Upcoming Imperial Agents Supplement

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.

**Thommy H**

It looks like they're separate, but since the whole point of the book is that you can use each of them to supplement other Imperial forces - which they all are - there doesn't need to be any special dispensation to use them together as an army in themselves.

Don't expect to be able to use them in a CAD together though. More likely it'll be self-contained detachments and formations.

**mmzero252**

MadCowCrazy wrote:
mmzero252 wrote:
They each have their own names, but they're still all in one book. If GW wants to abuse it's players, just abuse their wording.

GW doesn't care, all that does is make people hate you. Having to "cheat" just to make your army playable is not the way this game should be heading.

Pretty much every codex up til now has been REALLY good with very few trash units. If nothing changes in this book it doesn't bode well for the future. Why would they release this book and then a sisters book in 2 months with different rules in both. I really hope we get some updates rules and that the for the first time in GW history are good.

Didn't they literally just release Wrath of Magnus and then Traitor Legions with the same rules...?

**MadCowCrazy**

mmzero252 wrote:
MadCowCrazy wrote:
mmzero252 wrote:
They each have their own names, but they're still all in one book. If GW wants to abuse it's players, just abuse their wording.

GW doesn't care, all that does is make people hate you. Having to "cheat" just to make your army playable is not the way this game should be heading.

Pretty much every codex up til now has been REALLY good with very few trash units. If nothing changes in this book it doesn't bode well for the future. Why would they release this book and then a sisters book in 2 months with different rules in both. I really hope we get some updates rules and that the for the first time in GW history are good.

Didn't they literally just release Wrath of Magnus and then Traitor Legions with the same rules...?

What I'm asking is if the rules in CIA are the same as in the Digital Adepta Sororitas codex, if they are it doesn't bode well.

**Mr Morden**

MadCowCrazy wrote:
mmzero252 wrote:
MadCowCrazy wrote:
mmzero252 wrote:
They each have their own names, but they're still all in one book. If GW wants to abuse it's players, just abuse their wording.

GW doesn't care, all that does is make people hate you. Having to "cheat" just to make your army playable is not the way this game should be heading.

Pretty much every codex up til now has been REALLY good with very few trash units. If nothing changes in this book it doesn't bode well for the future. Why would they release this book and then a sisters book in 2 months with different rules in both. I really hope we get some updates rules and that the for the first time in GW history are good.

Didn't they literally just release Wrath of Magnus and then Traitor Legions with the same rules...?

What I'm asking is if the rules in CIA are the same as in the Digital Adepta Sororitas codex, if they are it doesn't bode well.

From what little we know, they appear to be the same - oh apart from lost SC and maybe lost Shield of Faith and.........so not the same but worse. Same as apparently Inquisitors have lost Servo Skulls.

**BBAP**

I've got to say, the fact they didn't add any SoB CC characters, and instead removed the only one that was there, is pretty funny.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Morden wrote:
Same as apparently Inquisitors have lost Servo Skulls.

So now they're completely pointless, as opposed to just largely pointless?

**Mr Morden**

BBAP wrote:
I've got to say, the fact they didn't add any SoB CC characters, and instead removed the only one that was there, is pretty funny.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Morden wrote:
Same as apparently Inquisitors have lost Servo Skulls.

So now they're completely pointless, as opposed to just largely pointless?

It really isn't very funny.

Yep - they apparently only tried to make units worse in this codex - or so it appears from the snippets so far. Maybe we have not been told about the good stuff.

**Bobug**

Theres a sickening level of negativity in this thread :l

Also to people saying the "theres no way to use them all together" im pretty sure the last part of the leak says theres a formation to bring them all together, Are you just annoyed you cant take them all together in a CAD or allied detachment?
Thing is you dont even know what the formation is. It might be a case of 1+ inquisitors and then select units from the other factions as auxillaries. No problems with that. Also you can just take multiple small detachments anyway. With the exception of sisters where the smallest you'd be able to take is an HQ+1 troop in an allied detachment the rest of the factions can be taken in 1 unit detachments anyway. Personally Im pretty keen for the book because I can use it to add a mob of assorted zealots and such to my steel legion and maybe a squad of grey knights if I fancy it without having to buy multiple codexes.

