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.

 Blndmage wrote:
True, they're Agents of the Imperium.

Precisely. PenitentJake said "inquisition patrol" not "AGENTS OF THE IMPERIUM patrol", which this quarter-assed update does not allow.

Or, as you so nicely put it, try reading the rules being discussed.

It’d be an Inquisition Patrol by the way keywords and Agents work.

 JNAProductions wrote:
It’d be an Inquisition Patrol by the way keywords and Agents work.

Only in the very strictest RAW sense, a rule that has no actual in-game effect, and only if you assume that when Agents of the Imperium says that you may include the unit without it taking up any slots it is not mandatory that it not take up any slots. But in a lore sense, which I know PenitentJake cares very much about, it is not a true inquisition patrol because it is a mixed-faction force with non-inquisition units included to fill a mandatory slot, just like you had to do before this quarter-assed update.

OMG! You can't build an Agents of the Imperium Patrol because the rules are so up.

HQ: The compulsory HQ choice cannot be a Cartographica Rogue Trader due to the Master and Commander ability. Therefore it must be an Inquisitor or an Officio Assassinorum unit.

Troop: The compulsory Troop cannot be Imperial Navy Breachers and Voidsmen-At-Arms, the only Agents of the Imperium Troops choices. Both units have the Shipborne Troops ability that prevent them from being a compulsory Troops choice in a detachment unless it is an Navis Imperialis detachment, which it can't be because see HQ above.

 alextroy wrote:
OMG! You can't build an Agents of the Imperium Patrol because the rules are so up.

HQ: The compulsory HQ choice cannot be a Cartographica Rogue Trader due to the Master and Commander ability. Therefore it must be an Inquisitor or an Officio Assassinorum unit.

Troop: The compulsory Troop cannot be Imperial Navy Breachers and Voidsmen-At-Arms, the only Agents of the Imperium Troops choices. Both units have the Shipborne Troops ability that prevent them from being a compulsory Troops choice in a detachment unless it is an Navis Imperialis detachment, which it can't be because see HQ above.

Yep. The only way to do it is to assume that the Agents of the Imperium rule means that you can take the unit without filling a slot but are not required to. If that's the case you can take an assassin or inquisitor using the Agents of the Imperium rule to fill the mandatory HQ slot without violating faction purity rules, then fill your remaining slots with NAVIS IMPERIALIS units. Technically all AGENTS OF THE IMPERIUM units, not meaningfully different from adding an inquisitor to a patrol detachment with a captain and some tactical marines.

Aelyn wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

There is no evidence available that the material is obsolete.

Other than the fact that the rules are no longer compatible (just like an old codex) with the current game, have not been updated in years, and have been explicitly excluded from being valid rules. Sorry, but citing the fact that GW hasn't technically deleted an obsolete page yet is RAW nitpicking.

The point is there is nothing to say that the page is obsolete! It's not been deleted and it's still in use, as evidenced by the fact that it's been updated within the past 12 months - more recently than some of the current FAQs.

Here, let me give a specific example to show you what I mean. I'll avoid the CSM Legends as apparently you don't count that PDF as relevant (I don't quite see why), so let's use one published in 2019 - let's go with the Space Wolves because that's near the top of the page:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/0c0ed4ed.pdf

Let's take a specific datasheet, even. I scrolled to the middle of the document to pick one relatively at random, and landed on the "Wolf Guard Battle Leader on Bike".

In what way is that datasheet not compatible with the current rules?

*snip to avoid wall of text*

No, it's fair to say that legends are not valid for matched play. Given your example of the Wolf Guard Battle Leader, we look at the abilities section and see the following line: "And They Shall Know No Fear (see Codex: Space Wolves)". Codex: Space Wolves is no longer a valid document - infact there is no current Codex: Space Wolves. The datasheet is now nonsense because the rules it references have moved on and the datasheet hasn't been updated to remain compatible. I think it would be more challenging to find a datasheet that doesn't have these types of compatibility issues.

