Knights. And what happened was that every powergaming twit swapped to Grey Knights, and very quickly anyone who played Grey Knights was called a powergamer.

The point that really drove it home for me was a particular Grey Knights player who'd been playing the army as his main force for years, had a full amount of metal miniatures, and still, people who he'd been playing against with his Grey Knights before the Codex was even rumored, accused him of being a power gamer. Despite his army of metal, well-painted miniatures they knew he'd had for years.

Point out the obvious facts to them? Yup, he did that. The response? Just swap the powergaming FotM army swapper comments for comments about how he hadn't been playing the army for a while before the Codex came out.

If Sisters of Battle get a good update, but with overpowered rules, every last Sisters of Battle fan on the planet will be quickly lumped in with the power gamers. And people will give zero feths.

Personally, I don't want to receive those comments whenever I talk about my favorite army in the tabletop game. I like playing the downtrodden faction, really. My favorite race in World of Warcraft is the Draenei, and their primary contribution to the game's lore is that the Orcs massacred 80-90% of their entire population at one point.

Sometimes the concept of a huge overhaul scares me because I think GW will try to compensate for the lack of previous interest in the faction by making them so overpowered all the powergamers will buy them. And then I get called every name in the book every time I mention I play Sisters of Battle.

Powerful? Sure. More tools for a variety of situations not covered already? Absolutely. But NEVER top-tier.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
I don't think they will squat Sisters, the interest is there in the fan base for them to justify making them. But like Chaos, they are going to need a massive investment of time from the design department. One day, someone there is going to have a lightbulb pop up and say...hey we should do sisters.

GW doesn't know the interest is there.

They have openly said that they do zero market research at any time, and rely exclusively on sales numbers to decide what to invest in making.

My gut feeling is, that has changed, along with a lot of things at GW.

It had better have.

Because a couple of years ago I got some pretty solid proof that they actually are monitoring the fan sites. Though at the time it seemed to just be their legal team who was monitoring those sites.

That proof is that I uploaded photos of a White Dwarf I got in the mail a few days early, and 4 hours after being uploaded they were taken down with a Cease and Desist order from GW's legal team. And the only place I posted them was here.

Of course, given that the reaction I got from Dakkaites was that those photographs were just rumors like the random things rumormongers say with zero proof, I quickly decided that if I ever get actual advance info like that again, I'm not sharing.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
So spoiler alert!

GW actual can and has made plastic sisters but no for retail. If you wanna see plastic sisters you need to entice GW to make them, meaning they need to move all of their old metal modes before they will even fathom the idea of making plastic ones.

So if you want better newer sisters, go buy more sisters

If they were looking to liquidate the stock they have they would just have to drop them back into the pot of molten metal they use to make new models from. They disappear instantly and you can then make any model you care too by changing molds.

Sisters have three stinker units (celestians are worst, pen engines and repentia are not popular) but the Codex is fine otherwise. The AoF could use an overhaul but GW is just as likely to ruin it rather than fix it. I'm fine not pressing my luck, sniping ebay for deals on sisters, converting repressors, and accumulating bits for a super heavy church tank.

Apart from purging Aliens, cleansing Mutants and burning Heretics thats all I need.

 dracpanzer wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
So spoiler alert!

GW actual can and has made plastic sisters but no for retail. If you wanna see plastic sisters you need to entice GW to make them, meaning they need to move all of their old metal modes before they will even fathom the idea of making plastic ones.

So if you want better newer sisters, go buy more sisters

If they were looking to liquidate the stock they have they would just have to drop them back into the pot of molten metal they use to make new models from. They disappear instantly and you can then make any model you care too by changing molds.

Sisters have three stinker units (celestians are worst, pen engines and repentia are not popular) but the Codex is fine otherwise. The AoF could use an overhaul but GW is just as likely to ruin it rather than fix it. I'm fine not pressing my luck, sniping ebay for deals on sisters, converting repressors, and accumulating bits for a super heavy church tank.

