Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Inquisition and Agents in 8th
Posted 30 April 2017 - 09:16 AM
The things which I think could most help:
Clarification of the allies, factions and dedicated transport rules. Being able to understand how an Inquisitorial Henchmen Warband works without feeling like a High Court judge trying to rule on some obscure point of constitutional law would be nice. Potentially, given they seem to be confirmed, AoS-style keywords could help here by increasing flexibility: for example, an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor could have the keywords "Imperium of Man", "Human", "Inquisition" and "Ordo Xenos", which might let him/her join a Deathwatch Kill-team in their Corvus (as sharing the OX keyword) but be prevented from embarking in a drop-pod (due to having keyword "human", not "Astartes", and being too squishy).
Psychic powers: The teasers from WH Community indicate that each race will have their own list of psychic powers. I'm hoping the Inquisition won't be too limited in choice, as the customisability of the =][= is part of its flavour. Similarly, I hope there's a bit of difference between Astropaths and Primaris Psykers, so that the Astropath doesn't just end up as merely the budget choice.
Finally, the Inquisition list itself: I suspect that the initial list we get in the big new faction books will just be an updated version of the C:IA list, but I'd rather like to see the new options in Shadow Wars carried over. The decidedly "non-elite" profile of Acolytes has always been irritatingly discordant with the fluff. Being able to take Acolytes as combat-specialists, with WS 3+ (which seems to be the new WS4) and LP/CCW as baseline, and shooting-specialists, with BS3+ and lasgun or autogun, would be nice. The combat specialists could then opt to take melee weapon and pistol upgrades whereas the shooters could choose shotguns, bolters, stormbolters, hot shots, sniper rifles or special weapons.
My thoughts, anyway. Anybody else?
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:21 PM
I agree that we will probably see some of the changes in A:SW carry over. I found it interesting that Crusaders have a range of options available to them, where as in 'both' current 40k books they do not, and never have had options. This, coupled with the fact that the models are strictly sword and board it would indicated that at some point a new line has to be coming. That is a generic acolyte kit which could make things like crusaders or gun toting henchmen. The current range is all metal/ resin and more than likely disappearing with the coming changes.
I just hope they retain the more esoteric options like monkeys & daemon hosts.
Posted 02 May 2017 - 05:48 AM
Posted 02 May 2017 - 01:10 PM
Given that they're for a more streamlined rule set similar to AoS I suspect they may also go with less customization as well which means I wouldn't put too much stock in what Shadow War did with some of our henchmen. I'd love to see an inquisitorial warband plastic box set but I am not holding my breath. I suspect our model range will stay the same and most henchmen will just come stock with few options for upgrades/customization.
Posted 05 May 2017 - 05:32 AM
So, there is a risk that GW could drop much of our list on the basis of lack of models. I believe (hope!) they will, at least in the first iteration of the list, continue to give us the same options, to avoid having to deal with the rage and grief of players who have spent considerable time and effort to convert carapace-armoured Acolytes with storm-bolters or power-armoured hot shot wielders, and then found them invalidated.
Indeed, I think a more restricted list is only likely to come IF GW actually produced a plastic Acolyte set. For quite some time, Inquisition has been almost the last bastion of the old GW's "here are some rules with lots of options; you work out how to make the models" approach- which is either a frustration or a liberating opportunity depending on your perspective.
Edited by Plasmablasts, 05 May 2017 - 05:43 AM.
- Nicodemus Doloroso and NatBrannigan like this
Posted 05 May 2017 - 08:19 AM
It will be a sad day if and when our more esoteric options disappear... Looking at how people make their warbands is one of the most enjoyable aspects of the hobby. I made a real effort to use only GW parts for mine and I think they've turned out really well. I did use some 3rd party models and parts but will replace them with GW models at some point, so it's not as though GW are losing money.
I like that you have to trawl the internet looking for parts, then chop them up and stick them back together until you have something you think looks like a Plasma Syphon or Deamon Host (preferable lifted into the air on completion with a mad scientist cackle). It's one of the saddest things that GW have lost, the encouragement to convert every model, make your own terrain etc.
Posted 06 May 2017 - 07:17 AM
Posted 09 May 2017 - 01:26 AM
Today's announcement of infantry being able to split fire like nobody's business certainly has interesting implications for Inquistion, given the diverse options we have for warbands.
... in the new Warhammer 40,000, models in a squad can fire at different targets. So, this means your Tactical Squad can have your boys with bolters deal with that onrushing Hormagaunt horde, while the flamer bathes a nearby Lictor in prometheum fire, and the squad’s krak missile takes an opportunistic potshot at that onrushing Carnifex – just as you always imagined they should!
Posted 09 May 2017 - 05:56 AM
Posted 09 May 2017 - 05:42 PM
Some leaks regarding characters now out: https://www.warhamme...omepage-post-4/
This has some interesting connotations for Inquisition. Looks like Inquisitors will no longer go into battle as part of their warbands, however, I wonder what sort of bubble/aura boosting ability Inquisitors might give?
