# Future of the 40k Inquisition Rumor



## Geist (Mar 9, 2010)

> Thank you to the reader that sent in this correspondence to the readers here on Faeit 212 (I do not have permission to use his name)
> 
> The Question to Forgeworld
> I had a question concerning the newly released PDF for "SPACE MARINE CHAPTER TACTICS FOR SIXTH EDITION WARHAMMER 40,000".
> ...


Sounds like some cool things are brewing for the Inquisition. Now, this is pure speculation on my part, but I felt that the Adeptus Sororitas was more of a supplement than a true codex. What if it was exactly that? What if the Adeptus Sororitas was simply a supplement for a future Codex: Inquisition?


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

It would make sense to have all Inquisition forces in the one book, with stuff like GKs, Sisters, Death Watch and maybe even a IG army built on Inquisitorial storm troopers having their own supplements. 

I always thought the Red Hunters fluff was cool. They might just answer the question of where all the loyalist survivors from the traitor legions ended up.


----------



## Loli (Mar 26, 2009)

Khorne's Fist said:


> It would make sense to have all Inquisition forces in the one book, with stuff like GKs, Sisters, Death Watch and maybe even a IG army built on Inquisitorial storm troopers having their own supplements.
> 
> I always thought the Red Hunters fluff was cool. They might just answer the question of where all the loyalist survivors from the traitor legions ended up.


This. 

Yes people will bitch and moan that Sisters aren't strictly Inquisition or it ruins Grey Knights, but honestly it's nothing but a good thing if it happens. It gives GW less books on the endless update cycle, it will create one hell of a tome. 

Yes I'd prefer my Sisters to stay individual because I worry after the success of C:GK, Sisters would play second fiddle to GK. But honestly I'd love an entire book towards the Inquisition. 

But it will be very interesting as to how this plays out if the response is true.


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

We may see a Iyanden style "additional codex" that provides ]I[ with the ability to take units from both forces.


----------



## dragonkingofthestars (May 3, 2010)

Or, could it be in the next sisters dex they get inquisitors? say, copy and paste the Grey knight ones into the sisters since there, come on all the same organization no matter if there working with Deathwatch, Knights or Sisters.

I expect sisters to come out with a dex with inquisitor options, and MAYBE a supplement Deathwatch that allows space marines to do the same.


----------



## gobsmak (Feb 16, 2011)

The SoB originally were associated with the Ordo Hereticus.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

The upcoming SOB codex will follow the style of the GK codex, up to a point, 
I am unsure that Inquisitors will be in the codex, 
but even if they do they will turn up elsewhere at some point............


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Bindi Baji said:


> The upcoming SOB codex will follow the style of the GK codex, up to a point,
> I am unsure that Inquisitors will be in the codex,
> but even if they do they will turn up elsewhere at some point............


they always turn up elsewhere at some point and usually when they are not expected ....


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

bitsandkits said:


> they always turn up elsewhere at some point and usually when they are not expected ....


Yup, that's kinda what they're for.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Khorne's Fist said:


> Yup, that's kinda what they're for.


Very true , nobody expects them


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

But are they all Spanish?


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Khorne's Fist said:


> It would make sense to have all Inquisition forces in the one book, with stuff like GKs, Sisters, Death Watch and maybe even a IG army built on Inquisitorial storm troopers having their own supplements.
> 
> I always thought the Red Hunters fluff was cool. They might just answer the question of where all the loyalist survivors from the traitor legions ended up.


I'd argue if the future proofing was for that then all they had to say was "an army lead by an Inquisitor" but instead they specified Sisters and Grey Knights seperately. I'm assuming we're looking at Ordos Hereticus going back to the Sisters, maybe Xenos shunting over to a Marine book or a Marine supplement and Malleus sticking it out with the Grey Knights.

But that's just my speculation.



gobsmak said:


> The SoB originally were associated with the Ordo Hereticus.


Not to be mean, but no they weren't. Sisters in RT and 2nd Ed had nothing to do with the Inquisition. That was a product of 3rd Edition actually.


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

Black Library just announced a Codex:Inquistion

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Blog/Angels-Daemons-and-Mysterious-Individuals.html

Finally, following the release of Codex: Adepta Sororitas earlier this month, we are very excited to announce the next digital exclusive codex.
(drumroll……..) 

This November, you will be able to download the brand new Codex: Inquisition. 