Theres probably a full new sisters dex coming. I'd be very surprised if there wasn't. To be honest I'd be more annoyed that the sisters units have shot up in price even more now. Utterly crazy

**H.B.M.C.**

DarkStarSabre wrote:
GeneCult hadn't faded into obscurity, as much as you'd like to think they had. They've been about and DW: Overkil was a nod that brought them and Deathwatch back into 40k. Because your argument is very much the same for Deathwatch as well. Was there a demand for yet another Marine army? Was there really a call to release them as a range?

Sorry, but they had. They were basically removed from GW fluff in all but the most oblique of references, only appearing in games that were very very old.

As far as Overkill goes, I'd hazard that the entire GS Cult range was in full swing when they made that game. Deathwatch on the other hand, had a whole RPG to themselves, one that was planned as a release all the way back when Dark Heresy came out. And Dark Heresy, a game perfect for Genestealer Cults, never got rules for them even in the most recent edition.

They just weren't really part of 40K until GW decided to bring them back.

**Mr Morden**

Bobug wrote:
Theres a sickening level of negativity in this thread :l

Also to people saying the "theres no way to use them all together" im pretty sure the last part of the leak says theres a formation to bring them all together, Are you just annoyed you cant take them all together in a CAD or allied detachment?
Thing is you dont even know what the formation is. It might be a case of 1+ inquisitors and then select units from the other factions as auxillaries. No problems with that. Also you can just take multiple small detachments anyway. With the exception of sisters where the smallest you'd be able to take is an HQ+1 troop in an allied detachment the rest of the factions can be taken in 1 unit detachments anyway. Personally Im pretty keen for the book because I can use it to add a mob of assorted zealots and such to my steel legion and maybe a squad of grey knights if I fancy it without having to buy multiple codexes.

Theres probably a full new sisters dex coming. I'd be very surprised if there wasn't. To be honest I'd be more annoyed that the sisters units have shot up in price even more now. Utterly crazy

I listed what I found positive and negative - sadly there is much of the latter - now it may be that there are good things in it beyond fluff and imagery - which is these days really my main reason to buy codexes and such.

However I can't see the positives (rule wise) from the current info - most particularly for Sisters in that there are lost units and maybe lost rules. Not really something to cheer about? If it had just had the SC Canoness, generic HQ and a sisters squad it would have boded better for the future of the faction.

I do like the fact they called it CIA....

What do you see as the positives thus far?

**H.B.M.C.**

I think it's unfair to criticise an orange for not being an apple.

This book is meant to be used as allied units/detachments for Imperial armies. It is not a complete army in a book, so admonishing it for not doing something it was never intended to do comes across as quite silly.

**Mr Morden**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it's unfair to criticise an orange for not being an apple.

This book is meant to be used as allied units/detachments for Imperial armies. It is not a complete army in a book, so admonishing it for not doing something it was never intended to do comes across as quite silly.

Ah but the snippets are stating that this is in fact the new SOB army list, full stop? GW describes it as the Sisters of Battle army list on their own site

As I said I would have been happier if had been a small detachment to fulfil the above potential as that would have given hope for a new Codex - this downgrade tends to squash it.

**Wereaardvark**

I think we are all jumping to conclusions based on information that may or may not be accurate. The lack of st. Celestine is disconcerting but there are a variety of factors at play not least of which is the possibility in a future codex she is moved to a LOW slot at which point she wouldn't be in this book assuming we get an sob codex later on. We don't know the points or options for anything in this book. I am not planning on preordering the codex until I know whether I benefit from it... But to say it's a nerf or conversely that us sisters players should be grateful is premature.

**Hulksmash**

I'm currently hoping for a single "faction" symbol for the codex but we'll have to see. Full sister spread makes it unlikely.

I do wish they'd let vn give us more info but such is life. I'll happily wait and see what we've really got instead of the first vague reviews.

**BBAP**

Mr Morden wrote:
It really isn't very funny.

