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.

 Gunzhard wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

nekooni wrote:
GK and DW aren't replaced by the new book, but SoB and Inquisition are. Their entire army lists are in there.

I agree with this assessment, but as it's not "officially stated" anywhere I can already see a Sky is Falling moment ahead...

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Codex-Adepta-Sororitas-eBook-Edition
"officially stated".

I still don't see that being clarified here... what am I missing?

"The rules in this eBook are also available in Codex: Imperial Agents, fully revised and updated along with new detachments plus rules for adding even more servants of the Emperor to your army."

That part.

 oldzoggy wrote:

Table wrote:

The "old codex" will be valid until GW stops selling it. Now none of this matters outside of tournaments and PuG's. Talk it out with your opponent.

Well it kinda does. Since any Inquisitor army is mainly using the old inq henchmen squad. This is 75%+ of their army and is missing in the new book.
The new henchman formation seems to fill the gap until closer inspection reveals that most normal builds are now impossible, or would result in you rolling 10+ times on the warlord trait table :\

Players might feel cheated when your entire army consist of a single disputed unit entry.

"disputed" ? The only thing missing here are the pages for the actual component units, mainly the Acolytes. How it works is pretty much undisputed by now, isn't it?

The only difference for SoB are whether or not Celestine is available. If someone gives me a hard time for fielding Celestine I am going to hate them very very much and not play with them (and possibly kill them dead when they are not looking?).

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
The only difference for SoB are whether or not Celestine is available. If someone gives me a hard time for fielding Celestine I am going to hate them very very much and not play with them (and possibly kill them dead when they are not looking?).

Or send them a sandwich with US cheese.

Personally I'd allow any Sisters player to just use the old Celestine rules, no big deal to me. It's not really that different to fielding 6th edition forgeworld stuff and most people are fine with that, too - as long as there aren't newer rules, use the old ones.

nekooni wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

nekooni wrote:
GK and DW aren't replaced by the new book, but SoB and Inquisition are. Their entire army lists are in there.

I agree with this assessment, but as it's not "officially stated" anywhere I can already see a Sky is Falling moment ahead...

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Codex-Adepta-Sororitas-eBook-Edition
"officially stated".

I still don't see that being clarified here... what am I missing?

"The rules in this eBook are also available in Codex: Imperial Agents, fully revised and updated along with new detachments plus rules for adding even more servants of the Emperor to your army."

That part.

If that is taken at face value, then, GK and DW ARE indeed replaced by the new book. That statement is a throw-away I'm afraid.

Yeah its going to be the same as all the daemon / chaos players. We will just pick the stuff we like out of book A and combine it with book B. A happens to be our own obscure digital book that is still for sale and B is the new allies for everyone book. Together they make a perfect army. Look at it they really do. Just only using the new book, makes all of the armies in the book kinda silly since all the entries in there are focussed at being used as allies.

 Gunzhard wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

nekooni wrote:
GK and DW aren't replaced by the new book, but SoB and Inquisition are. Their entire army lists are in there.

I agree with this assessment, but as it's not "officially stated" anywhere I can already see a Sky is Falling moment ahead...

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Codex-Adepta-Sororitas-eBook-Edition
"officially stated".

I still don't see that being clarified here... what am I missing?

"The rules in this eBook are also available in Codex: Imperial Agents, fully revised and updated along with new detachments plus rules for adding even more servants of the Emperor to your army."

That part.

If that is taken at face value, then, GK and DW ARE indeed replaced by the new book. That statement is a throw-away I'm afraid.

Does Codex: Grey Knights have the same disclaimer? No.
Does Codex: Deathwatch have the same disclaimer? No.
Does Codex: Inquisition have the same disclamer? Yes.

I'm not quoting Codex: Imperial Agents, I'm quoting the webstore page of Codex: Adepta Sororitas.

I think it's pretty obvious which codex is replaced and which isn't. It wasn't me who needed an "official line" to understand how it works, what you do with the information and official statement is up to you.
I'm betting a cheese sandwich on most TOs going with "GK and DW Codexes are still valid but Inquisition and Sisters digital codexes arent". I'd even go buy some proper dutch cheese for that sandwich.

Well ...I do like cheese sandwiches and I agree it is clear how this is meant to work. But I also know what this community is like and I hardly think that will be considered the "official line".

 Gunzhard wrote:
Well ...I do like cheese sandwiches and I agree it is clear how this is meant to work. But I also know what this community is like and I hardly think that will be considered the "official line".

This is an Exorcist.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-CA/Sisters-of-Battle-Exorcist

It fires rockets out of the pipe organ. The pipes are thus the barrels of its weapon.

Consult your BRB and determine the arcs of fire for the Exorcist.