A full codex, packed with background and artwork on the forces of the Imperium’s most secretive and powerful organization. You’ll soon be able to field an Inquisitor and their retinue in any Imperial army in games of Warhammer 40,000.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Words_of_Truth said:


> Black Library just announced a Codex:Inquistion
> 
> http://www.blacklibrary.com/Blog/Angels-Daemons-and-Mysterious-Individuals.html
> 
> ...


Huh. I wonder how _that_ is going to tie into everything else. :shok:


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

How many allies can you have? Atm I'm looking at having my Frateris Miltia (Imperial Guard) ally with sisters, but then I'd like to have an inquisitor to and then potentially some Red Hunters space marines, that's like 3 allies, unless Codex Inquisitor offers an alternative option for my Frateris to be based on.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Words_of_Truth said:


> How many allies can you have? Atm I'm looking at having my Frateris Miltia (Imperial Guard) ally with sisters, but then I'd like to have an inquisitor to and then potentially some Red Hunters space marines, that's like 3 allies, unless Codex Inquisitor offers an alternative option for my Frateris to be based on.


1. If you double FOC the second set of allies has to be from the same codex as the first set.

I'm wondering if this is the first multi-book supplement (which wouldn't count as allies for adding models to the army). :scratchhead:


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

If it's only one then how can Sisters of Battle and Red Hunters be battle brothers if an Inquisitor needs to be present, as it would then be two allies.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Words_of_Truth said:


> If it's only one then how can Sisters of Battle and Red Hunters be battle brothers if an Inquisitor needs to be present, as it would then be two allies.


If this codex works like a supplement would then it could potentially skip past the allies part of the rules to add more to the codex.

But I'm just guessing. I know what I'll have to buy next month now as this has me so curious I need to see if for myself.

Who knows, maybe I'll change my mind about running Ordos Hereticus with my Sisters.


----------



## Mossy Toes (Jun 8, 2009)

Nobody expects the Codex: Inquisition!

Their chief weapon is surprise.... and fear. Their two chief weapons, that is, are...


----------



## Geist (Mar 9, 2010)

Zion said:


> Huh. I wonder how _that_ is going to tie into everything else. :shok:


Well, I guess that settles it. Forget all my other "Get back into 40k" army ideas, I'm doing an IG Ordo Xenos Strike Force.


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

Geist said:


> Well, I guess that settles it. Forget all my other "Get back into 40k" army ideas, I'm doing an IG Ordo Xenos Strike Force.


"Just trying to kill some bugs, sir!"


----------



## Chaplain-Grimaldus (Aug 4, 2013)

Welcome to the rough necks!


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

This I can get into. Given that the Inquisition can bring in most Imperial forces at a whim (technically: when necessary) it's really the only sane way to bring them to the table.

Wild guesswork, every branch gets IG with the Hereticus also fielding Sisters, Malleus getting Grey Knights, and Xenos getting Space Marines. Ally matrix... well, the Space Wolves will probably be in the 'Desperate Allies' column


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Words_of_Truth said:


> This November, you will be able to download the brand new Codex: Inquisition.
> 
> A full codex, packed with background and artwork on the forces of the Imperium’s most secretive and powerful organization. You’ll soon be able to field an Inquisitor and their retinue in any Imperial army in games of Warhammer 40,000.


Wow, wasn't expecting this to happen so quickly.........
admittedly I have been waiting a looooong time already..........
Looking forward to seeing this, a day one digital purchase for me............................




Shandathe said:


> This I can get into. Given that the Inquisition can bring in most Imperial forces at a whim (technically: when necessary) it's really the only sane way to bring them to the table.
> 
> Wild guesswork, every branch gets IG with the Hereticus also fielding Sisters, Malleus getting Grey Knights, and Xenos getting Space Marines. Ally matrix... well, the Space Wolves will probably be in the 'Desperate Allies' column


I believe it's going to be more flexible then that


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

I've got a little theory brewing for those interested: http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/10/codex-inquisition-speculation.html


And now, homework.


----------



## Karyudo-DS (Nov 7, 2009)

Shandathe said:


> Ally matrix... well, the Space Wolves will probably be in the 'Desperate Allies' column


They've also occasionally been at ship destroying odds with Dark Angels... good thing no one else knows that


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Gonna be interesting to see how this one pans out. 


Naftka combined some different announcements on his site, detailed below:



> The Inquisition, and What it Means
> 
> Today Games Workshop announced that codex Inquisition will be released sometime next month (November). There was very little lead in or expectations that this was coming, with the exception of a hint from Forgeworld's latest Chapter Tactics updates for Space Marines.
> 
> ...