JakeSiren wrote:
I think it would be more challenging to find a datasheet that doesn't have these types of compatibility issues.

There's a few. Some of them are so simple (usually to the point of uselessness) that there's nothing to break. For example, the Elysian Sniper Squad is just a unit of three models with sniper rifles, lasguns, and frag grenades. No special rules, no references to the codex, just a very basic stat line. It doesn't have the REGIMENTAL keyword so it doesn't get any faction bonuses, it doesn't have PLATOON so it can't receive orders, and you'd never want to take it from a list optimization point of view. But it's technically a functional unit that can be put into the game exactly as written and not break anything.

The general point stands though, that most of them are non-functional rules. And I'd even add that they're non-functional outside of matched play. In Crusade or open play you still have to house rule your own version of the game if you want to use them, it's just more likely outside of matched play that "what is legal" is something the players are willing to ignore in favor of making up their own rules.

Reckon these new agents datasheets will get faq'd if this is the intention and you find you can't do it legally(from the article):

'The document also moves AGENTS OF THE IMPERIUM to the Faction keyword box – for those looking to field an entire Detachment of special agents. If you want to build a Boarding Patrol of Inquisitorial agents or Navy privateers, you can do that too – free rules are available in the Boarding Actions Mustering Dataslate.'

Edited: woops, nope i'm wrong, thats for Boarding actions only.

Edited again rules hard: you can make an arc of omens Agents of the Imperium detachment right? and use all those datasheets. Or make an Agents of the Imperium Patrol detachment with the Battle Brothers rules. So what's the problem? Is it just 'cos it's not called an Inquisition detachment?

Aecus Decimus wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
I think it would be more challenging to find a datasheet that doesn't have these types of compatibility issues.

There's a few. Some of them are so simple (usually to the point of uselessness) that there's nothing to break. For example, the Elysian Sniper Squad is just a unit of three models with sniper rifles, lasguns, and frag grenades. No special rules, no references to the codex, just a very basic stat line. It doesn't have the REGIMENTAL keyword so it doesn't get any faction bonuses, it doesn't have PLATOON so it can't receive orders, and you'd never want to take it from a list optimization point of view. But it's technically a functional unit that can be put into the game exactly as written and not break anything.

The general point stands though, that most of them are non-functional rules. And I'd even add that they're non-functional outside of matched play. In Crusade or open play you still have to house rule your own version of the game if you want to use them, it's just more likely outside of matched play that "what is legal" is something the players are willing to ignore in favor of making up their own rules.

Open Play doesn't need detachments to work. Stratagems, CPs, and detachments themselves are actually in the "Advanced Rules" section of the corebook.

You can run any combination of them without worry, as there are no compulsory slots.

My word what a terrible update. Yes you can use your models without a rules lawyer complaining. No you will not have much luck with them. Poor old assassins. Have all their strats gone then?

Yeah, wow. I guess I wanted Inquisition to work so much that I didn't see Shipborne wrecking IA Detachments, but it does.

What a mess.

Seems like in some ways getting updated was actively worse for Inquisition.

Ignoring a line about an invalid supplement was an easier conversation for Inquisition players than trying to make and employ armies with these rules.

 Blndmage wrote:
Open Play doesn't need detachments to work. Stratagems, CPs, and detachments themselves are actually in the "Advanced Rules" section of the corebook.

You can run any combination of them without worry, as there are no compulsory slots.

I'm not sure what your Open Play™ evangelizing has to do with anything here?

PenitentJake specifically mentioned an inquisition patrol detachment and how the new update supposedly now allows one (it doesn't) so "you don't have to use detachments" isn't relevant.

The post of mine you quoted is talking about rule function issues that have nothing to do with detachments. How does using Open Play and ignoring stratagems/detachments/etc resolve the problem that a Salamander tank's smoke launcher rule says "see Codex: Astra Militarum page XX", a reference to a book which is no longer valid and a rule which no longer exists? How does it resolve the problem that Tau units still have the old markerlight rules with a weapon profile and not the version in the current codex?

