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.

 Desubot wrote:

edit: At purifer

he has a power sword.

you can tell from the power cable dot thing going down the center of it.

Nah, it just has an integrated phone charger.

Wait that forgeworld one or that REALLY old metal one.

also sure you can scrape off the power weapon dot stick thing.

also odd that they say they have chainswords but no inquistor model im aware of has a chainsword.

 daedalus wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

edit: At purifer

he has a power sword.

you can tell from the power cable dot thing going down the center of it.

Nah, it just has an integrated phone charger.

Seriously though. He could be using that sword as an antenna. I mean the design of the thing is ludicrous as far as a weapon goes. It might be purely ornamental.

Yeah that's just bs. Of course 'you can use your models' must take account WYSIWYG, otherwise it merely means that some form of models are used in the 8th edition

 Desubot wrote:
Wait that forgeworld one or that REALLY old metal one.

also sure you can scrape off the power weapon dot stick thing.

also odd that they say they have chainswords but no inquistor model im aware of has a chainsword.

Oh wait, you're complaining that there are rules for things that they don't specifically sell? You're complaining that some of people's custom builds are viable? They promised they'd support the currently sold models, they never stated that there will be exactly that and no more.

Only one seems 'illegal', since he's holding a melee weapon - but GW just lists him as "Inquisitor with Combi-weapon" to get away with it. On the GW US Online site, at least.

Edit: People beat me to it. Too slow.

Edit2: Technically any model without a listed melee weapon automatically gets one - though it doesn't actually add anything stat-wise. RAW not illegal...

 Purifier wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Wait that forgeworld one or that REALLY old metal one.

also sure you can scrape off the power weapon dot stick thing.

also odd that they say they have chainswords but no inquistor model im aware of has a chainsword.

Oh wait, you're complaining that there are rules for things that they don't specifically sell? You're complaining that some of people's custom builds are viable? They promised they'd support the currently sold models, they never stated that there will be exactly that and no more.

I was complaining?

wana tone that down?

 Crimson wrote:
Yeah that's just bs. Of course 'you can use your models' must take account WYSIWYG, otherwise it merely means that some form of models are used in the 8th edition

Ok, so even assuming that you are the arbiter of what's a power sword and what isn't, and assuming that this sword in no way can be anything but a power sword, you're really up in arms about the fact that they missed ONE weapon on ONE really old model? That's worth getting agitated over?

Ugh, that inquisitor is so old...

It's a funny irony that the discontinued (briefly made to order) lady inquisitors with the giant hairdoos are more representative of actual inquisitor load outs.

It's really nothing to be concerned about though, metal models get a bit of leeway, there's a great sister model with a power maul and bolter, also a load out they can't do.

As for your conundrum, why not run your power armoured inquisitor as it's next best fit in your chosen chamber militant?

 Desubot wrote:

I was complaining?

That's what I was asking, yes.

 Desubot wrote:
wana tone that down?

No, it seems fairly well toned.

 Purifier wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

I was complaining?

That's what I was asking, yes.

 Desubot wrote:
wana tone that down?

No, it seems fairly well toned.

 Purifier wrote:


Oh wait, you're complaining that there are rules for things that they don't specifically sell? You're complaining that some of people's custom builds are viable? They promised they'd support the currently sold models, they never stated that there will be exactly that and no more.

thats not you trying to say im complaining? whatever

no im not complaining.

im saying i notice and find it odd that they dont have a model for something that has rules. that and the forgeworld version being forgeworld would more than likely pop up in the forgeworld book (that and i think he is a named character)

 Purifier wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Yeah that's just bs. Of course 'you can use your models' must take account WYSIWYG, otherwise it merely means that some form of models are used in the 8th edition

Ok, so even assuming that you are the arbiter of what's a power sword and what isn't, and assuming that this sword in no way can be anything but a power sword, you're really up in arms about the fact that they missed ONE weapon on ONE really old model? That's worth getting agitated over?

I am agitated? I am annoyed at most. But these gear limitations are pointless, the game balance would have not been broken had the Inquisitors kept their old weapon options. And as it has been pointed out, it doesn't even conform to 'no model, no rule' paradigm, as there are rules for weapons that there are no models for and models there are no rules for. I really don't understand why you're so adamantly defending bad rules writing.

Inquisition has always been a faction for those who like wacky and weird armies and customised models, and it is no surprise if people who love that aspect are annoyed when options are cut for no reason.

 Crimson wrote:
I am agitated? I am annoyed at most

annoyed: slightly angry; irritated.
agitated: feeling or appearing troubled or nervous.

I don't know, I don't really feel like one of those is above the other. It's six of one and half a dozen of the other.

 Crimson wrote:
it doesn't even conform to 'no model, no rule' paradigm

No one has said that was ever the case, so not sure where you're getting that paradigm from.

The fact that there is no promise to make anything that doesn't have a model, doesn't mean that there is a promise not to.

