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.

OR:

GW Will release a brand new faction (Sisters) with a weapon combination that isn't even sanctioned in the book, requiring a day 1 (And still waiting) FAQ.

Waiting for GW to fix their mistakes is a terrible game. Just houserule it.

 Charistoph wrote:

versus Chaos Terminator's:
- 1 chain axe
- 1 chainfist
- 1 power sword
- 1 power axe
- 1 power maul
- 2 power fists
- 2 lightning claws
- 1 heavy flamer
- 1 reaper autocannon
- 5 combi-weapons

Plus a bunch of cool spikes.

Honest question: Why does any of this matter when Blue Stuff is a thing? I don't know how much money i've saved over the last year, but considering i was buying entire kits for a single weapon i probably put someones kid through college.

A question related to the topic: is using the Flesh Hound on the Korghos Khul model as a flamer fair use? I want to use the model as a WE Chaos Lord, and flamers and Gore Hounds' fire breath have the exact same stats and abilities.

Usually I don't even need blue stuff, just ask a friend or buy some bits on the internet.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
A question related to the topic: is using the Flesh Hound on the Korghos Khul model as a flamer fair use? I want to use the model as a WE Chaos Lord, and flamers and Gore Hounds' fire breath have the exact same stats and abilities.

That'd be pretty kick-ass. The only problem would be fitting it on the base and not inadvertently increasing the size of your auras.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
A question related to the topic: is using the Flesh Hound on the Korghos Khul model as a flamer fair use? I want to use the model as a WE Chaos Lord, and flamers and Gore Hounds' fire breath have the exact same stats and abilities.

It would depend on your opponent's consent, but that's the kind of thing I'd consider reasonable, since as long as you're not using a ton of other counts-as in the same force, it's pretty easy to remember and keep track of, and doesn't break the sense of immersion.

MiguelFelstone wrote:
Honest question: Why does any of this matter when Blue Stuff is a thing? I don't know how much money i've saved over the last year, but considering i was buying entire kits for a single weapon i probably put someones kid through college.

Honestly, friend of mine got a 3d printer several months ago, files are out there for almost every bit you can think of for this game. GW can pound sand on this stuff ultimately, it's just a dumb, transparent money grab on their part, and they're well aware of it.

question related to the topic: is using the Flesh Hound on the Korghos Khul model as a flamer fair use? I want to use the model as a WE Chaos Lord, and flamers and Gore Hounds' fire breath have the exact same stats and abilities.

Sculpt a few flames on the ground by his head.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:
Honest question: Why does any of this matter when Blue Stuff is a thing? I don't know how much money i've saved over the last year, but considering i was buying entire kits for a single weapon i probably put someones kid through college.

Honestly, friend of mine got a 3d printer several months ago, files are out there for almost every bit you can think of for this game. GW can pound sand on this stuff ultimately, it's just a dumb, transparent money grab on their part, and they're well aware of it.

It's just good (if cold) business. Two sprues means fewer molds, less time spinning product, smaller packages, less weight, etc.

Shapeways has some stellar shops, but it does get a little pricey. There otherwise seems to be few kits that suffer in the way Chaos Terminators do though (at the cost of blanderizing, I suppose).

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
OR:

GW Will release a brand new faction (Sisters) with a weapon combination that isn't even sanctioned in the book, requiring a day 1 (And still waiting) FAQ.

Waiting for GW to fix their mistakes is a terrible game. Just houserule it.

Which weapon combo are you referring to?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
They're charging you for a box you can't even build the base unit with, so they shouldn't be charging anything for it at all!

CSM Players to GW: We can't construct all the various weapon options, including the default, from the CSM Terminator Kit.

GW to CSM Players: Noted. We will update the rules in the next version of the Codex to only allow you to arm the unit based on the option quantities actually in the kit.

This is exactly the only thing this whining will accomplish.