 Gunzhard wrote:
Well ...I do like cheese sandwiches and I agree it is clear how this is meant to work. But I also know what this community is like and I hardly think that will be considered the "official line".

There's an official line on BOTH invalidated codexes, there isn't one on the others.
Which book is valid and which isn't has never been "clearly ruled" anywhere, so it's really a non-issue unless GW starts publishing a list of valid books.
It's really not advancing the community at all by claiming that there are so many people that think like that and arguing their point. I've literally never met someone that went "oh, but GW never claimed that old books are invalidated, so I can just play this 2nd edition book instead".
If people that want to argue that actually exist, let them speak for themself and explain WHY they think that they're free to use a clearly invalidated codex?

It's fine if you wanna bring Celestine to a casual match with the new Codex: Imperial Agents, just ask beforehand. But that won't fly at a tournament or with a bad attitude, claiming it's your right to do that.

Neki you know that, this is just your interpretation of that disclaimer not the clear cut official line right ?
There are clearly players who read it in an other way, and the previous GW FAQ's seem to all point in the other direction. So it isn't all that clear cut.

 oldzoggy wrote:
Neki you know that, this is just your interpretation of that disclaimer not the clear cut official line right ?
There are clearly players who read it in an other way, and the previous GW FAQ's seem to all point in the other direction. So it isn't all that clear cut.

It's really not advancing the community at all by claiming that there are so many people that think like that and arguing their point. I've literally never met someone that went "oh, but GW never claimed that old books are invalidated, so I can just play this 2nd edition book instead".
If people that want to argue that actually exist, let them speak for themself and explain WHY they think that they're free to use a clearly invalidated codex?
You don't sound like one of those people, just playing devils advocate, am I right?

nekooni wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
Neki you know that, this is just your interpretation of that disclaimer not the clear cut official line right ?
There are clearly players who read it in an other way, and the previous GW FAQ's seem to all point in the other direction. So it isn't all that clear cut.

It's really not advancing the community at all by claiming that there are so many people that think like that and arguing their point. I've literally never met someone that went "oh, but GW never claimed that old books are invalidated, so I can just play this 2nd edition book instead".
If people that want to argue that actually exist, let them speak for themself and explain WHY they think that they're free to use a clearly invalidated codex?
You don't sound like one of those people, just playing devils advocate, am I right?

In this case the alternate Codices are up-to-date for the current edition, so it's not like bringing a 2e Codex to a 7e game.

Came to this thread curious about the new Imperial Agents book and now I am leaving remembering how convoluted and ugly 40k's codex system is.

God damn, I really want to get back into 40k. Between this book, the Deathwatch release and Genestealer Cults there is a ton of cool stuff in 40k now, but the arguments over what is valid, and knowing that all this new gak will be invalid probably sooner rather than later just makes me go a big "nope" to the prospect of getting back in.

 Pouncey wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
Neki you know that, this is just your interpretation of that disclaimer not the clear cut official line right ?
There are clearly players who read it in an other way, and the previous GW FAQ's seem to all point in the other direction. So it isn't all that clear cut.

It's really not advancing the community at all by claiming that there are so many people that think like that and arguing their point. I've literally never met someone that went "oh, but GW never claimed that old books are invalidated, so I can just play this 2nd edition book instead".
If people that want to argue that actually exist, let them speak for themself and explain WHY they think that they're free to use a clearly invalidated codex?
You don't sound like one of those people, just playing devils advocate, am I right?

In this case the alternate Codices are up-to-date for the current edition, so it's not like bringing a 2e Codex to a 7e game.

Codex Inquisition had 5th edition rules. The Codex store page literally tells you where to find the latest rules for that faction.

 oldzoggy wrote:
[Edit] We now have seen the book. It is clearly not intended to be used as a stand alone army book for Inq players and lacks some Sister options. It does however give some minor but interesting buffs to some units and would work perfectly as a printed supplement for our digital codex's. Can we as INQ / sister players just ignore it and use our own true 7th codex instead or use them side by side like most daemon players tend to do ?
GW FAQ's sure seem to hint this way with the iron priest ruling and the green tide ruling.

The old books are still for sale .
Here -> https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Codex-Adepta-Sororitas-Interactive-iBook-Edition?_requestid=27880
and
Here -> https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Codex-Inquisition-eBook-Edition

So what if the old books are still for sale?

Kill Team was for sale even through its updating.

Because as a digital product, they can force an update to it.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Came to this thread curious about the new Imperial Agents book and now I am leaving remembering how convoluted and ugly 40k's codex system is.

God damn, I really want to get back into 40k. Between this book, the Deathwatch release and Genestealer Cults there is a ton of cool stuff in 40k now, but the arguments over what is valid, and knowing that all this new gak will be invalid probably sooner rather than later just makes me go a big "nope" to the prospect of getting back in.