Apart from purging Aliens, cleansing Mutants and burning Heretics thats all I need.

More to the point, I've heard that exact speculation about how they're just running down their stock for years.

During that time, models have gone out of stock and come back in stock repeatedly. And the stuff that gets discontinued completely manages to somehow keep the entire range juuuuust varied enough to make a playable army.

If they're really just running down their stock, they should probably realize at some point that running down your existing stock is impossible if you just keep making more of them.

 Just Tony wrote:

 Elbows wrote:

Or specify certain units as available for the SoB army. Regiments of Guard, Rhino transports, possibly IG heavy support, throw whatever super heavies people care about nowadays. I mean, it's possible without even going unbound. Not to mention that with a base SoB plastic set and add on sprues, you could have enough Elites, HS, and FA to bulk out the army. Really the only reason that I can see that they haven't done a Sisters army is because they are afraid boobs won't sell. To gamers.

And this really highlights the weakness of the way they're organizing the Imperium forces. There is almost zero reason there shouldn't be one large nicely written codex for Imperial Agents. Combine your Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Sisters of Battle, Arbites, Assassins etc. into one book. Almost none of these really justify an army or codex by themselves as they currently sit. You could rein in the Grey Knights, bolster the usefulness of Sisters, bring in some new sweet plastic Arbites for fun...lots of options which really should be in one big book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I don't play current 40K but I can see one big issue with the Sisters of Battle in the current game. Inevitably GW would make their own book and their own army (because...money). But even in 2nd edition Sisters of Battle were a very limited army which relied more on allies than real substance themselves. While heavily armored etc. they are so slim in the selection of units that they'd be hopeless in the current game (if you wanted to field a solely Sisters of Battle force, sans allies).

This, in turn, means that GW would have to likely bulk up the entire force/army, introduce new units and do a full launch - thus supporting an entire new product line. This is why I'm doubtful of this happening. I do think however they could be clever and produce 30K-esque models which could very easily be used as Sisters of Battle. This way they produce a small board-game's worth of miniatures (in plastic) without having to commit to an entire line. Much like the Genestealer Cult figures - they can release a highly desirable product without having to commit to supporting it for 20 years with more model releases and codices etc. They can fill the gap for the diehard fans in a cheaper more efficient way --- let the players sort out the rest.

Or they could do a boardgame with Sisters in 40K and accomplish the same thing. The board games have given GW a huge "out" when it comes to producing niche figures if they decide to use it. "Oh these are board game pieces only, but they happen to fit perfectly into that gap in our 40K line".

I've never bought one of GW's board games so I don't know what the models in them are like. Answer some questions for me, if you please.

-Are they mono-pose like the 40k starter set minis, or multi-part multi-posable like standard plastic models?
-What's the pricing like for buying the board games for the models? Is it comparable to standard plastic kits if you assume that every model in the kit will be used?
-Are the board games available for a limited time only, or could I buy another set if I decide I need more models five years from now?

Depends on the board game. If you look at the higher price ones as Betrayal at Calth etc. you're getting 100% game miniatures, with the exception of a couple push-fit heroes which are in line with modern plastic character sprues. $150 for the box (so $125 from a retailer) and you get three full tactical squads, a five man terminator squad, two characters and a dreadnought + the actual game itself. Very reasonable --- and these sprues have now been released as plastic kits for nearly double that price. Deathwatch has more limited poseability but a large assortment of nicely sculpted genestealer cultists etc. Again I think this was a $150 box with a good assortment of miniatures - at discount a reasonable purchase. No idea on the availability of board games. The ones like Betrayal at Calth will be around in sprue-form for a long time. Others I couldn't tell you. But in a simple game like Deathwatch GW was able to feed the whims of a lot of older players who missed the old Genestealer Cult army lists...I'd argue probably 80% of the people who bought that game bought it for the Genestealer Cultists, regardless of what edition of 40K they play (or Inquisitor, Necromunda, Inquisimunda - whatever).