That's why you vote with your wallet and send well worded emails to them. Instead we got people defending the fething kit here.

The cannoness in the box has an illegal loadout.

Actually, I was wrong. I just checked with GW store rep, and he confirmed the Cannoness can take a power sword, a Plasma Pistol, and a rod of office. So according to the GW Rep, it's legal and clear in the rules, which he showed me. Just got back from the store where I picked up the new white dwarf.

So I was wrong.

Really? I don't see that option in my Codex.

"This model may replace their chainsword with a weapon from the Melee weapions list" - Powersword

This model may replace it's bolt pistol OR it's chainsword with a weapon from the pistols list" - Plasma Pistol

Null rod is just a replacement for the chainsword.

So perhaps I am missing the mistake? You can take a power sword and a plasma pistol, or a nullrod and a plasma pistol, but you seem to think to box indicates you can take all three?

There are mulitple options, but you get a rod and a gun, or a sword and a gun, or a torch and a gun.

The limited edition Canoness clearly has a power sword, plasma pistol and a rod of office or a nullrod. This is not a combination the rules allow you to have.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
"This model may replace their chainsword with a weapon from the Melee weapions list" - Powersword

This model may replace it's bolt pistol OR it's chainsword with a weapon from the pistols list" - Plasma Pistol

Null rod is just a replacement for the chainsword.

So perhaps I am missing the mistake? You can take a power sword and a plasma pistol, or a nullrod and a plasma pistol, but you seem to think to box indicates you can take all three?

There are mulitple options, but you get a rod and a gun, or a sword and a gun, or a torch and a gun.

According to the current wording, Null Rod and Holy Brazier are chosen *in addition to* the chainsword, and cannot exist alongside any melee weapon *except* the chainsword. The monopose model from the Sororitas boxset is different from the one you're showing, and is sculpted with her holding a power sword in one hand and a rod in the other (this is presumably the rod of office, not the null rod). And a plasma pistol on her hip.

It's an error most likely caused by the fact that the models are made and then rules fitted to them. The rules were then designed based off the retail release models and the limited edition version was forgotten about during the rules balancing phase when they were making the various options she could take.

It might have been a latter change to the book when the team working on things had forgotten that there was goin to be a separate limited edition of the model being released at an earlier point.

 Overread wrote:
It's an error most likely caused by the fact that the models are made and then rules fitted to them. The rules were then designed based off the retail release models and the limited edition version was forgotten about during the rules balancing phase when they were making the various options she could take.

It might have been a latter change to the book when the team working on things had forgotten that there was goin to be a separate limited edition of the model being released at an earlier point.

Well yes, this is likely. I just want them to FAQ it fast as I want to assemble my model.

 Overread wrote:
It's an error most likely caused by the fact that the models are made and then rules fitted to them. The rules were then designed based off the retail release models and the limited edition version was forgotten about during the rules balancing phase when they were making the various options she could take.

It might have been a latter change to the book when the team working on things had forgotten that there was goin to be a separate limited edition of the model being released at an earlier point.

Which really is a dumb way to go about things.

 Overread wrote:
It's an error most likely caused by the fact that the models are made and then rules fitted to them. The rules were then designed based off the retail release models and the limited edition version was forgotten about during the rules balancing phase when they were making the various options she could take.

It might have been a latter change to the book when the team working on things had forgotten that there was goin to be a separate limited edition of the model being released at an earlier point.

My theory is that it was because the box set was sort of rushed out, because the Sororitas range was taking longer to finish than they initially expected, and they wanted to keep their promise of "Plastic sisters in 2019!", and definitely wanted to have something out in time for the Christmas sales boom. So they had to make a rushed version of the codex that didn't get as much editing and finalizing as they would have liked. You can even SEE the parts in the limited edition codex where they're clearly intending to place different art / photos later on (there's even a few spots that are just big empty spaces).

Thus: mistakes. They rushed in a Canoness build for the limited edition model, but forgot she had a plasma pistol rather than a boltgun.