I wonder if the people defending GW here think GW will see it and give them some free models.

Is it just the shipbourne rule that's a problem? or am I not seeing something else?

Well, sort of. If you are running Arks of Omen and you want to run an Agent of the Imperium, it has to be in the Arks detachment or in an Aux Support detachment. The Battle Brothers rule mentions an Agents of the Imperium patrol detachment, but there is no legal way to build one under the provided rules due to shipbourne.

At least that's how I understand it.

JakeSiren wrote:
Well, sort of. If you are running Arks of Omen and you want to run an Agent of the Imperium, it has to be in the Arks detachment or in an Aux Support detachment. The Battle Brothers rule mentions an Agents of the Imperium patrol detachment, but there is no legal way to build one under the provided rules due to shipbourne.

At least that's how I understand it.

I agree with you, This seems like a bug that might be fixed with the release of the Arbites units. I heard they will be core units and this would address this issue directly.

 PaddyMick wrote:
Is it just the shipbourne rule that's a problem? or am I not seeing something else?

Partly. There are two separate issues here:

It seems to be intended to be possible to build an all NAVIS IMPERIALIS (rogue traders and navy crew) detachment but GW screwed up the execution in this quarter-assed update. "Shipborne Personnel" works fine in concept, only allowing the units to be mandatory troops in a pure NAVIS IMPERIALIS detachment, the issue is that you can't build a legal NAVIS IMPERIALIS detachment because the rogue trader has a rule which says it can't be used for a compulsory slot. What GW needed to do was change the rogue trader rule to say "except in a NAVIS IMPERIALIS detachment", allowing you to use all three units to fill mandatory slots as long as you take a pure detachment of them.

There's a separate issue that there are no INQUISITION troops units, which makes it impossible to build a pure inquisition detachment. You'll always have to take some non-inquisition unit(s) and that sucks for thematic reasons. What GW needed to do was move acolytes to troops, or even give them a rule that makes them troops in a pure INQUISITION detachment if they're concerned about non-inquisition forces taking them as cheap obsec fodder.

The issue of being unable to build an AGENTS OF THE IMPERIUM detachment is a non-issue. Lore-wise those units are not a single coherent force and there's no reason to take a mixed detachment of them. Inquisition and rogue trader forces need to be separate options, not dumped into a single "anything we don't bother to make a real codex for" pseudo-faction.

Thanks Aecus, think I get it now. Hopefully it gets FAQ'd.

Personally i'd like to build a Boarding Actions patrol with an Inquisitor, a handful of space marines, and some regular human dudes of some stripe, but i don't know if that will be possible.

 JNAProductions wrote:
It’d be an Inquisition Patrol by the way keywords and Agents work.

It can be either/or. If you ignore the NAVIS faction and fill with Inquisitors, Assassins, and Inquisition Elites in an AOO Det, its Inquisition. If you ignore the INQUISITION faction and fill with NAVIS it becomes a NAVIS det.

Breton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It’d be an Inquisition Patrol by the way keywords and Agents work.

It can be either/or. If you ignore the NAVIS faction and fill with Inquisitors, Assassins, and Inquisition Elites in an AOO Det, its Inquisition. If you ignore the INQUISITION faction and fill with NAVIS it becomes a NAVIS det.

How do you make it a Navis detachment when the rules for the HQ state that they can't be used to fill the compulsory slots?
Who's your Navis HQ?

ccs wrote:

Breton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It’d be an Inquisition Patrol by the way keywords and Agents work.

It can be either/or. If you ignore the NAVIS faction and fill with Inquisitors, Assassins, and Inquisition Elites in an AOO Det, its Inquisition. If you ignore the INQUISITION faction and fill with NAVIS it becomes a NAVIS det.

How do you make it a Navis detachment when the rules for the HQ state that they can't be used to fill the compulsory slots?
Who's your Navis HQ?