Or you could just talk to your local group and decide how you want to play things instead of letting Dakka ruin 40k for you.

nekooni wrote:

Codex Inquisition had 5th edition rules. The Codex store page literally tells you where to find the latest rules for that faction.

Nope not at all it was never 5th.It was 6th and is all updated to 7th editon for ages. I lost my power axes in the last update, that is not something you forget ; )

 andysonic1 wrote:
Or you could just talk to your local group and decide how you want to play things instead of letting Dakka ruin 40k for you.

You may want to read the thread. Quite a few people insist that you should never use anything but the latest edition of your rules.

nekooni wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
The only difference for SoB are whether or not Celestine is available. If someone gives me a hard time for fielding Celestine I am going to hate them very very much and not play with them (and possibly kill them dead when they are not looking?).

Or send them a sandwich with US cheese.

I'm assuming you mean "American" "Processed" "Cheese" TM(R)(C), rather than something like White Vermont Cheddar.

Cause the former is a hate crime, and the latter is awesome.

nekooni wrote:
so I can just play this 2nd edition book instead".

We aren't talking about a 2nd edition codex. It is an 7th edition codex, that players actually own and is still for sale.

 Pouncey wrote:

 andysonic1 wrote:
Or you could just talk to your local group and decide how you want to play things instead of letting Dakka ruin 40k for you.

You may want to read the thread. Quite a few people insist that you should never use anything but the latest edition of your rules.

Quite a few people you play with or quite a few people on Dakka?

GW isn't still selling second edition books advertised as active codices.

 andysonic1 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 andysonic1 wrote:
Or you could just talk to your local group and decide how you want to play things instead of letting Dakka ruin 40k for you.

You may want to read the thread. Quite a few people insist that you should never use anything but the latest edition of your rules.

Quite a few people you play with or quite a few people on Dakka?

Given that I told you to read the thread, what do you believe the answer to your question to be?

 Pouncey wrote:

 andysonic1 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 andysonic1 wrote:
Or you could just talk to your local group and decide how you want to play things instead of letting Dakka ruin 40k for you.

You may want to read the thread. Quite a few people insist that you should never use anything but the latest edition of your rules.

Quite a few people you play with or quite a few people on Dakka?

Given that I told you to read the thread, what do you believe the answer to your question to be?

So my point stands, then? Good, glad we're in agreement.

 andysonic1 wrote:
So my point stands, then? Good, glad we're in agreement.

I made the same point you did in my first post in the thread. So yes, we do agree.

I was merely pointing out that there are people in this thread who disagree quite strongly.

 Pouncey wrote:

 andysonic1 wrote:
So my point stands, then? Good, glad we're in agreement.

I made the same point you did in my first post in the thread. So yes, we do agree.

I was merely pointing out that there are people in this thread who disagree quite strongly.

And my original point is that it really doesn't matter what Dakka says, it matters what you and your opponent decide on, or you and your tournament organizer decide on. Putting so much stock in Dakka that it pushes you away from the game is madness and I see it all the time on this forum.

 andysonic1 wrote:
And my original point is that it really doesn't matter what Dakka says, it matters what you and your opponent decide on, or you and your tournament organizer decide on. Putting so much stock in Dakka that it pushes you away from the game is madness and I see it all the time on this forum.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but when people create threads on Dakka asking for their fellow forumers' opinions, it's usually because they value the opinions of those forumers in some way.

Taking your approach, we may as well just shut down this entire forum site and merely discuss everything with our real-world groups instead.

Don't worry, The digital editions will be secretly updated so you have the latest edition.

The new book doesn't replace anything. Like all the new splash books, it just adds options to the existing ones. It's no big deal really.

Pouncey wrote:You can play an older edition with your opponent's permission if you want to.

Really it's up to you and your opponent to decide, the Internet cannot help you.

The Internet can help you out. He can gauge if it's worth his time to start or not. Just like asking "anyone want to play Unbound" almost everyone will say No, so it will not be worth buying, modelling and painting an army if he can't use it for Unbound. So maybe he will have to buy other minis to play with if he wants to get games in.

Same here. He can gauge to see if he really needs to buy the book so he can play with what ever army he wants or save a bit of money and not bother with it, just in case it sells out.

I say you still have to wait. While it seems most information is out, there could still be stuff in that we don't know yet and wait and see until it's actually released and then decide for yourself. It's too early to get worked on for nothing.

That said, if you were playing me, I would be perfectly fine with it. Thing is in most cases we will never have a game and you will have to think what is your alternative if your opponent says No. What will you do then? Have 2 lists? One for when someone says yes and when someone says no? Is this ok with you? Will you shelf your army until a new dex comes out? What is your plan B, C and D and maybe E?