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.

Warhams-77 wrote:
I'm unable to verify the post at the moment. I also do not tend to react emotionally to stuff like this as it would not change anything to the better

Screenshot by Markain on www.gw-fanworld.net - from 40k FB

https://www.gw-fanworld.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=318799&d=1481635794

I'm not sure GW should post stuff like this. If they don't plan to release plastic Sisters they should say so straight away. If they do, keep silence until the miniatures are ready and drum up interest shortly before release. Maybe they do already and this is their way? But it is getting kind of... annoying... to be honest.

I think people really need to have a sense of humor and some thicker skin.
Either they will come, or they will not but there is nothing wrong with GW taking a piss with the whole thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
I'm unable to verify the post at the moment. I also do not tend to react emotionally to stuff like this as it would not change anything to the better

Screenshot by Markain on www.gw-fanworld.net - from 40k FB

https://www.gw-fanworld.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=318799&d=1481635794

I'm not sure GW should post stuff like this. If they don't plan to release plastic Sisters they should say so straight away. If they do, keep silence until the miniatures are ready and drum up interest shortly before release. Maybe they do already and this is their way? But it is getting kind of... annoying... to be honest.

Or they could get ahead of the backlash that just sitting silently and not addressing any of the issues people are raising would ferment and defuse it by saying that plastic sisters are coming and tell people when.

What backlash?
The internet is a small minority of players of this game.
This book will come and go like a burp in the night.
Some will love it, some will hate it.
Two months from now nobody will be talking about it.
There is no backlash.
There may be people that believe that they are entitled to something, mistakenly mind you and they may feel that they will leverage this to force GW to say something but they would be mistaken.
This is a game of ups and downs, we live in their world and you either enjoy playing or it may be time to take a break until something comes along for you.
Remember, Sisters of Battle Adepta Sororitas can very easily become the next Tomb Kings/Lizard Men.

 Captain Joystick wrote:
Frankly I think the 'lazy' argument is jumping the gun a bit. Not giving them fields was a conscious decision when they first assembled the codex, and it's one I generally agree with: an Inquisitor on the field of battle should be something the player wants to protect, while you should be able to invest to make him more fighty, at the end of the day I don't think he can adhere broadly to the fluff and be the big bruiser of a death star.

I am not convinced it was a conscious decision at all.

re protecting them - Given that we are talking about models with T3 its not like they are incredibly durable with fields, it just makes them more lore friendly.

Inquisitors on the battlefield are normally extremely well equipped and understand all too well their own value.

There should be options to better reflect the sheer diversity of such people - the ability to make them better WS or BS, even other stats. Force fields is a absolute staple of Inquisitors in day to day life never mind when they are leading troops into battle.

So what you're saying is that Inquisitors basically are mobile force field generators, because that's how essential you make them out to be for them.

It'd be nice to have a bigger kit of equipment for Inquisitors, yes. We get it.

nekooni wrote:
So what you're saying is that Inquisitors basically are mobile force field generators, because that's how essential you make them out to be for them.

It'd be nice to have a bigger kit of equipment for Inquisitors, yes. We get it.

Whaaa..? We're arguing for inquisitors to have access to an invuln, not to turn them into mobile void shield generators or whatever you're implying. By 'force field' we mean refractor field, rosarius, conversion field etc. Personal protection systems that work in-game by giving the bearer an invuln.

nekooni wrote:
So what you're saying is that Inquisitors basically are mobile force field generators, because that's how essential you make them out to be for them.

It'd be nice to have a bigger kit of equipment for Inquisitors, yes. We get it.

Really - that's twisting my words to a massive degree - I am saying that those Inquisitors that are on the battlefield are almost certain to have the best protection they can.

Perhaps you should read some of the fluff?

I get that you are happy with a half assed codex - well done.

For what it's worth, this is one of the first canonical descriptions of an Inquisitor and his standard equipment:



He wears (skin-tight) power armor, a conversion field, a stasis field, and a refractor field! Inquisitors are supposed to have carte blanche when it comes to acquiring technology and requisitioning troops. Of course tech levels have been downgraded over time and almost every character in Rogue Trader was highly equipped with digital lasers and fields, but it's pretty crazy for a battlefield Inquisitor in a modern 40k setting not having access to things like artificer armor and energy fields, much less more esoteric equipment.

Oh gawd that name...

 nudibranch wrote:
Oh gawd that name...

There are a few more like that

 nudibranch wrote:

nekooni wrote:
So what you're saying is that Inquisitors basically are mobile force field generators, because that's how essential you make them out to be for them.