 Purifier wrote:

No one has said that was ever the case, so not sure where you're getting that paradigm from.

The fact that there is no promise to make anything that doesn't have a model, doesn't mean that there is a promise not to.

Right. So you agree that there is no sensible reason to cut the Inquisitor gear options then?

Maybe when your codex comes out they will make inquisitors with power swords or whatever you want. These indexes have a ton of stuff missing and type-os. I'm glad they rushed them out 7th edition was getting worse and worse.

 Funzeez wrote:
Maybe when your codex comes out they will make inquisitors with power swords or whatever you want. These indexes have a ton of stuff missing and type-os. I'm glad they rushed them out 7th edition was getting worse and worse.

I somehow have a feeling that Codex:Inquisition is not exactly high on GW's priority list...

 Crimson wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

No one has said that was ever the case, so not sure where you're getting that paradigm from.

The fact that there is no promise to make anything that doesn't have a model, doesn't mean that there is a promise not to.

Right. So you agree that there is no sensible reason to cut the Inquisitor gear options then?

Oh absolutely. But now that they are, it's really a non-issue. Everyone lost a BUUUUUUNCH of stuff in the index. Some stuff just didn't make it in, and this was one of them. Maybe they just weren't exactly sure of how it would be balanced so they kept it out until they release the full book where there will be some more testing before it's released. Don't really have any insight into why it happened, but yeah, it seems like a small thing to add. I am just ok with everything I've lost because it was a casualty of a huge rework, and I'm sure we're gonna get a lot of it back, or other nice stuff to replace it.

 Crimson wrote:

 Funzeez wrote:
Maybe when your codex comes out they will make inquisitors with power swords or whatever you want. These indexes have a ton of stuff missing and type-os. I'm glad they rushed them out 7th edition was getting worse and worse.

I somehow have a feeling that Codex:Inquisition is not exactly high on GW's priority list...

Gotta have hope man, being that negative is going to put you in an early grave! Here's the way I see it... GW joked about releasing plastic sisters which they probably will cause if they go back on what they said there will be a lynch mob. When they get released in the next year and a half (calling it!) the new hotness Codex:Inquisition gets dropped and some new models/weapon options to purge the heretics. In the meantime paint you up one of those sexy Inquisitor Greyfax models and maybe Saint Celestine if you got time.

 Purifier wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
GW told us nothing would be invalidated

Misinformation that keeps getting repeated over and over and it has to stop. What they said was

Yes. Every Warhammer 40,000 miniature we sell today will be usable in the new edition of Warhammer 40,000

They did not promise you that your own custom builds would be viable, nor did they promise that anyone with a Squat army was gonna get full rules. They promised that nothing they are currently selling would be invalidated.

Actually, they specifically said no ones army would be invalidated, and that if you can build it in 7th you can build it in 8th.

There's no misinformation here, just gw screwing up.

As others have pointed out, several Inquisitor models have been invalidated, as have several sisters of battle models. It wouldn't have been hard for them to make sure they could still be used as intended. The examples given in this thread of the inquisitor with a power sword and combi weapon show that.

It's nonsense to say, just proxy it for a ccw. It's CLEARLY a power sword.

Also, it's more interesting gameplaywise as a power sword anyway.

 General Kroll wrote:


Actually, they specifically said no ones army would be invalidated

Yes.

 General Kroll wrote:

and that if you can build it in 7th you can build it in 8th.

No. You made that part up, or extrapolated it by faulty assumptions.

What they said was:

Is my army still valid?
Yes, it certainly is! You’ll still be able to use your army in the new edition of Warhammer 40,000. All current armies will be supported with new rules.

Which isn't the same as "every list you build is going to be valid." It means "nothing is gonna get squatted. A very real fear that people had. That quote was then followed up by the one about specific models, further clarifying the stance.

Wait I'm confused what in production model did GW make invalidated from the Inquisition range when 8th was released?

GodDamUser wrote:
Wait I'm confused what in production model did GW make invalidated from the Inquisition range when 8th was released?

There is one REALLY old inquisitor that has a sword, that if it is a power sword, he can't have with the combi rifle he is also holding in 8th. That's it. One really old model with a ridiculously small flaw. Unforgivable oversight, I know.

Could of sworn some one said there was something wrong in the sisters book too. but i dont really focus on sisters.

 Desubot wrote:
Could of sworn some one said there was something wrong in the sisters book too. but i dont really focus on sisters.

They were mentioning a Canoness, but there is only one Canoness being sold, and it's a multiple weapon option kit, so I guess they just meant one of the weapons in the kit can't be used.

Loading...


^^

Awesome bug there..


But as I was saying..

Old mini has a 'Force Sword' which is a legal waregear option.. as well as a combi-weapon
the issue being he can only have one or the other, as it replaces the Chainsword

But looking at the size of the combi weapon, it could easily be used as an inferno pistol. and then there is no issue

 General Kroll wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
GW told us nothing would be invalidated

Misinformation that keeps getting repeated over and over and it has to stop. What they said was

Yes. Every Warhammer 40,000 miniature we sell today will be usable in the new edition of Warhammer 40,000

They did not promise you that your own custom builds would be viable, nor did they promise that anyone with a Squat army was gonna get full rules. They promised that nothing they are currently selling would be invalidated.