So, I don't believe the "limited edition" cannoness was setup before or after the new rules were released? Wasn't she prior to the new release? Also it's clearly a different model, so perhaps special character?

I didn't get the box set, was she part of it or something?


***Just looked it up!

She was a free give-away model at a major GW event, not part of the full release. Also, she was never stated to be part of the full release. She was just a pretty bit of loot tossed to attendees of NOVA open apparently.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So, I don't believe the "limited edition" cannoness was setup before or after the new rules were released? Wasn't she prior to the new release? Also it's clearly a different model, so perhaps special character?

I didn't get the box set, was she part of it or something?

Yeah. Everything in the box set is a unique monopose, with only one option for the build. That's why it sold for pretty cheap relative to the contents.

It's got a 10 Battle Sisters (w/ storm bolter and flamer), 5 Seraphim, 4 Repentia, 3 Arco-Flaggelants, a Penitent Engine, a Repentia superior, and the problematic Canoness.

Edit to respond to your edit:

She was given to NOVA attendees *and* included in the boxset. I have the boxset. I haven't built her yet, but she's definitely in there.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

She was a free give-away model at a major GW event, not part of the full release. Also, she was never stated to be part of the full release. She was just a pretty bit of loot tossed to attendees of NOVA open apparently.

No, she was also included in the boxed set. I am literally holding the sprue in my hand right now.

Ok, then where does the photo come from? Because I can only find that in an article about NOVA open, nothing about the box set shows her with the dual rod/sword combo? Or is it all three? I can't find a specific google pic of the rules, but when I was just looking at the codex it looked clear.

Maybe it's sorta like the Lord Commissar tossed into the Tempestus box? The one you can't include in the army you just bought, because it would invalidate the army? Maybe it was just a free model that has no board value?

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, then where does the photo come from? Because I can only find that in an article about NOVA open, nothing about the box set shows her with the dual rod/sword combo? Or is it all three? I can't find a specific google pic of the rules, but when I was just looking at the codex it looked clear.

Maybe it's sorta like the Lord Commissar tossed into the Tempestus box? The one you can't include in the army you just bought, because it would invalidate the army? Maybe it was just a free model that has no board value?

The Lord Commissar is a perfectly legal model to use. The Canoness, under the present rules, can't be used at all. I mean, come on, it's pretty obvious they intended her to be the Warlord for the small army in the boxset, but made a mistake when writing the canoness data sheet.

It's legal now since the FAQ, but back in the day it would violate the Army doctrine of Tempestus, and force you to lose their strat and their special rule. Anything without the keyword Tempestus was considered to violate the rule, hence would never be taken.

Now that got changed. I see your point, but it seems this was just a bit of shiney tossed into a limited edition box set. Not part of the "official table top army".

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, then where does the photo come from? Because I can only find that in an article about NOVA open, nothing about the box set shows her with the dual rod/sword combo? Or is it all three? I can't find a specific google pic of the rules, but when I was just looking at the codex it looked clear.

She comes in the box and the rules in the codex clearly do not allow that gear combo. I really don't understand what about this is so hard to understand.

Maybe it's sorta like the Lord Commissar tossed into the Tempestus box? The one you can't include in the army you just bought, because it would invalidate the army? Maybe it was just a free model that has no board value?

The Lord Commissar doesn't invalidate the army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's legal now since the FAQ, but back in the day it would violate the Army doctrine of Tempestus, and force you to lose their strat and their special rule. Anything without the keyword Tempestus was considered to violate the rule, hence would never be taken.

Now that got changed. I see your point, but it seems this was just a bit of shiney tossed into a limited edition box set. Not part of the "official table top army".

The rule has not changed and the Commissar has never prevented the Scions from benefiting of their doctrine.