It'd be nice to have a bigger kit of equipment for Inquisitors, yes. We get it.

Whaaa..? We're arguing for inquisitors to have access to an invuln, not to turn them into mobile void shield generators or whatever you're implying. By 'force field' we mean refractor field, rosarius, conversion field etc. Personal protection systems that work in-game by giving the bearer an invuln.

My point wasn't that you're asking for VSGs but that you're not arguing anything. you're just repeating ad nauseam that basically every Inquisitor should have an invuln save via some kind of personal shield and how bad the entire book is simply because Inquisitors do not have access to an invuln save since they should really have access to invuln saves as they're very well known to require protection via invuln saves, especially since most of them in the fluff have invuln saves and they - as inquisitors - should have access to all the best equipment, especially invuln saves.

I don't consider this book "failed" because of one piece of equipment still not being in there. sorry.

I never called the book failed... I said I was dissapointed in one aspect, that's all.

nekooni wrote:

 nudibranch wrote:

nekooni wrote:
So what you're saying is that Inquisitors basically are mobile force field generators, because that's how essential you make them out to be for them.

It'd be nice to have a bigger kit of equipment for Inquisitors, yes. We get it.

Whaaa..? We're arguing for inquisitors to have access to an invuln, not to turn them into mobile void shield generators or whatever you're implying. By 'force field' we mean refractor field, rosarius, conversion field etc. Personal protection systems that work in-game by giving the bearer an invuln.

My point wasn't that you're asking for VSGs but that you're not arguing anything. you're just repeating ad nauseam that basically every Inquisitor should have an invuln save via some kind of personal shield and how bad the entire book is simply because Inquisitors do not have access to an invuln save since they should really have access to invuln saves as they're very well known to require protection via invuln saves, especially since most of them in the fluff have invuln saves and they - as inquisitors - should have access to all the best equipment, especially invuln saves.

I don't consider this book "failed" because of one piece of equipment still not being in there. sorry.

Nope IMO thus far the book has "failed" because: (and I was really looking forward to this)

St Celestine has gone and the update of the Sisters is lazy and without any apparent effort or interest - see the pathetic detachments that they have and then look at any recent dex.
Same with the Inquisition Codex - the lack of invulnerable saves for Inquisitors is simply showing how little time and attention has been paid.
The various Factions remain in place and so the whole cool idea of the Inquisitor with weird and wonderful units, again using his or her influence to travel in whatever vehicle they like - is not possible.

And that's just the issues from what we currently know - imagine how much disappointing it will be when we know more.

In particular what exactly is your reason for Inquisitors not to have invulnerable saves? I can't see how its especially powerful - especially compared to what power dexes get and its totally in tune with the lore.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Nope thus far the books has "failed" because:

St Celestine has gone and the update of the Sisters is lazy and without any apparent effort or interest.

Well they did get some new things, and yes - Celestine being gone is a real shame.

Same with the Inquisition Codex - the lack of invulnerable saves for Inquisitors is simply showing how little attention has been paid.

Again - it's all about that one stupid invuln save, really?

The various Factions remain in place and so the whole idea of eh Inquisitor with weird and wonderful units, again using his or her influence to travel in whatever vehicle they like - is not possible.

From what I can tell he's able to ride in any transport provided through their formation. That's a ton of vehicles.

And that's just the issues from what we currently know - imagine how much disappointing it will be when we know more.

Yes, the sky might be falling - or not.

In particular What exactly is you reason for Inquisitors not to have invulnerable saves? I can't see how its especially powerful - especially compared to what power dexes get and its totally in tune with the lore.

Please point me to a single line where I said that Inquisitors shouldn't have invulnerable saves. I've never said that, so why exactly do you think I have to explain myself on that topic in any way? I have no clue why GW decided to not give Inquisitors a refractor field. I simply don't think it's as big a deal as you clearly do. *edit* While repeatedly claiming how it's not a big deal at all since it wouldn't make them powerful anyway (which I agree with as long as the points cost are appropiate).

I make one minor complaint about invulns amd this happens. Jesus Christ I hate the internet sometimes...

nekooni wrote:

I don't consider this book "failed" because of one piece of equipment still not being in there. sorry.

I agree that the book hasn't failed due to Inquisitors not being able to have access to more equipment.