I have to disagree. Since 4th Edition my fellow Sisters players have insisted the army would be A1-grade awesome if only it had an uber-buff CC character, despite that being mainfestly false. The Sisters were fine without CC support of any kind. They had problems, sure, but none of them were fixable by the addition of a CC beater unit. It should've been the lowest thing on anyone's priority list, but people kept demanding it anyway and complained when they didn't get it. "Take Celestine", I'd tell them, "She's alright." "No!", they'd reply - "She doesn't have EW and can't beat five TH SS Terminators in a duel so she is bad!"

Then, on 10/12/16, GW released their revised rules for the Sisters, and not only did the Sisters not get their beater unit, but Celestine was gone too.

From where I'm sitting that's frigging hilarious.

**unmercifulconker**

Is this artwork new? I dont remember seeing it and this is THE 40k art for me, defines everything about the Universe, I would buy a huge ass print of this in a second.

Edit: I mean look at this glorious piece, the everyman soldiers down at the bottom, in the mud and blood, banners gloriously waving amidst the bodies, depicting the power of man, the preacher charging headlong into battle with nothing but his robes and his faith. A titan towers in the distance and surely the thunder of guns echo across the field. Then above is this angelic depiction of the Imperium, the throne of gods and his angels of death, humanities salvation heralded by the servo-cherubs. I have never seen a more badass piece of artwork.

**Vankraken**

Lack of servo skulls, St Celestine, and the general lack of "new" stuff/rules me rather disappointed. Just seems like a cut and paste job instead of trying to develop the faction(s) to be anything more than what they where. Also do each entry have their own faction because if so then the Valks are going to be completely useless if they have their own Aeronautica faction as you can't start other units in it.

**Inquisitor Kallus**

Are people moaning that st celestine cant be taken with a small group of sisters that is added to a larger army? Thats what the SOB codex is for. You wouldnt expect Dante to turn up with a squad of BA Tacs as part of a larger Guard army etc. This book is to add some flavour to existing armies by all accounts

**mmzero252**

BBAP wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
It really isn't very funny.

I have to disagree. Since 4th Edition my fellow Sisters players have insisted the army would be A1-grade awesome if only it had an uber-buff CC character, despite that being mainfestly false. The Sisters were fine without CC support of any kind. They had problems, sure, but none of them were fixable by the addition of a CC beater unit. It should've been the lowest thing on anyone's priority list, but people kept demanding it anyway and complained when they didn't get it. "Take Celestine", I'd tell them, "She's alright." "No!", they'd reply - "She doesn't have EW and can't beat five TH SS Terminators in a duel so she is bad!"

Then, on 10/12/16, GW released their revised rules for the Sisters, and not only did the Sisters not get their beater unit, but Celestine was gone too.

From where I'm sitting that's frigging hilarious.

Celestine actually can't beat a lot of things. Like..a lot. I've never had her survive any close combat against an HQ unit from another faction that wasn't of Canoness/commisar strength. They either instant death her or simply overpower her with their equipment and abilities in general.

**BrookM**

unmercifulconker wrote:
Is this artwork new?

First featured in the 6th edition rulebook IIRC.

**Kapitan Montag**

I was looking at the rerelease SoB minis. I noticed that the retributors squad has 4 multi melta girls in it. So there is no way currently of getting the heavy bolter or heavy flamer models. Does that mean anything?

**MadCowCrazy**

Vankraken wrote:
Lack of servo skulls, St Celestine, and the general lack of "new" stuff/rules me rather disappointed. Just seems like a cut and paste job instead of trying to develop the faction(s) to be anything more than what they where. Also do each entry have their own faction because if so then the Valks are going to be completely useless if they have their own Aeronautica faction as you can't start other units in it.

This is a rather interesting question. In the product list GW sends out to stores everything is listed by "Race", this includes everything form Eldar, Tyranids etc to Paints, General tools etc.
CIA is listed as Imperial Forces, so are all assassins, the new Canoness and Imperial Knights. It could just be a tag for Imperial things without a proper faction.