Actually, they specifically said no ones army would be invalidated, and that if you can build it in 7th you can build it in 8th.

There's no misinformation here, just gw screwing up.

As others have pointed out, several Inquisitor models have been invalidated, as have several sisters of battle models. It wouldn't have been hard for them to make sure they could still be used as intended. The examples given in this thread of the inquisitor with a power sword and combi weapon show that.

It's nonsense to say, just proxy it for a ccw. It's CLEARLY a power sword.

Which of my models has become invalidated?

I'm fairly certain that, what with the incredibly limited selection of wargear we had available in the first place, and the equally-limited selection of models, there's nothing we can't use.

Well, apart from Jump-Pack Canonesses, but those we couldn't use last edition either, and are our own conversions anyway. I was actually really hoping that, since Genevieve and Eleanor were Canonesses with Jump Packs before becoming Celestine's Geminae Superia, our Canonesses would regain the ability to have Jump Packs, but oh well.

 Purifier wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
Wait I'm confused what in production model did GW make invalidated from the Inquisition range when 8th was released?

There is one REALLY old inquisitor that has a sword, that if it is a power sword, he can't have with the combi rifle he is also holding in 8th. That's it. One really old model with a ridiculously small flaw. Unforgivable oversight, I know.

That, and one the now claim has inferno pistol actually has an incenerator. But most of the Inquisitors sold over the years have been invalidated by these new rules, as they either have a power armour or illegal weapon combinations. I really don't think that's cool. Missionaries still have access to plasma gun, because Jes sculpted one with such a weapon decades ago. That's how these things should be handled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Which of my models has become invalidated?

I'm fairly certain that, what with the incredibly limited selection of wargear we had available in the first place, and the equally-limited selection of models, there's nothing we can't use.

You'd think, but they still managed to screw the SoB over.

This Superior (being currently sold) has illegal weapons combination. Just like Inquisitors, SoB Superiors can't have a melee weapon and non-pistol shooting weapon. I'm pretty sure there were some OOP Sister models which were affected by this as well.

 Crimson wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
Wait I'm confused what in production model did GW make invalidated from the Inquisition range when 8th was released?

There is one REALLY old inquisitor that has a sword, that if it is a power sword, he can't have with the combi rifle he is also holding in 8th. That's it. One really old model with a ridiculously small flaw. Unforgivable oversight, I know.

That, and one the now claim has inferno pistol actually has an incenerator. But most of the Inquisitors sold over the years have been invalidated by these new rules, as they either have a power armour or illegal weapon combinations. I really don't think that's cool. Missionaries still have access to plasma gun, because Jes sculpted one with such a weapon decades ago. That's how these things should be handled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Which of my models has become invalidated?

I'm fairly certain that, what with the incredibly limited selection of wargear we had available in the first place, and the equally-limited selection of models, there's nothing we can't use.

You'd think, but they still managed to screw the SoB over.

This Superior (being currently sold) has illegal weapons combination. Just like Inquisitors, SoB Superiors can't have a melee weapon and non-pistol shooting weapon. I'm pretty sure there were some OOP Sister models which were affected by this as well.

Hmm... Fascinating. I didn't notice that. I don't think I ever ran Superiors with Plasma Pistol/Chainsword or with Boltgun/Power Sword, though.

 Crimson wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
Wait I'm confused what in production model did GW make invalidated from the Inquisition range when 8th was released?

There is one REALLY old inquisitor that has a sword, that if it is a power sword, he can't have with the combi rifle he is also holding in 8th. That's it. One really old model with a ridiculously small flaw. Unforgivable oversight, I know.

That, and one the now claim has inferno pistol actually has an incenerator. But most of the Inquisitors sold over the years have been invalidated by these new rules, as they either have a power armour or illegal weapon combinations. I really don't think that's cool. Missionaries still have access to plasma gun, because Jes sculpted one with such a weapon decades ago. That's how these things should be handled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Which of my models has become invalidated?

I'm fairly certain that, what with the incredibly limited selection of wargear we had available in the first place, and the equally-limited selection of models, there's nothing we can't use.

You'd think, but they still managed to screw the SoB over.

This Superior (being currently sold) has illegal weapons combination. Just like Inquisitors, SoB Superiors can't have a melee weapon and non-pistol shooting weapon. I'm pretty sure there were some OOP Sister models which were affected by this as well.

CSM Aspiring Champions are in the same boat, which is funny given the Aspiring Chapion clampack us armed with a Poweraxe & Combi-Melta.

At this point I'm fairly sure they overlooked the wording used, because the error seems pretty consistent amongst many of the indices - with the exception of Loyalist Marine Sergeants which aren't restricted in the same manner.