I will point out how I think the book has failed though (and this is barring any commentary on Sisters - as I'm not familiar enough with their previous iteration).
1. I can no longer play my Inquisition Kill Team due to the new formatting of the henchmen squad.
2. I still can't play my Witch Hunter army that I used in fifth.
3. I can no longer really use the Inquisition Valkyrie I put together,

So, while I think not adding something new to a faction is not "failing," I would argue that taking things away and invalidating how people use their armies is "failing" pretty hard. I am going to reserve final judgement until I know the whole deal with the book, but as it stands this book has me boxing away my 40k until 8th edition comes out and I can see what it's like.

And here I thought the Tau Battleforce formation was rather useless...moving a single squad 6" at the start of a turn. Sure it's probably got it's uses to keep markerlights going from pathfinders and such..but c'mon GW.

BUT..that sister formation is just so much worse. At least make it every turn so it makes up for losing ObSec

nekooni wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Nope thus far the books has "failed" because:

St Celestine has gone and the update of the Sisters is lazy and without any apparent effort or interest.

Well they did get some new things, and yes - Celestine being gone is a real shame.

Same with the Inquisition Codex - the lack of invulnerable saves for Inquisitors is simply showing how little attention has been paid.

Again - it's all about that one stupid invuln save, really?

The various Factions remain in place and so the whole idea of eh Inquisitor with weird and wonderful units, again using his or her influence to travel in whatever vehicle they like - is not possible.

From what I can tell he's able to ride in any transport provided through their formation. That's a ton of vehicles.

And that's just the issues from what we currently know - imagine how much disappointing it will be when we know more.

Yes, the sky might be falling - or not.

In particular What exactly is you reason for Inquisitors not to have invulnerable saves? I can't see how its especially powerful - especially compared to what power dexes get and its totally in tune with the lore.

Please point me to a single line where I said that Inquisitors shouldn't have invulnerable saves. I've never said that, so why exactly do you think I have to explain myself on that topic in any way? I have no clue why GW decided to not give Inquisitors a refractor field. I simply don't think it's as big a deal as you clearly do. *edit* While repeatedly claiming how it's not a big deal at all since it wouldn't make them powerful anyway (which I agree with as long as the points cost are appropiate).

Name those new things Sisters got? Rate them alongside other recent dexes? They got two detachments - one of which is obviously to assist non Sisters codexes and the other is so dire its untrue.

If its not a big deal why are you against it

not giving them fields was a conscious decision when they first assembled the codex, and it's one I generally agre

and i specifcially gave it as a single example of the dex could be improved - then you suddenly got excited and starting saying nonsense like

basically are mobile force field generators

Why are you so against the lore and fluff being reflected on the tabletop?

re transports - you do get that they have put in a Navy unit that only the navy officer can deploy in amngst other nonsese.

So what is good about this dex that you personally see as improvement. Currently I can only see that we finally have them in hard copy.

nekooni wrote:

gungo wrote:

nekooni wrote:

gungo wrote:

ShaneMarsh wrote:
Gungo, what's with the attitude?

The fact is this detschment says nothing about limiting inqusitors from this book. It says any unique inquisitor so forgeworld is open game.

Noone claimed otherwise, but which book are you using exactly? I've been unable to find that "ObSec" rule on Hector so far.

The old 6th ed downloadable character update from forgeworld
https://i.yuki.la/tg/1402337392680.pdf

However his psychic powers were changed later on to sanctic: focus, banishment, sanctuary and hammerhand. As noted He is an inqusitor character so perils is an issue.

Thanks! However that says he's just Scoring, not ObSec.

Send FW an email. pretty much every unit that had that effect such as buzzgrob etc all contest and score aka obj secured.
I love his model and his set psychic powers are great since he can increase his unit invul, hurt demons invul, and add 2str to unit, and obj secured. A priest, 2 crusaders, 2-4 DCA and maybe an enginseer if canticles work on the unit, or maybe an astropath for telepathy powers (invisibility).
Back this unit up with a drago star grey knight formation and your set.

 weirdingway wrote:
For what it's worth, this is one of the first canonical descriptions of an Inquisitor and his standard equipment:

Spoiler:

He wears (skin-tight) power armor, a conversion field, a stasis field, and a refractor field! Inquisitors are supposed to have carte blanche when it comes to acquiring technology and requisitioning troops. Of course tech levels have been downgraded over time and almost every character in Rogue Trader was highly equipped with digital lasers and fields, but it's pretty crazy for a battlefield Inquisitor in a modern 40k setting not having access to things like artificer armor and energy fields, much less more esoteric equipment.

and you thought ( i dont mean you i just mean in general ) lizardmen names were bad... eesh!



S.Y.

 nudibranch wrote:
Oh gawd that name...

Nothing beats Kruellagh the Vile, but that comes closest.