If his take on this is correct then it seems like this is more of a "additional options" book instead of a allies book when combined with imperial forces. The Red Hunters Chapter kind a points that even more that way as they counts as units from GK/SOB if there is a inquisitor around.



Wild personal speculation and wish listing:
This could be the way they have tested true combined books and tried to make them viable and happening. This should fuel the fires of the 4 Chaos Gods getting own books in the future, and also hopefully Word Bearers getting their needed combined codex to do them justice.
I want this to be true so that I actually might consider playing 6th, despite random charges and other crap. GW kind a owe all CSM players a more fun option than we now have, even more so when looking at the SM codex which without problem could get lots of fun and fluffy options which also are backed up by rules :read:


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

3 Warlord Traits Tables confirmed. From GW Digital Editions Facebook Page:


> As a reward, we're going to let you see the names of the Warlord Traits from one of the three tables in Codex: Inquisition.
> 
> And you get to pick which one!
> Which would you like to see guys?
> ...


----------



## Geist (Mar 9, 2010)

Zion said:


> 3 Warlord Traits Tables confirmed. From GW Digital Editions Facebook Page:


Interesting stuff! k:

Just skimmed the comments and it looks like people have overwhelmingly voted Xenos.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Speaking of Xenos:


> The codex is primarily designed to be included as allies, but you will be able to take a primary detachment if you like.
> there aren't any Space Marines in the book, so no Deathwatch (but we've certainly got our eye on them for their own digital something in the future).


----------



## Geist (Mar 9, 2010)

Zion said:


> Speaking of Xenos: "there aren't any Space Marines in the book, so no Deathwatch"


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

@Geist, there not being any Deathwatch in the book doesn't at all stop you from painting a bunch of Space Marines in the Deathwatch color scheme, which is pretty much what the Deathwatch DOES. The latest SM Codex certainly has enough things in it to support any Deathwatch deployment in a proper manner.


----------



## Geist (Mar 9, 2010)

Shandathe said:


> @Geist, there not being any Deathwatch in the book doesn't at all stop you from painting a bunch of Space Marines in the Deathwatch color scheme, which is pretty much what the Deathwatch DOES. The latest SM Codex certainly has enough things in it to support any Deathwatch deployment in a proper manner.


I don't really have any desire to make a Space Marine Army, just wanted a squad of Deathwatch for fluff.


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Geist said:


> I don't really have any desire to make a Space Marine Army, just wanted a squad of Deathwatch for fluff.


Which... is a squad of Space Marines that had their armour spraypainted a different shade for the duration. Toss an HQ in there and you've got an Allied Detachment you can use beside your Inquisition army. Am I missing something here? :dunno:


----------



## Geist (Mar 9, 2010)

Shandathe said:


> Which... is a squad of Space Marines that had their armour spraypainted a different shade for the duration. Toss an HQ in there and you've got an Allied Detachment you can use beside your Inquisition army. Am I missing something here? :dunno:


Haha, I guess some context would have been better. The plan was Imperial Guard mainly with Inquisitorial Allies for an Ordo Xenos Strike Force(Black and Red Valkyries, Leman Russ' and Chimeras with giant =][= painted on them :so_happy: ). Since I'm almost certain that the Inquisitorial Codex will not allow me to take a 2nd ally in Space Marines, using Space Marine allies for Deathwatch just won't work.


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Don't despair yet. We already know there's some wackiness going on. Read the "By this Seal" rule from the Red Hunters again. Somehow, someway, Codex: Inquisition is adding Inquisitors (at the very least) to the FOC of Space Marines and Sisters of Battle, neither of which normally has those. We don't yet know how, and it may be limited in some way, but it's obvious that using Codex: Inquisition you can build an army with three Codices involved. All you're looking to change in the above is switching out the SoB for IG.


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

I hear that the ]I[ can be added to any imperial army, very much like the ancient and venerated Assassin's pamphlet...er, supplement.


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

Okay, this _is_ interesting.

I'm a little pissed that I'll probably have to shell more money in the hopes it might do something to fix all the problems GW refuses to fix about sisters, but I'm willing to give this the benefit of doubt in case it still allows me to field Sisters and Guard together and maybe even add some peculiar configurations.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

All the preview stuff that's out right now, review of the book next week when it's out for those who don't want to go all in just yet: http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/11/Codex-Inquisition-Preview.html


----------



## revilo44 (Sep 17, 2010)

I know these are not rumors but it still good to know 

via James in an email sent in for Faeit 212
The Ordos was created for a Dark Heresy supplement by Andy Hoare. It was short background text only, no rules or equipment, etc.
Anyway, the reason I'm emailing is that a while after the supplement was published, Andy blogged about the Ordo Chronos and why he'd created it. 