The Cartographer in the Non-Compulsory slot.

You CAN take one Inquisitor/Assassin without it taking a slot. Sounds like you CAN take one in a slot too - failing that you can take one of each, which still leaves a non-compulsory slot. I'm not even sure you need a NAVIS HQ in a NAVIS Det - but you'd most likely want one anyway. If you take an Assassin and an Inquisitor in a Space Marine Det, it's still a Space Marine Det.

I do think some polite feedback regarding the issues with this PDF to their 40k FAQ mailbox might be worthwhile - it can't hurt, at the very least.

Don't know if it'd bring Warlord Traits, Relics or Stratagems back - though you could ask - but they might fix the bits that just don't seem to work at all right now.

 Dysartes wrote:
I do think some polite feedback regarding the issues with this PDF to their 40k FAQ mailbox might be worthwhile - it can't hurt, at the very least.

Don't know if it'd bring Warlord Traits, Relics or Stratagems back - though you could ask - but they might fix the bits that just don't seem to work at all right now.

Yep, just did so. Pointed out the conflict with the Navis Imperialis rules, as well as a small missive on the absolute state of the Agents/Inqusition as a faction. The absolute decay they're in, and encouraging them to at least stop and play a couple test games with them and see how poorly they preform.

Breton wrote:

ccs wrote:

Breton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It’d be an Inquisition Patrol by the way keywords and Agents work.

It can be either/or. If you ignore the NAVIS faction and fill with Inquisitors, Assassins, and Inquisition Elites in an AOO Det, its Inquisition. If you ignore the INQUISITION faction and fill with NAVIS it becomes a NAVIS det.

How do you make it a Navis detachment when the rules for the HQ state that they can't be used to fill the compulsory slots?
Who's your Navis HQ?

The Cartographer in the Non-Compulsory slot.

You CAN take one Inquisitor/Assassin without it taking a slot. Sounds like you CAN take one in a slot too - failing that you can take one of each, which still leaves a non-compulsory slot. I'm not even sure you need a NAVIS HQ in a NAVIS Det - but you'd most likely want one anyway. If you take an Assassin and an Inquisitor in a Space Marine Det, it's still a Space Marine Det.

If the Inquistor it taken as the Compulsory HQ Agent of the Imperium doesn’t allow you to ignore him when checking detachment faction. Thus you are not a Navis detachment and can’t fill compulsory Troops slots.

Like others have said, the rules in the PDF are a mess.

 alextroy wrote:
If the Inquistor it taken as the Compulsory HQ Agent of the Imperium doesn’t allow you to ignore him when checking detachment faction. Thus you are not a Navis detachment and can’t fill compulsory Troops slots.

Like others have said, the rules in the PDF are a mess.

AGENT OF THE IMPERIUM
If your army is Battle-forged, you can include one Agent of
the Imperium unit in each Imperium (excluding Fallen units)
Patrol, Boarding Patrol, Battalion, Brigade and Arks of Omen
Detachment in your army without those units taking up
Battlefield Role slots in those Detachments.

Part I - Can be taken without a slot

The inclusion of an Agent of the Imperium unit does not prevent other units
from their Detachment benefiting from Detachment abilities
(e.g. Chapter Tactics), and it does not prevent other units from
your army benefiting from abilities that require every model
in your army to have that ability (e.g. Combat Doctrines).
An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol, Boarding
Patrol, Battalion, Brigade or Arks of Omen Detachment in this
manner is ignored for any rules that state all units from that
Detachment must have at least one Faction keyword in common
(e.g. in a matched play game), and when determining your
Army Faction.

Part II - Including an Agent of the Imperium does not need shared keywords - so you could take one with Aeldari or Nids etc. strangely - and they don't change the faction/Det type. Assassin and Inquisitor as the only HQ in an otherwise Space Marine border patrol is still a Space Marine Border Patrol Inquisitor Agents (i.e. 3 Acolytes and Inquisitor/Assassin) can be an Inquisition Det, or if it has all something else can be an all something else Det.