Our inquisitors still can't be singled out by shooting (except, perhaps, by Ratlings) so they don't NEED to be attached to their warband. I wonder whether characters will be able to ride in transports with a squad, however?
Posted 09 May 2017 - 07:43 PM
Posted 09 May 2017 - 08:13 PM
I think the C:IA warband was gone no matter what anyway, because formations are gone, and they are streamlining things.
That said, Inquisitorial warbands have a pretty long history (i.e. since their first incarnation back in Codex: Daemonhunters and Codex: Witchunters) of being a mixed band of various different things including all the stuff we love like priest, astropath, etc. Back then they were not independent characters. They are not independent characters in Codex: Inquistion. So I'm thinking we may just revert back to something more like C:=][= warbands ... I hope.
Posted 09 May 2017 - 11:23 PM
Posted 10 May 2017 - 01:24 AM
They could go back to having war bands as a retinue as well. GW is all about retro these days...
You mean the old retinue that buffed the Inquisitor? I dearly loved that iteration of warbands. I'd be all in favour of GW going back to that style, but I don't know that they will -- haven't seen any evidence of such stuff in AoS although I don't think Fantasy ever had retinues.
Time will tell.
I am getting impatient here. Someone get the Ordo Chronos in here to see if they can't do something about getting June 10th here faster.
Posted 10 May 2017 - 10:14 AM
Inquisition is interesting... Because things like Acolytes don't even have models. They're just guardsmen/ storm troopers with a different name and diverse weapon options.
I'd like to see a rule across all of the "warband" units (could literally be the Keyword: Warband) that means these units can all combine together as one in any combination, with their rules that affect "the unit" affect them all (I'm looking at you, Jokero buffs).
Could even have the Inquisitor join in, make him a unique exception to the normal character rules.
Would be nice to see Tech Priests, Servitors & Ministorum Priests included again too - get that Dark Heresy feel.
"Pain is an illusion of the senses, fear an illusion of the mind, beyond these only death waits as silent judge o'er all." - Mortarion
Posted 10 May 2017 - 02:48 PM
One of the things they said in the FAQ is that units and kits that dont currently have models will still be kept as options for the most part. So I wouldnt be to worried about models being completely invalidated.
Posted 10 May 2017 - 05:12 PM
Yes, that's for sure. But how ? In which form ? And with what kind of options ?
With C:IA, we saw the number of options decrease (servo skull). I'm a bit afraid that they keep on that track and don't want to end with an inquisitor/comissar-like and a unit of guardmens as acolytes.
But I'm pretty confident, so far every thing look ace for this V8 !
Posted 18 May 2017 - 11:36 AM
I wonder what Mystics will do now with the change to deep strike?
I'm also hoping we keep a bit of distinction in the new version. I suspect we will but you never know. As long as a suitably customisable unit of Acolytes hangs around I'll be happy.
I'm starting to think the best thing for Inquisition and Sisters would be getting put into one codex a la C:IA. More likely that they'll be updated and new models (especially for sisters) will seem less of a risk for GW. Just one sprue of plastic sisters, and one sprue of special / heavy weapon options, that's all I ask!
Posted 18 May 2017 - 02:02 PM
Codex: Witchhunters was my favourite iteration of the Inquisition and Sisters of Battle. I wouldn't mind a return to a C:IA type of codex, although that may not be necessary given the way list-building looks like it may work. Like others I am really looking forward to 8th, everything I've heard sounds great rules-wise. I am quite uncertain about what the future of inquisition and sisters will be, but I feel confident that there will be a future. Considering the release of things like Mechanicus and Gene Stealer Cults, it seems like GW is supporting the lesser-known armies and going for nostalgia. Inquisition has been around forever as a key part of the Imperium fluff.
Posted 18 May 2017 - 07:47 PM
But now that we know formations are gone, I wonder how we will be able to have a mixed unit with acolyts, mystics, psykers, crusaders, etc ...
Back to the digidex ? Fine for me but who knows...
Posted 18 May 2017 - 09:07 PM
Yeah I would speculate/hope that they go back to something along the lines of the digidex. Although given the timing of the release of C:IA one wonders if they weren't trying something out in preparation for 8th? Seems a bit odd to introduce that new way of developing warbands only to then go back to the old way for 8th edition. So maybe even though formations are gone, Inquisition warbands will still be constructed in a similar way to C:IA.
We can only wait and see. I for one am getting a bit fatigued by the slow trickle, I want June 10th to be here now!
Posted 18 May 2017 - 09:55 PM
Another thought: as C:IA had solo Jokaero and Daemonhosts as options, I wonder if they might become characters now. Imagine a Jokaero providing its upgrades to any neighbouring unit?
Posted 18 May 2017 - 10:03 PM
Keep in mind that they've stated there will be a dozen general detachments and we have no idea what the 9 not teased look like.
The article on Battle Forged Armies which introduces the new detachments does not say one way or the other whether the 12 game-wide detachments are the only ones, or whether there may be some faction-specific detachments as well. If the latter, =][= may well have something to allow for the sort of army you describe.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users