Here is the article and writing by Andy Hoare about the Ordos Chronos

via Andy Hoare from his own blog back in 2011 (which is no longer accessible)
Friday, 25 February 2011Existential cogitations on the Inquisitorial Ordos
Scanning the interwebs recently I came upon a discussion on a minor piece of background (sand-boxed to the Fantasy Flight Games setting) relating to an arm of the Inquisition that I myself am responsible for creating, and it was interesting to see people’s reactions to it and their theories as to just why it was created. The discussion reminded me of my own chain of thought during the writing of the piece in question, so I thought I’d write a blog entry on the subject.

The arm of the Inquisition in question is the Ordo Chronos, and it first appeared in the Dark Heresy: Ascension supplement. It came into existence not as a random whimsy or any desire to introduce a Time Lord-like archetype into Warhammer 40,000, but, initially at least, as a response to a design challenge. When we wrote Ascension, Games Workshop’s Manager of Intellectual Property, Alan Merrett, provided us with an overview of the current standing of the Inquisition. Alan’s document was thorough and presented a guide for writers working on any subject relating to the Inquisition, ensuring we all knew which themes were worth pursuing and which weren’t. One piece of wisdom addressed the question of Inquisitorial Ordos, stating that there are three which we really care about and should focus on, but that others do exist, if only for a short time or specific place.

This got me thinking, because I’ve always felt that the three Ordos cover between them every single threat to the Imperium we could possibly imagine. What enemy of Mankind couldn’t be encompassed within the mandate of the Ordo Hereticus (the Enemy Within), the Ordo Xenos (the Enemy Without) or the Ordo Melleus (the Enemy Beyond)?

In the past, both writers and players have invented other Ordos, but to be honest, they’ve never really ringed true to me. We’ve had the Ordo Sicarius, established to look out for and deal with rogue assassins, but wouldn’t that be a job for the Ordo Hereticus? We’ve had other Ordos described as dealing with all sorts of other things, including Plague Zombies, which to me would fall under the remit of the Ordo Malleus, being products of Chaos. To me, the three main Ordos exist to combat truly existential threats to the Imperium and to Mankind, and so any new ones we invent should do so too, and be clearly delineated.

So what existential threats might exist beyond the three already covered by the main Ordos? I could think of two, and I’m quite sure others will be able to come up with more. The first is the notion of time distortion, a phenomenon already seeded into the Warhammer 40,000 oeuvre via the hazards of miscalculated warp jumps. That’s why I created the Ordo Chronos – not as some huge, fanfared plot device, but as a nice little example of the sort of threat that should, in my view, merit an Ordo all its own.

To return to the discussions I was reading about the Ordo Chronos, some people did seem to view them as one-dimensional, 40k Time Lords. That’s not the case at all, as after all, existing to combat the effects of time distortion doesn’t mean they bring it about. However, as Inquisitors they would be just as subject to factionalism as their peers. Perhaps Puritan Ordo Chronos Inquisitors (‘Time Hunters’?) ruthlessly hunt down anyone who has fallen prey of a mistimed warp jump, just in case anything happens to alter the Imperium’s fate. Equally, perhaps Radical Time Hunters seek to utilise heretical technologies, and consider changing the course of history a valid way of keeping the Imperium alive? Just imagine the wars that these two factions could be fighting without the rest of the Imperium ever even knowing about it!

Sounds cool to me, so as a hobbyist, I want to know what these guys might look like. Perhaps they’re a bit steam punkish, with cog emblems, huge mechanical goggles, idiosyncratic technologies and eccentric costumes? Maybe the Radicals are accompanied by all sorts of riff raff washed up by the tides of space-time? I can certainly picture a little ‘Victorian sci-fi’ here, but maybe that’s just me!