 Crimson wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, then where does the photo come from? Because I can only find that in an article about NOVA open, nothing about the box set shows her with the dual rod/sword combo? Or is it all three? I can't find a specific google pic of the rules, but when I was just looking at the codex it looked clear.

She comes in the box and the rules in the codex clearly do not allow that gear combo. I really don't understand what about this is so hard to understand.

Maybe it's sorta like the Lord Commissar tossed into the Tempestus box? The one you can't include in the army you just bought, because it would invalidate the army? Maybe it was just a free model that has no board value?

The Lord Commissar doesn't invalidate the army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's legal now since the FAQ, but back in the day it would violate the Army doctrine of Tempestus, and force you to lose their strat and their special rule. Anything without the keyword Tempestus was considered to violate the rule, hence would never be taken.

Now that got changed. I see your point, but it seems this was just a bit of shiney tossed into a limited edition box set. Not part of the "official table top army".

The rule has not changed and the Commissar has never prevented the Scions from benefiting of their doctrine.

If you included a Commissar in the same detachment, you lose their Storm Trooper doctrine, in the past, ala prior to Officio Perfectus et al being FAQ'd into magically fitting into everything without rocking the boat. Back when Scions first dropped, it was very confusing why GW would include a unit in a box set that basically made storm troopers weaker, ala broke the doctrinal rule.

Now that has changed. I am really sorry you are so upset about the fact that your model has no rules. But given the fact that you are a big defender of beer and pretzels 40k, I'm sure you can houserule your Cannonness until the FAQ comes out. Or 9th drops and you have 3 more years before new rules are published. It's a toss up. I'd say just house rule it.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:


If you included a Commissar in the same detachment, you lose their Storm Trooper doctrine, in the past, ala prior to Officio Perfectus et al being FAQ'd into magically fitting into everything without rocking the boat. Back when Scions first dropped, it was very confusing why GW would include a unit in a box set that basically made storm troopers weaker, ala broke the doctrinal rule.

No, because Commissars have 'Advisors and Auxialia' rule in the codex.

Now that has changed.

Show me this rule change.

I am really sorry you are so upset about the fact that your model has no rules. But given the fact that you are a big defender of beer and pretzels 40k, I'm sure you can houserule your Cannonness until the FAQ comes out. Or 9th drops and you have 3 more years before new rules are published. It's a toss up. I'd say just house rule it.

It is not a huge deal, but it is mildly annoying that did not release the FAQ two weeks after the codex release as is normal.

 Crimson wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:


If you included a Commissar in the same detachment, you lose their Storm Trooper doctrine, in the past, ala prior to Officio Perfectus et al being FAQ'd into magically fitting into everything without rocking the boat. Back when Scions first dropped, it was very confusing why GW would include a unit in a box set that basically made storm troopers weaker, ala broke the doctrinal rule.

No, because Commissars have 'Advisors and Auxialia' rule in the codex.

Now that has changed.

Show me this rule change.

I am really sorry you are so upset about the fact that your model has no rules. But given the fact that you are a big defender of beer and pretzels 40k, I'm sure you can houserule your Cannonness until the FAQ comes out. Or 9th drops and you have 3 more years before new rules are published. It's a toss up. I'd say just house rule it.

It is not a huge deal, but it is mildly annoying that did not release the FAQ two weeks after the codex release as is normal.

Is 2 weeks the norm? As in the free faqs we get on the community site? I guess you could also argue they haven't "fully" released Sisters yet, so they are holding fire on the FAQs until after the holidays.

As to the rule change, I am not diving through 145 books to find the one where it changed from "Commissars disrupt the Tempestus Scion Reg Doctrine" into "Commissars, Primaris Psychers, Astropaths, et al no longer violate Regimental Doctrine rules." But if I had to guess, it would have been around when they dropped the "custom Regiments rule".

I know this isn't GW, but they are the official team that runs the ITC events, and they are members of the play testing group.



That being said I don't want to pull us any further off topic than I already have.