I think Games Workshop is currently on the wrong side of demographic trends on this one. The population of the United States is 51% female, and I'd hazard a guess that the gaming geek community is following suite, particularly with the younger generations. So, it makes sense to have a product that appeals to both male and female gamers. However, GW's best selling game has very little in the way of female armies, miniatures, or characters, and their flagship army has no female representation at all. Heck, they don't even have a female Farseer despite the fact that all the Dawn of War games thus far have portrayed the Farseers as female. Nor do they have a dedicated mini for Inquisitor Valyria, despite the fact she's one of the named characters in the Inquisition codex, and being Ordo Xenos, you'd think she'd be a character they'd want a mini for to go along with the Deathwatch release.

I'm not saying revamping the Sisters would completely fix the female under-representation in 40K, but it'd be a start. Plus, in the setting the Sisters of Battle are probably more numerous than Space Marines, and would be more likely to be encountered by the average Imperial citizen/soldier. Additionally, it's the main fighting force of the Ecclesiarchy and tied to the Ordo Hereticus, so it's important thematically. Plus, if the Dark Eldar have shown us anything, it's that a long-neglected force that gets a much-deserved revamp can generate a lot of excitement.

The Sisters wouldn't need that many new units - perhaps one each in Elites, Troops, and Fast Attack, and the Fast Attack could be the Avenger Strike Fighter, maybe with a Sororitas pilot. There's already a plastic kit for Immolators. Make one for Repressors as well (or maybe do a combined Immolator/Repressor kit). Maybe give Dominions a Fast Rhino variant. All the infantry units besides Repentias could be based off a common Sisters body, which would make it easy to build boxes around a common sprue of bodies with accessory sprues as appropriate for Celestians, Dominions, Seraphim, and Retributors. The release could be tied into a Crusade of Faith campaign, that could include the Black Templars as well (just to give it the obligatory Astartes tie-in).

I don't think one can realistically argue there's not a market for new plastic Sisters either, considering the fact there are third-party companies beginning to produce minis to fill the void GW is leaving.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
At this point if I were a Sister player I would look into buying a new army. GW seems to be showing little to no interest in updating the faction besides a token Codex update.

And what other army would that be? Space Borings, a bunch of screaming old angry bald white guys who aren't even human? Imperial Guard, an army consisting of units with no power armor and drastically different feel and playstyle? Inquisition, which isn't even really an army but a collection of people wearing nice hats trying to command everyone else's armies? Chaos Space Borings, which are a bunch of screaming angry old bald white guys with daddy issues (and are even less human)? Eldar, a bunch of psychic space elf pansies that have almost the exact opposite playstyle?

Yes, the above is hyperbole. The point is, though-- there's nothing in 40k that has the same fluff or playstyle as Sisters do. And removing them or folding them in to some lame-ass codex so that you can instead justify making Space Borings color variant #21,321,654,564 like boring people such as Elbows suggest is just plain lame and shows a complete lack of respect for the source material.

 Elbows wrote:
And this really highlights the weakness of the way they're organizing the Imperium forces. There is almost zero reason there shouldn't be one large nicely written codex for Imperial Agents. Combine your Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Sisters of Battle, Arbites, Assassins etc. into one book. Almost none of these really justify an army or codex by themselves as they currently sit. You could rein in the Grey Knights, bolster the usefulness of Sisters, bring in some new sweet plastic Arbites for fun...lots of options which really should be in one big book.

There's the beauty of it, say you have 20-35% of the player base plays one of those Imperial armies. Each one buys its individual book. Now, if you had one book with all the lists to pool from, you could get those people to all get the same book, maximizing profits. Model releases are already covered, but maybe a touch of cross-sell for the Rhino on the package, as well as some of the other multiforce kits.