**A Town Called Malus**

Inquisitor Kallus wrote:
Are people moaning that st celestine cant be taken with a small group of sisters that is added to a larger army? Thats what the SOB codex is for. You wouldnt expect Dante to turn up with a squad of BA Tacs as part of a larger Guard army etc. This book is to add some flavour to existing armies by all accounts

From the product description of Imperial Agents on GWs website:

A full army list for the Battle Sisters of the Adepta Sororitas

**Crimson**

Where is the 'no servo-skulls' thing from? This worries me a lot. It is bad in itself, but I'm afraid that they have trimmed all inq options without models.

**Mr Morden**

BBAP wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
It really isn't very funny.

I have to disagree. Since 4th Edition my fellow Sisters players have insisted the army would be A1-grade awesome if only it had an uber-buff CC character, despite that being mainfestly false. The Sisters were fine without CC support of any kind. They had problems, sure, but none of them were fixable by the addition of a CC beater unit. It should've been the lowest thing on anyone's priority list, but people kept demanding it anyway and complained when they didn't get it. "Take Celestine", I'd tell them, "She's alright." "No!", they'd reply - "She doesn't have EW and can't beat five TH SS Terminators in a duel so she is bad!"

Then, on 10/12/16, GW released their revised rules for the Sisters, and not only did the Sisters not get their beater unit, but Celestine was gone too.

From where I'm sitting that's frigging hilarious.

Ah, laughing at others misfortune funny -ok I guess.

Are people moaning that st celestine cant be taken with a small group of sisters that is added to a larger army?

Except thats not what they (appear) to have done - they deleted St C and seem to have downgraded other rules like Shield of Faith, Then on the GW sist its syas this is the SOB army list, not just a deatchment that an Inquisitor has brought along with them

To put in perspective -

The next Space Marines Codex

Well the Ulramarine section deletes all their special characters but the sniper guy, also Calgar is deleted but hey a new Captain replaces him but only in resin and via orders, Chapter tactics are reduced unless the single large unit formation is used, All other formations are deleted.

I can just imagine the rejoicing

**Vankraken**

Crimson wrote:
Where is the 'no servo-skulls' thing from? This worries me a lot. It is bad in itself, but I'm afraid that they have trimmed all inq options without models.

Frontline gaming has a review of the book up and it said they didn't see any mention of servo skulls.

**General Kroll**

Well this sounds a little disappointing. It doesn't seem to be the inquisition fun fest that was advertised. I was hoping it would be an update to the Inquisition codex that allowed them to tack on all these little factions. But I'm not sure what GW were going for with this now... :(

**mmzero252**

Not sure how accurate it is, but apparently this is another rumor of what the formations are.

Spoiler:

**Mr Morden**

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2016/12/10/codex-imperial-agents-review/

Some more actual info - reading now!

re sisters:

The first of two big codices in this book. There is actually some cool stuff in this book, and one very sad thing which I will cover at the end. First off, I noticed that this section is almost a direct reprint of the Sisters of Battle 6th edition book. Which is cool, because I felt like that book was not a terrible base for a faction, and just needed a few more rules and units to really become viable at the competitive-casual level. In this section you will find a detachment that lets you take a single Ministorum priest, as well as a new detachment for the girls in armor called the “Vestal Task Force”. Which has the ability to give all units in the detachment the ability to reroll any saving throws of 1 once in a game. Awesome! You are forced to take a compulsory elite option, but it isn’t all that bad because GW gave the sisters access to Deathcult Assassins, Crusaders, and Arco-Flagellents. Other then one minor detail, this section is a copy of the Adepta Sororitas codex, with some updated verbage to make rules clearer.

so it may be that Shield of Faith is still as was...........but St C is gone.

**BBAP**

Mr Morden wrote:
Ah, laughing at others misfortune funny -ok I guess.

Not misfortune, really. Sisters have never needed CC to fix them and Celestine was always a bit-part novelty. I doubt that's why GW baleeted her, but I find it ironically amusing nonetheless.

**Mr Morden**

BBAP wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
Ah, laughing at others misfortune funny -ok I guess.

Not misfortune, really. Sisters have never needed CC to fix them and Celestine was always a bit-part novelty. I doubt that's why GW baleeted her, but I find it ironically amusing nonetheless.

Always good to remove options - oh wait its not. Kicking people when they are down is not especaily cool.