I haven't seen anyone mention the Admech units yet. Are they basically just as seen in the Imperial Guard codex, but with Canticles added on? I'd love to be able to field 3 enginseers and 15 servitors in my Cult Mechanicus army as close combat speedbumps and meat shields.

From what we KNOW: Sisters also got access to Death Cult Assassins as a unit. probably Crusaders and flagellants, too. Do we always need huge amounts of new rules in EVERY release?

 Mr Morden wrote:

nekooni wrote:

In particular What exactly is you reason for Inquisitors not to have invulnerable saves? I can't see how its especially powerful - especially compared to what power dexes get and its totally in tune with the lore.

Please point me to a single line where I said that Inquisitors shouldn't have invulnerable saves. I've never said that, so why exactly do you think I have to explain myself on that topic in any way? I have no clue why GW decided to not give Inquisitors a refractor field. I simply don't think it's as big a deal as you clearly do. *edit* While repeatedly claiming how it's not a big deal at all since it wouldn't make them powerful anyway (which I agree with as long as the points cost are appropiate).

If its not a big deal why are you against it

not giving them fields was a conscious decision when they first assembled the codex, and it's one I generally agre

and i specifcially gave it as a single example of the dex could be improved - then you suddenly got excited and starting saying nonsense like

basically are mobile force field generators

Why are you so against the lore and fluff being reflected on the tabletop?

Read what you quoted. Just do it. And now reflect on what you just wrote. Do you notice a certain ... mismatch between what you claim my position is and what I've actually written?

re transports - you do get that they have put in a Navy unit that only the navy officer can deploy in amngst other nonsese.

You've got no clue what transport options are available to Acolytes. None at all. Nor have you seen all the Navy pages, have you? Maybe they've put in a "you may embark Battle Brothers on this transport". Who knows? I don't, and I don't think there's been a leak of those pages, or am I mistaken?

So what is good about this dex that you personally see as improvement. Currently I can only see that we finally have them in hard copy.

It being a hard copy is #1, it being proper 7th edition rules another. I also really like the Chamber Militant rules. Having a single book for multiple "Imperial Friends" detachments / addons is also a huge plus to me, as I'm a purely imperial player and I really like mixing my armies.


throwing a ton of new rules at every codex release / faction update is exactly how we ended up with an incredibly imbalanced game. I'm not a fan of the whole powercreep going on, so - in terms of game balance - I'm just waiting for 8th edition to hopefully fix that problem. A single Codex just can't do that, sadly - so I'm not really expecting it from any such release.

Davor wrote:

 deviantduck wrote:
I want my 33 minutes back.

Did you just watch the first 1/2 of the Ultramarine movie and shut it off?

BoLS video review of C:IA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIb4HVz9kUE

 deviantduck wrote:

Davor wrote:

 deviantduck wrote:
I want my 33 minutes back.

Did you just watch the first 1/2 of the Ultramarine movie and shut it off?

BoLS video review of C:IA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIb4HVz9kUE

Thanks, but it was posted a few pages back...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/2100/708759.page#9073591

nekooni wrote:
From what we KNOW: Sisters also got access to Death Cult Assassins as a unit. probably Crusaders and flagellants, too. Do we always need huge amounts of new rules in EVERY release?

Sisters already had access to that unit.

nekooni wrote:
From what we KNOW: Sisters also got access to Death Cult Assassins as a unit. probably Crusaders and flagellants, too. Do we always need huge amounts of new rules in EVERY release?

 Mr Morden wrote:

nekooni wrote:

In particular What exactly is you reason for Inquisitors not to have invulnerable saves? I can't see how its especially powerful - especially compared to what power dexes get and its totally in tune with the lore.

Please point me to a single line where I said that Inquisitors shouldn't have invulnerable saves. I've never said that, so why exactly do you think I have to explain myself on that topic in any way? I have no clue why GW decided to not give Inquisitors a refractor field. I simply don't think it's as big a deal as you clearly do. *edit* While repeatedly claiming how it's not a big deal at all since it wouldn't make them powerful anyway (which I agree with as long as the points cost are appropiate).

If its not a big deal why are you against it

not giving them fields was a conscious decision when they first assembled the codex, and it's one I generally agre

and i specifcially gave it as a single example of the dex could be improved - then you suddenly got excited and starting saying nonsense like

basically are mobile force field generators

Why are you so against the lore and fluff being reflected on the tabletop?

Read what you quoted. Just do it. And now reflect on what you just wrote. Do you notice a certain ... mismatch between what you claim my position is and what I've actually written?

re transports - you do get that they have put in a Navy unit that only the navy officer can deploy in amngst other nonsese.