You're right, let's delete all the Space Borings books and throw them in, too-- they're part of the Imperium, too. You know, why not also throw the Chaos Borings in there, too, since they're really not all that different from the Space Borings? And hey if Chaos Borings are thrown in, Daemons will have to join them, of course, it'd be bad if Chaos Borings and Chaos Daemons had to pull from two separate books to make a Chaos army, right? And then of course, why not throw all of the xeno armies in it, too, or just give them their own book? I mean it's not like they're going to be popular enough to merit their own books compared to the One Big Imperium book. And then we can have just one big blob of book, the Big 'Ol Book one would call it, which has only the most generic and boring iterations of each faction, because that's all that they could fit in.

And everyone would be happy*.


*Except for those who aren't.

Drama much?


To my mind, most of the SM chapters should be under one book. I personally don't care how boring you find anything or how entitled you feel. IF there was a way to get your list out and kits to go with it, would you really feel that indignant having other Imperial units in the same book? If so, I don't have the words...

I cannot express enough my disdain the stupid ideas of "stuff everything in to one book" without being dramatic.

It is the lazy option for those who have given up and have no creative thoughts of their own.

OR it's the fact that rather than squat your army they find a way to generate enough potential sales to get the book to be carried. If my choices were deep sixing my favorite army or having it released in a group Codex, my choice would take no effort at all.

 Melissia wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
At this point if I were a Sister player I would look into buying a new army. GW seems to be showing little to no interest in updating the faction besides a token Codex update.

And what other army would that be? Space Borings, a bunch of screaming old angry bald white guys who aren't even human? Imperial Guard, an army consisting of units with no power armor and drastically different feel and playstyle? Inquisition, which isn't even really an army but a collection of people wearing nice hats trying to command everyone else's armies? Chaos Space Borings, which are a bunch of screaming angry old bald white guys with daddy issues (and are even less human)? Eldar, a bunch of psychic space elf pansies that have almost the exact opposite playstyle?

Yes, the above is hyperbole. The point is, though-- there's nothing in 40k that has the same fluff or playstyle as Sisters do. And removing them or folding them in to some lame-ass codex so that you can instead justify making Space Borings color variant #21,321,654,564 like boring people such as Elbows suggest is just plain lame and shows a complete lack of respect for the source material.

Not all Space Marines are white. Check your privilege, mate.

I am just being realistic. I for one do not want the Sisters to be deleted so don't insinuate that I do. If they released a new plastic sisters with an overhauled aesthetics and rules I'd go buy an army. But that doesn't seem to be in the cards for GW. I applaud the patience for which Sisters have that GW will provide an update for their army. However, GW seems to prefer releasing more kits for the "Space Borings". To the point that I, as a privileged Space Borings player, find it plainly fething ridiculous.

 Just Tony wrote:
There's the beauty of it, say you have 20-35% of the player base plays one of those Imperial armies. Each one buys its individual book. Now, if you had one book with all the lists to pool from, you could get those people to all get the same book, maximizing profits.

That only really works if you assume the books are especially expensive to produce in the first place, when GW actually makes a lot of money off of them as they are. The most expensive parts of the army book are the rules development (jokes asside) and lore contained therein, the latter part becomes cheaper with new books as they can and do option to reuse a lot of stuff, and the model pictures and so on come from the larger marketing pool that contributes to the advertising, box art, promotional material, etc. So a larger codex packed with rules for multiple army components and proportionately less pictures and stories would need to be proportionately more expensive to turn the same percentage of profit in the return. It's much more palatable to GW to try to split the rules up across still more books.

But that aside, I think an 'agents of the imperium' book has been discussed already and I don't think it makes sense. A codex should encompass a command structure, and not be for multiple disperate allies. We have examples of these groups working together in the lore, they don't work reasonably well enough together to justify having them under one command structure. An arbites commander will never be able to tell grey knights what to do.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I am just being realistic.

So am I-- my hyperbole earlier was done partially in jest. The fact is, though, there's just nothing that really matches Sisters as far as a combination of lore and gameplay goes.