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.

Every so often I feel the need to build a new Inquisitor, and since it's that time again for the first time in 8th ed I'm looking for a bit of wisdom on how Inquisitors play in this edition. Generic Inquisitors only, please. I have no interest in using special characters.

That's the question, really. Bit of background:

I've been doing the whole Inquisition thing for over twenty years now and haven't really taken kindly to their gradual decline over the editions, but even with my expectations set low I read the index as was... not amused. No model, no rules seasoned with a good helping of spite, and then some. But as I am ever hopeful, I just can't get the Inquisition out of my head.

I never really cared for the actual utility of an Inquisitor, and as such never used the dreaded servo skull caddy, always preferring to have a flavorful loadout instead. Seeing as how that's no longer possible, I may as well inquire about making a model that's actually useful on the tabletop so there's at least a little point to it.

So, does anyone even use generic Inquisitors in this edition? In what capacity and with what loadout? Which Ordo?

I’m trying to paint Up an army that will use them but sorry to say I cannot comment on their effectiveness. Look forward with interest to the comments tho

They're probably most useful in IG armies. They provide a decent leadership bubble and can have psychic powers. A bit like combined Commissar and Primaris Psyker.

Their equipment choices are unfortunately really unimpressive, competitively one should keep them as cheap as possible, but if you have just one you might as well give them some gear that looks nice.

I feild one with my marines for fluffy reasons and he keeps dying... one game it was cool having a free smite though and if you're moving up you mat get lucky and remove overwatch. I could imagine a Tau player getting angry at this.

I field a couple of Hereticus inquisitors in my sisters army from time to time to make an old school witch hunters force.
They lack everything they used to be. I think the best way (i find) to field them is near infantry and have them be psykers for those extra mortal wounds on hard targets or get off the overwatch denial power.

Otherwise, yeah, inquisition is in desperate need of attention.

Bare Bones Ordo Xenos Inquisitor with the Psyker power that removes overwatch is the best bang for your buck, in a list with some IG to screen him and benefit from his leadership bubble, preferably catchan so as to take advantage of his desire to close.

Sad and not what I wanted to hear, but hardly unexpected.

Thanks for the input, guys. What do you think about the good old Malleus Inquisitor with terminator armor, psycannon and hammer? How's he faring? Not good I guess, since it seems like the game is cheap buff characters with even cheaper screens. Still, he's got good protection and a nice gun. Perhaps he won't feel like a waste of points?

He will feel like a waste of points.

A bit like playing Grey Knights, really.

It's cool, sure. Fun, certainly. If you're opponents are doing equally silly fluffy fun things, it'll be a great game.
If they're playing to win...

Named inquisitors are where it is at. Regular inquisitors pay an arm and a leg for weapons to little effect, as do acolytes.

You can run them as a cheap-ish HQ for sisters of silence though. No relics or faction benefits to lose.

From a competitive standpoint, you shouldn't use them. They're trash. None of their options are particularly notable, their psychic powers are mediocre, and their buffs are forgettable. Their statline is also really bad for what you pay (most esoteric individuals in the Imperium, and you're hitting on 3+/3+...). Even their leadership buff isn't much good because leadership is mostly pointless as a mechanic in 8e anyway.

From a fluff standpoint, you probably wouldn't want to run them either. They've lost almost all of their interesting and flavourful wargear, including some basic essentials like power armour. They're at the absolute blandest that they've ever been, which is really sad, considering how awful their representation in the edition prior had been.

As for why you're not seeing much presence from them lately, it's because even the most hardcore of us Inquisition fanboys have written them off pretty much entirely at this point. The consensus is pretty clear that everything is terribly weak and horrifically overcosted, while seriously lacking in synergy and coherency. GW couldn't have made the Inquisition less attractive as a faction if they tried (that said, I'm not entirely convinced that they didn't).