What of the other existential threat then? Well, this one is a little vague, but Stewart Brand once said something along the lines that ‘information wants to be free’, and in the Imperium, the ultimate oppressive state, that would make it pretty dangerous. Dangerous enough to warrant an entire Ordo to keep it under control? Maybe! Who do you think it is that goes around deleting files in the Imperium’s archives? They don’t just get corrupted, they get wiped, from everywhere, and that’s some undertaking! I have a tongue in cheek name for these guys – the Ordo Redactor – and I imagine them as grey-suited, blank-faced agents who ensure information is kept under control. Maybe the Puritans believe in hiding the truth away, deleting it even, so that it never escapes. Perhaps the Radicals believe it better to hide it in plain sight, as many conspiracy theorists believe actually happens today?

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the relevance of the Ordos and the existential threats they combat. Hopefully this whimsical diatribe also reveals something of my thinking too (though maybe not!) I’d be very interested in hearing if anyone else can think of some more


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

revilo44 said:


> The arm of the Inquisition in question is the Ordo Chronos, and it first appeared in the Dark Heresy: Ascension supplement. It came into existence not as a random whimsy or any desire to introduce a Time Lord-like archetype into Warhammer 40,000, but, initially at least, as a response to a design challenge.


There is something very wrong here,
the ordo chronos were spoke about long, long before 2010,
there was very little known about them but I had a discussion about them with an ex-black library writer about a year before then (the name has been expunged to protect the guilty)


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Zion said:


> All the preview stuff that's out right now, review of the book next week when it's out for those who don't want to go all in just yet: http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/11/Codex-Inquisition-Preview.html


... the amount of preview stuff they're generating without putting in anything substantial is amazing. I think that partial armoury page is the only thing even vaguely rules-related, and it's still lacking actual game effects. :laugh:

What's the betting on the Inquisitorial priests being different from the Sororitas ones?


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Bindi Baji said:


> There is something very wrong here,
> the ordo chronos were spoke about long, long before 2010,
> there was very little known about them but I had a discussion about them with an ex-black library writer about a year before then (the name has been expunged to protect the guilty)


Correct. They date back to RT IIRC where they where chasing a man and his time traveling telephone box. Yes 40k is potentially the same universe as Doctor Who.



Shandathe said:


> ... the amount of preview stuff they're generating without putting in anything substantial is amazing. I think that partial armoury page is the only thing even vaguely rules-related, and it's still lacking actual game effects. :laugh:
> 
> What's the betting on the Inquisitorial priests being different from the Sororitas ones?


Yeah, they've mastered the teaser for sure.

As for the priests, perhaps. I wonder if IG will be getting the same as well...


----------



## Majere613 (Oct 14, 2008)

The GW blog has updated with some more pics, including the Karamazov miniature (basically de facto confirmation that he gets rules) and lore entries for the LR Crusader and Redeemer, which makes my Battle Conclave happy little bunnies.

The fluff for the Xenos Inquisitor mentions them sometimes having aliens in their retinue, which might or might not lead to something!


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Majere613 said:


> The GW blog has updated with some more pics, including the Karamazov miniature (basically de facto confirmation that he gets rules) and lore entries for the LR Crusader and Redeemer, which makes my Battle Conclave happy little bunnies.
> 
> The fluff for the Xenos Inquisitor mentions them sometimes having aliens in their retinue, which might or might not lead to something!


I already had pictures of the Power Chair model though. 

The confirmation of extra Land Raiders made me a happy camper though.

As for Ordos Xenos the aliens in their Retinues likely references Jokaero.


----------



## revilo44 (Sep 17, 2010)

> via White Dwarf Daily
> http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/wnt/blog.jsp?pid=11700068
> The front cover, illustrated by Marek Oken, is just one of the new pieces of artwork in the book, which focuses on the strange, dangerous and clandestine work of the Imperial Inquisition. The book talks in great depth about the three primary Ordos: the Ordo Hereticus, concerned with hunting down witches and psykers; the Ordo Xenos, tasked with the extermination of aliens; and the Ordo Malleus, who protect humanity from the Daemons of the Warp. Other Ordos are mentioned too, such as the sinister Ordo Sicarius and the unusual Ordo Chronos, who investigate (and try to prevent) time travel. The different factions of Inquisitors are talked about too, ranging from Thorians to Monodominants. Many famous (or notorious, depending on your point of view) Inquisitors are also covered in the book, including Gregor Eisenhorn, Witch Hunter Tyrus and Torquemada Coteaz.
> Codex: Inquisition allows you to include an Inquisitor and his retinue in your army, be they Space Marines, Imperial Guard or even Xenos races. There's unique wargear in the book, such as the Liber Heresius and new Warlord Traits which can help you define the role and personality of your Inquisitor. Are they readers of the Imperial Tarot or collectors of forbidden Xenos technology? There are also full rules and points for building an Inquisitorial retinue, including Acolytes, Arco-flagellants, Jokaero Weaponsmiths and plenty more besides. To help you start your own Inquisitorial warband, here's a selection of Inquisitorial miniatures, all of which are available through the Games Workshop website.