An Agent of the Imperium unit can never be included in a
Brood Brothers Detachment

AGENT OF THE IMPERIUM
If your army is Battle-forged, you can include one Agent of
the Imperium unit in each Imperium (excluding Fallen units)
Patrol, Boarding Patrol, Battalion, Brigade and Arks of Omen
Detachment in your army without those units taking up
Battlefield Role slots in those Detachments.

Part I - Can be taken without a slot

The inclusion of an Agent of the Imperium unit does not prevent other units from their Detachment benefiting from Detachment abilities
(e.g. Chapter Tactics), and it does not prevent other units from
your army benefiting from abilities that require every model
in your army to have that ability (e.g. Combat Doctrines).

Part 2 - doesn’t prevent other units in detachment from from gaining detachment abilities or army abilities.

An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol, Boarding Patrol, Battalion, Brigade or Arks of Omen Detachment in this manner is ignored for any rules that state all units from that Detachment must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. in a matched play game), and when determining your Army Faction.

Part 3 - this only applies when you take an Agent of the Imperium unit in an applicable Imperium detachment without taking a Battlefield Role slot. Thus including one in an Agents of the Imperium slot this way still requires inclusion of another HQ unit to fill the compulsory HQ slot for the detachment to be an Navis detachment. As already noted, there is no Navis HQ to take that slot.

 alextroy wrote:

An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol, Boarding Patrol, Battalion, Brigade or Arks of Omen Detachment in this manner is ignored for any rules that state all units from that Detachment must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. in a matched play game), and when determining your Army Faction.

Part 3 - this only applies when you take an Agent of the Imperium unit in an applicable Imperium detachment without taking a Battlefield Role slot. Thus including one in an Agents of the Imperium slot this way still requires inclusion of another HQ unit to fill the compulsory HQ slot for the detachment to be an Navis detachment. As already noted, there is no Navis HQ to take that slot.

Yep, I pointed that out - you'd have to include an Inquisitor/Assassin or both - but I can kind of get behind the fluff on that one - the Inquisitor has seconded/drafted the ship crew etc.

An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol, Boarding Patrol, Battalion, Brigade or Arks of Omen Detachment in this manner is ignored for any rules that state all units from that Detachment must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. in a matched play game), and when determining your Army Faction.

Army faction is not Detachment faction I would guess? The Army faction described on BRB 245 I think? Its mostly a double up of the bespoke rules above, but maybe there's a niche case for something?

Ironically by Breton's reading ("army faction being different from detachment faction") then it still doesn't work, because agents of the imperium only ignores when checking for Army faction. It does not ignore when checking for detachment faction.

Lol. What a mess.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Ironically by Breton's reading ("army faction being different from detachment faction") then it still doesn't work, because agents of the imperium only ignores when checking for Army faction. It does not ignore when checking for detachment faction.

Lol. What a mess.

No, the first part specifically allows it -

An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol, Boarding
Patrol, Battalion, Brigade or Arks of Omen Detachment in this
manner is ignored for any rules that state all units from that
Detachment must have at least one Faction keyword in common

Automatically Appended Next Post:
To do this step by step:
All Units in a detachment must share a Faction Keyword.
(skipped by "An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol....is ignored for any rules that state all units from that
Detachment must have at least one Faction keyword in common"
All detachments in your army must share one Faction Keyword.
skipped by "An Agent of the Imperium unit included in a Patrol... and when determining your Army Faction."

Don't get me wrong, the rules are poorly worded, and result in some rather silly possibilties (Nids/Chaos forces with an Inquisition/NAVIS detachment for example) - but you can in theory make the NAVIS detachment if you jump through enough hoops and assume the same internal logic applied to Adeptus Astartes and/or CHAPTER Dets (and the others that are actually defined - technically there's no way to make a NAVIS/etc Det because there's no rule defining a NAVIS/etc Det.)