If you absolutely, positively have to take an Inquisitor, Greyfax is alright. Not great, but alright. If you're looking for psyker denial, the Culexus and Sisters of Silence will be more point efficient, more versatile, do more damage, and be far more durable, but Greyfax isn't entirely entirely incompetent as a character. She's probably worth less than what you pay for her, but she's not painfully bad. You should never, ever use any of the unnamed Inquisitor options.

Limiting yourself to only generic Inquisitors will always put you on the back foot.

Eisenhorn, Coteaz, Greyfax and Hector Rex are where it is at if you want good utility.

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Limiting yourself to only generic Inquisitors will always put you on the back foot.

Eisenhorn, Coteaz, Greyfax and Hector Rex are where it is at if you want good utility.

Unfortunately this is the way it'll be until we get the Inquisition codex. Who even knows how customizable it'll be too? Even for an index list they surprisingly gutted lots of options, even weapons...

I play them, but I only play casual. They are still fun in a casual game. (You won't hear much of that in any forum as most posters do not comprehend the difference in "Tournament" games and "Fun" casual games).

I use the Supreme Command Detachment and play 3 Inquisitors as some form of a "Triumvirate" or I go with 4 and call them the "Four Horseman".

If you want to add spice and say a truly powerful Inquisitor called forth a team of powerful Imperial agents, you can add in assassins, Space Marines and a Grey Knight Grand Master. This will give you a lot more play ability.

The problem with Inquisitors is that they aren't fun. They have no interesting options available, their entire wargear and rules selection has been completely gutted. Even as cheap psyker access, their powers are bad.

I only use a naked one as my HQ choice in a Vanguard Detachment containing multiple Assassins. That give me a CP instead of taking away one / several.

 Giantwalkingchair wrote:
I field a couple of Hereticus inquisitors in my sisters army from time to time to make an old school witch hunters force.
They lack everything they used to be. I think the best way (i find) to field them is near infantry and have them be psykers for those extra mortal wounds on hard targets or get off the overwatch denial power.

Otherwise, yeah, inquisition is in desperate need of attention.

I've played this combo a couple of times. My sense is that it can be made to earn back it's points and then some and possibly disrupt the game in a significant way, but they're a finesse play that can be hard to maximize.

 Da-Rock wrote:
I play them, but I only play casual. They are still fun in a casual game. (You won't hear much of that in any forum as most posters do not comprehend the difference in "Tournament" games and "Fun" casual games).

I use the Supreme Command Detachment and play 3 Inquisitors as some form of a "Triumvirate" or I go with 4 and call them the "Four Horseman".

If you want to add spice and say a truly powerful Inquisitor called forth a team of powerful Imperial agents, you can add in assassins, Space Marines and a Grey Knight Grand Master. This will give you a lot more play ability.

I like this about the Inquisitors and think that being able to bring in other units from other forces should be special, so force org and allies should be restricted. I guess one way to do that would be to say that we play X points and each list must generate at least Y command points.

I've used a Supreme Command of Karamazov, Greyfax, and Inquisitor <Ordo Hereticus> (with Inferno Pistol) as a fluffy centerpiece in many games, up to and including the Adepticon Long War Doubles. Inquisitors have multiple issues that a lot of the other posters have covered quite well. My own take is this: against their Quarry, Inquisitors are interesting and worth fielding. Against everything else, they are quite inefficient, and not much fun.

If you're insistent on fielding a generic Inquisitor, I would recommend the following:

Ordo Hereticus, as this covers the most bases
Terrify
Boltgun -or- Condemnor Boltgun -or- Storm Bolter, whatever your leftover points allow.

Mostly you'll be spending the game standing around giving an infantry squad LD9 and flinging Smites, with the occasional break for Terrify. Shoot your gun at your Quarry when the opportunity arises, but mostly stay back, as your only real defense is the Character rule.

I will personally be using Grayfax, Eisenhorn and The Inquistor with a Flamer mostly because I like the models.