You've got no clue what transport options are available to Acolytes. None at all. Nor have you seen all the Navy pages, have you? Maybe they've put in a "you may embark Battle Brothers on this transport". Who knows? I don't, and I don't think there's been a leak of those pages, or am I mistaken?

So what is good about this dex that you personally see as improvement. Currently I can only see that we finally have them in hard copy.

It being a hard copy is #1, it being proper 7th edition rules another. I also really like the Chamber Militant rules. Having a single book for multiple "Imperial Friends" detachments / addons is also a huge plus to me, as I'm a purely imperial player and I really like mixing my armies.


throwing a ton of new rules at every codex release / faction update is exactly how we ended up with an incredibly imbalanced game. I'm not a fan of the whole powercreep going on, so - in terms of game balance - I'm just waiting for 8th edition to hopefully fix that problem. A single Codex just can't do that, sadly - so I'm not really expecting it from any such release.

Okay fine that is cool, they need a cheap mob unit like they had originally. Redemptionists would be really cool here. A mid range autogun / shotgun unit, that can soak fire, provide some anti Armour ( evisorator, meltagun) or anti infantry ( flamer, extaingunators? - 1 shot flamers, pos heavy stubber, grenade launcher) maybe zelot or frenzy

I think it would fix a lot of problems, throw in a cheap buggy like the Pulptek, you get a sisters army and a Redemptionist force in the same book`

S.Y.

Anybody know anything about the LE Canoness's rules?

 pretre wrote:

nekooni wrote:
From what we KNOW: Sisters also got access to Death Cult Assassins as a unit. probably Crusaders and flagellants, too. Do we always need huge amounts of new rules in EVERY release?

Sisters already had access to that unit.

To be fair they had access to the Battle Conclave through a Priest, whose modifications allowed you to field any combination. Crusaders, DCA, and Acro-Flagellants are now separate units. So yeah Nekooni is technically right, even if the change isn't really something all that compelling.

 weirdingway wrote:
For what it's worth, this is one of the first canonical descriptions of an Inquisitor and his standard equipment:

Spoiler:

He wears (skin-tight) power armor, a conversion field, a stasis field, and a refractor field! Inquisitors are supposed to have carte blanche when it comes to acquiring technology and requisitioning troops. Of course tech levels have been downgraded over time and almost every character in Rogue Trader was highly equipped with digital lasers and fields, but it's pretty crazy for a battlefield Inquisitor in a modern 40k setting not having access to things like artificer armor and energy fields, much less more esoteric equipment.

That's the past. Now the modern-day Inquisitor doesn't have three Jokaero digital weapons - he has three Jokaeros. Likewise he doesn't have three energy fields - he has a Crusader, an Enginseer and an Akolyte with shield - all of them can be used at once of course. Henchmen are just equipment for a true Inquisitor.

 StupidYellow wrote:


and you thought ( i dont mean you i just mean in general ) lizardmen names were bad... eesh!

The old Slann names like Mylkbeotl, Thanxaleotl and Wotalotabeotl are still THE benchmark.

ERJAK wrote:
Plastic Sisters aren't coming. January will be more chaos gak, then february switches to Sigmar then marines->chaos->xenos->back to sigmar. They haven't even started work on new models and aren't going to.

If this is true, then why tease us with the Magnus video? I cannot believe with all of the progress they have made this past 15 months that they would be that stupid. While I expect you are correct, they aren't coming in January I have a hard time believing they aren't coming at all. My original prediction of them coming via the release of 8th edition is still the best shot I believe.

ShaneMarsh wrote:
To be fair they had access to the Battle Conclave through a Priest, whose modifications allowed you to field any combination. Crusaders, DCA, and Acro-Flagellants are now separate units. So yeah Nekooni is technically right, even if the change isn't really something all that compelling.

So you mean that Nekooni is technically right because his supposed improvement is actually a downgrade? Interesting.

 BloodGrin wrote:
I think people really need to have a sense of humor and some thicker skin.
Either they will come, or they will not but there is nothing wrong with GW taking a piss with the whole thing.

I think you should immolate yourself in fire as a tribute to alliterations. Don't worry it's just a joke !


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also Inquisitors should have access to 4/5 weird defense wargear like teleportation fields (as in Cain's book), refractor fields have been mentioned (was it the -1 strength field?), rosarius, maybe stuff that make them immune to specific types of attack (think like the Avatar being immune to melta/flame), or some field that gives Shrouded…