Demoulius Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Hey guys, just like the question says :) can oyu make an all inquisitor army? as in, no grey knight in power or terminator whatsoever? assasins and henchmen only? or do they still have "borrowed" guardsmen? :D have to admit i havent read the codex yet but just read something on the GW website about the different kind of inquisitors you can take :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Something Wycked Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Absolutely. Inquisitor Coteaz makes Henchmen warbands into Troop choices, so you can do 100% Inquisition lists, and they can be very competitive, too! Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779105 Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberschveinen Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Yes, which is why there are literally dozens of threads on this topic on this board alone. You can even make some that are good. The only questions as-yet unanswered are how good you can make them when going solely for ruthless efficiency, and to what extent you can structure an Inquisitorial army around your personal fluff before it begins to compromise playability. The sheer complexity of the Henchmen unit alone gives an unseemly number of options, most with very substantial strengths and weaknesses. The only complications are the extent to which you are willing to use vehicles with Grey Knight stats and use counts-as for things like Dreadnoughts. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779107 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demoulius Posted June 1, 2011 Author Share Posted June 1, 2011 oh there are several topics on this? sorry my bad only looked on the front page :) i go look for one of those pages an necromancy those back to life :D cheers Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779117 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherWasted Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 yes and no, depending on how one interprets the "ignores FOC" of henchmen when made troops. Some argue that since Henchmen troops fall outside the FOC, those squads do not satisfy the minimum troop requirements - meaning that you need to take at least 2 GK squads to fill that. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779163 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Something Wycked Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 People who argue that are people I'd ignore and choose not to play. :lol: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779243 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demoulius Posted June 2, 2011 Author Share Posted June 2, 2011 People who argue that are people I'd ignore and choose not to play. :lol: haha pretty much this :) only play among friends. not in tourneys or anything. doubt one of them will throw a hissy fit about it :P Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779249 Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 I'll point you to my still-incomplete guide here, that may give you some ideas about a no-Grey Knights army. http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=230168 Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779275 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherWasted Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 hahahaha, it's my friends who are the ones who enforce that ruling. And I tend to agree with them, but that debate has been done and won't be resolved without a FAQ. At my house, you need to take Grey Knights, but I'll play by whatever rules go at your house. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779296 Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberschveinen Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 Anyone who isn't willing to accept the clear precedent set by the Black Templars FAQ is, in my eyes, up to something. They don't even say it applies only to this example, they go out of their way to reference it back to a basic principle of the rules. You don't do that unless you actively want people to see it as a principle. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779343 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozybonza Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 Anyone who isn't willing to accept the clear precedent set by the Black Templars FAQ is, in my eyes, up to something. They don't even say it applies only to this example, they go out of their way to reference it back to a basic principle of the rules. You don't do that unless you actively want people to see it as a principle. Exactly - you need two troops "choices" as your minumum, rather than needing to occupy two troops "slots". Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779385 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherWasted Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 BRB specifically states that a force organisation chart outlines the minimum troops you must take. This is defined in the BRB exactly as such. It has nothing to do with slots. Henchmen rules EXPLICITILY state that they do not occupy choices for the purposes of fulfilling the FOC (i.e. they "do not occupy a slot on the Force Organisation Chart") - therefore the argument still stands that you much take Grey Knights to satisfy minimum troops. How can your units qualify as the two minimum troops for the FOC, when they literally do not count as occupying those choices? Screw the Templars FAQ. Players shouldn't have to be aware of a FAQ made for an unrelated army. To be honest, I wasn't even aware of the Templars FAQ. I know of nobody that plays them, nor should I have to in order to judge how my own army's Codex works. Again, it all comes down to house rules and a pending Grey Knights FAQ. When I run a gaming session, I play by RAW. The majority interpretation of RAW amongst all the players I know personally says you need Grey Knights. At your place or store, I'll follow your rules. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779417 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 Firstly, I remain completely unconvinced by all arguments that claim that Coteaz warbands don't occupy force org slots. If you truly believe that GW intended for people to spam more than 20 warbands in a 1500 pts list (and I've seen such lists), then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. PM me for details. From a rules perspective, an equally valid reading of the rules is that the "Lord of Formosa" rule outright replaces the initial Warband rule. As in, "Warbands are Troops. FULL STOP." Why do we insist on continuing to reference the initial rule with respect to Warbands when "Lord of Formosa" gives us all the information we need? Is that actually required? No, it isn't. So seeing as there are at least two equally valid readings of this, Brother Wasted's example interp and my example interp, doesn't it behoove us to choose the one that doesn't break the game and seems, well, OBVIOUS? Moving on, then.... Show me in the BRB where it requires that compulsory choices occupy force org slots. I'll be waiting right here. The BRB does have language that talks about units that may be bought as part of a force org choice (e.g., dedicated transports), and how they don't occupy force org slots, and how these units can't count as part of your compulsory choices. But ... we already knew that, right? You buy a GK Strike Squad, as part of that same choice you may buy a dedicated transport. You still only made a single choice. The BRB talks about force org choices, and the language around units is only there so people with older codexes -- e.g., Tau -- don't do things like take a Devilfish and say, "There's one of my Troops choices!" (If you're familiar with the Tau codex, you'll know what I'm talking about.) So my challenge stands. Show me where the BRB insists that compulsory force org choices must also occupy force org slots. Full circle: this argument is unneeded anyway, and I'm only discussing it for academic reasons. It doesn't apply to the GK codex. Coteaz warbands do occupy force org slots. We all know this to be the case. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779657 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demoulius Posted June 2, 2011 Author Share Posted June 2, 2011 woah, seems i stepped on some toes :ermm: what is all this about the black templar faq though? how is that relevant to the GK codex? :huh: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779797 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellios Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 woah, seems i stepped on some toes :ermm: what is all this about the black templar faq though? how is that relevant to the GK codex? :huh: Only that... and I'm not sure on the wording but The Emperors Champion does not take up a HQ slot... and the FAQ says it counts towards the required HQ. So it might provide precedent... but I'm sure it will be FAQed B) otherwise I'll have to hunt down the guy who makes GW FAQs. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2779830 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherWasted Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 We all know this to be the case. Don't claim to speak on my behalf. They DON'T occupy slots on the Force Organisation chart. Did you suddenly decide to just white-out the special rule, at the top of p.90 of the GK Codex? This unit does not use up a force organisation slot. It is written right there in your codex, the term 'slot' is used explicitly. Show me where Coteaz specfically overrides this in his special rules. I'll be waiting right here. If I take a HQ, it occupies a slot on the FOC, because it has nothing to say that it does not count. No special clause is required to illustrate this. The force organisation chart is by definition, a list of the compulsory and optional choices you are required to take for that mission. In a standard mission, do you have 1 HQ? Do you have 2 Troops? Sweet, your army is legal. Oh, wait, those two Troops choices are Warbands, which by their very definition, do not use up a slot on that chart. What units DO count towards the FOC? Grey Knights. You need to take them. End of story. You're not playing by intent, you're putting words into player's mouths. NOT forcing you to take Grey Knights is the broken option. Compulsory Grey Knights is the obvious option when reading through the Codex. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780043 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 We all know this to be the case. Don't claim to speak on my behalf. They DON'T occupy slots on the Force Organisation chart. Did you suddenly decide to just white-out the special rule, at the top of p.90 of the GK Codex? Firstly, do you seriously believe that the intention is to allow players to take unlimited numbers of warbands? Secondly, do you not understand the reasoning behind my interpretation? Thirdly, I never said your logic was meritless. What I did say was that: 1. It was valid, but no more or less so than my interpretation. The implication being that the rules in question really are vague enough to be open to these variant interpretations, both of which are, purely logically, equally valid. 2. Given the context of the actual game we all play, your logic should not -- does not -- apply. I would like to play Warhammer 40K. Not some variant game where 1 codex is allowed to break it into something completely different. You're not playing by intent, you're putting words into player's mouths. NOT forcing you to take Grey Knights is the broken option. Compulsory Grey Knights is the obvious option when reading through the Codex. Practice what you preach! :) In the same virtual breath you take me to task for "playing by intent" you immediately claim that compulsory GK units is "obvious when reading through the Codex". No it isn't. You know what GW does in codexes when they want choices to be compulsory? They put a little "1+" next to the army entry. E.g., Tau Commanders and Fire Warriors. I don't see any such notation by the unit entries, nor do I see a specific rule that says that every army must contain at least one GK unit. I'll be here until you find it, of course. :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780077 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherWasted Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 Secondly, do you not understand the reasoning behind my interpretation? I understood your reasoning. It is incorrect as far as I can understand what is written in the Codex. Thirdly, I never said your logic was meritless. What I did say was that: 1. It was valid, but no more or less so than my interpretation. The implication being that the rules in question really are vague enough to be open to these variant interpretations, both of which are, purely logically, equally valid. The only thing is that I do not agree your interpretation is logically valid at all. Your logic ignores a special rule that is listed specifically in the Warband unit entry, which is part of a 40K Codex - something intended to override the main rules. This makes your logic flawed, as far as I can see it. 2. Given the context of the actual game we all play, your logic should not -- does not -- apply. I would like to play Warhammer 40K. Not some variant game where 1 codex is allowed to break it into something completely different. Then you should be playing a game that is completely standardised and has no variaion amongst armies. The point of a Codex is to outline the special rules applicable to that army, and if applicable, how that army breaks the standard rules. So, yes, my opinion is that GW does in fact want to let you take more troops than allowed on the FOC. I see no problem with that, since your army is still limited by points. It is not as if you can flood the table with incredible units in a genuine Warband-only list. Who are you to know their intent? Unless you are Matt Ward himself you don't know what the intent of the rules in the Codex are. Practice what you preach! :) In the same virtual breath you take me to task for "playing by intent" you immediately claim that compulsory GK units is "obvious when reading through the Codex". Except, it IS obvious. The book says henchmen don't occupy force org slots. How do you satisfy FOC then? You take Grey Knights. It does not get more obvious than that. No it isn't. You know what GW does in codexes when they want choices to be compulsory? They put a little "1+" next to the army entry. E.g., Tau Commanders and Fire Warriors. I don't see any such notation by the unit entries, nor do I see a specific rule that says that every army must contain at least one GK unit. I'll be here until you find it, of course. :P I don't see a special rule that specifically says Knights are compulsory. What I see is several special rules in the GK codex that give you no other choice. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780316 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Something Wycked Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 You seem to have skipped the "Firstly," question that number6 asked, BW :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780321 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherWasted Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 I forgot to quote it, but it was answered in that post. I do infact believe the intention is to allow player to take unlimited warbands, army point level pending. This however is not the issue. The issue is whether you require Grey Knights to satisfy FOC. Yes, you do. Your Henchmen Warbands explicitly state they do not occupy slots on the FOC; therefore they do not count as minimum troops. Saying that henchmen can be your minimum troops is ignorant of what is literally written at the top of their Codex entry. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780325 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackwyvern Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 Yes i think that you are right but it is then stupid to put in the demon weapon as that means you are a renegade inquisitor, yes? So you can't be a renegade inquisitor and work with the grey knights. and so they have cut of a section of the army that could have beeen very interesting. I mean i could imagine my army being made up of warbands that are organised like different gangs. i think that it was better when inquisitorial stormtroopers were troops or actually it would be pretty good if they just made warrior acolyte bands troops and keep the warbands. just my thoughts :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780492 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr Shepard Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 Yes i think that you are right but it is then stupid to put in the demon weapon as that means you are a renegade inquisitor, yes? Techinacally you are a "Radical" Inquisitor not a renegade one. You believe in using your enemy own weapons against it for the sake of humanity, you are not a person who betrayed his mandate to protect mankind. :D Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780618 Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 BrotherWasted, As you seem to be a strict RAW-type of guy, I'll point out something: the exact henchmen rule states that "they do not USE UP a force org slot" (emphasis mine). However, not using one up does not mean the same thing as not occupying one. They could very well occupy one, and not "use it up", leaving room for 6 other troops units. But again, it doesn't mean they aren't occupying troop slots for the purposes of minimum troops. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780739 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 The only thing is that I do not agree your interpretation is logically valid at all. Your logic ignores a special rule that is listed specifically in the Warband unit entry, which is part of a 40K Codex - something intended to override the main rules. This makes your logic flawed, as far as I can see it. What my interpretation does is fully honor the verb "are" in the Lord of Formosa rule. You should appreciate this, since you are similarly focusing on individual words in rules. ;) That is, they are Troops. Period. End of story. Why should we assume that this verb -- which applies a status of existence on the units in question -- is conditional? Why is it not equally valid to believe that the verb is actively denoting specifically and exactly what Henchmen Warbands "are"? Initial status of Warbands: Elites that don't occupy force org slots. Introduce Lord of Formosa, now there's a new status of Warbands: Troops. It's really very simple. :) So, yes, my opinion is that GW does in fact want to let you take more troops than allowed on the FOC. I see no problem with that, since your army is still limited by points. It is not as if you can flood the table with incredible units in a genuine Warband-only list. Actually, yes. Yes you can. Points limits are actually not enough to balance armies and make the game fair. The force org chart exists for a reason. It is the other half of "fair". It means people can't take unlimited numbers of Leman Russ Squadrons, for example. It should also mean that you cannot flood the table with incredible units in a genuine Warband-only list. Go ahead, try it out yourself if you don't believe me. Take your best army list -- ANY army -- at any points value you desire. Let's say 1500 pts for now. Put it up against this and let me know how you do. Coteaz OM Inquisitor, 3 servo skulls 2 x 3 Servitors, multi-meltas, Chimera (hull heavy flamer) 2 x 3 Warriors w/bolters, Chimera (hull heavy flamer) 6 x 3 Warriors w/stormbolters, Chimera (hull heavy flamer) 10 x 3 Servitors, plasma cannons That's 1500 pts on the dot. And hey, with infinite warbands, this little list scales up extremely easily with points limits. Good luck! You're going to need it! And that's just off the top of my head with about 2 minutes to think about it. It could be much nastier if focused a bit more properly. But it's more than nasty enough for any other 1500 pts army list, that's for certain. Who are you to know their intent? Unless you are Matt Ward himself you don't know what the intent of the rules in the Codex are. Then why do you keep insisting that GKs are compulsory units when even you, arguing on behalf of what you believe to be "strict RAW", cannot find any rule supporting this stance? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2780830 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Tual Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 N6 is right. Initial status of Warbands: Elites that don't occupy force org slots. Introduce Lord of Formosa, now there's a new status of Warbands: Troops. You cannot apply both rules at the same time. This would be crazy. One trumps the other. It is just like any other rule altering the FOC. It trumps the unit entry 'unit status'. I dont see any other valid way of refuting this argument. Otherwise every codex that has this ability to alter the FOC through changing a units 'status' would cause the unit to occupy TWO FOC slots. Are you going to argue this? You cannot run two conflicting rules. It is one OR the other. Henchmen in a Coteaz list are troops and occupy FOC accordingly. For the counter argument to be true, the Lord of Formosa rule would have omitted the troops part and just been unlimited number. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/231107-can-you-make-an-all-inquisitor-army/#findComment-2781574 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.