interesting 



> via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
> all of the metal/finecast inquisitor models are going to get updated in plastic shortly (although not in time for the digital codex release).
> 
> However, it looks like we may be getting ONE metal-to-plastic update (with the ‘dex?), although oddly, not the one that is shown on the cover of the new ‘dex. See the attached screen capture from my gift list. The Inquisitor w/ Grimoire was available as early as last week – pre-codex 411. Now it is not.
> ...


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Im quite tempted to make this my first digital codex purchase, after reading those teaser bits i really do feel like i want to know more about these guys, never really been that interested in this side of the imperium before, but it looks like a good read.


----------



## SilverTabby (Jul 31, 2009)

Land raider options... Hmmm. An assault vehicle option for Repentia, possibly? :grin:


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

@SilverTabby, that was my first thought. Then I remembered we're not on the WDex anymore, and it's probably just not worth it.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Shandathe said:


> @SilverTabby, that was my first thought. Then I remembered we're not on the WDex anymore, and it's probably just not worth it.


Sadly the big thing that makes Repentia worse is the loss of their "all the time" FnP. Honestly I rather liked using them before but now? Yeaaaaah....no.

Fill the Land Raider with Crusaders and DCA with a priest on the other hand (or Arcos for the cheap option) and you got yourself a scary brick-o-death. Especially with a Crusader since it gives the unit Grenades if they charge the turn they get out...


----------



## revilo44 (Sep 17, 2010)

These rumors just keep coming.



> via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
> It now has a lot more detailed rules for creating a retinue for your inquisitor, with each member having a lot more detailed rules / impact.
> 
> There are limits based on which Ordo you are on what you can take in your retinue.
> ...





> via Stickmonkey on Faeit 212
> GW is not producing finecast like before. Its moved to small batch runs, that they are only maintaining minimum stock on remaining models until they are replaced with plastic equivalents. And as stock runs out on some older models they are being discontinued even if no replacement is complete.
> 
> I think this may be what's happening to missing inquisitor models...the wide brim hat with plasma is also gone from what I see. Not that they will necessarily have a direct plastic replacement any time soon.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

I'm highly doubtful of the first one since Eddie (GW DE) posted you could make an army with the book too. And GW posted models you could use as Acolytes, something that doesn't work if the _entire book_ is for making Inquisitors only.


----------



## Geist (Mar 9, 2010)

Zion said:


> I'm highly doubtful of the first one since Eddie (GW DE) posted you could make an army with the book too. And GW posted models you could use as Acolytes, something that doesn't work if the _entire book_ is for making Inquisitors only.


I'm assuming that that person doesn't mean that literally. Rumors do make it sound like the Inquisitor retinue is the main focus of the codex with a full army lacking both choices and competitiveness.

Still, if true that's exactly what I wanted, an inquisitor leading my guard regiment who can take allies since he doesn't take up the ally slot.


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

I read Ahriman recently and there was a cool unit that I think would work very well in the game..



Pariah Arco-Flagellants


----------



## returnoftheclown (Mar 14, 2012)

And so the inquisition will soon be knocking on our doors!
Let us hope they bring gifts of good tidings and jo...oh wait...sorry getting them mixed up with something else I'm sure...wasn't there a baby Emperor involved?

Really interested to see what this brings as I've always liked inquisitors. Hope they are all actually playable rather than just the one...we all know who the little so and so is...


----------



## Majere613 (Oct 14, 2008)

My first impression on reading it: No great surprises.

We get Coteaz and Karamazov, largely unchanged including K's ability to Orbital Strike his own side. Inquisitors can get the GK powers as well as Divination, Pyromancy and another one I forget (it's late) but only 1 of them.

All you get is the Inquisitor and the Warbands, but those are every bit as nasty as they were, and then some. Taking the Inquisition as Primary gives you a special Force Chart and makes all warbands Scoring- Coteaz does this even as an ally. Inquisition is an extra ally, BB with all Imperials. The Priest is straight out of the Sororitas, including War Hymns. Ordo Xenos can still get Rad and Hammerhand, so the Assault Retinue From Hell is now available to all Imperial armies complete with Land Raider. With Zealot.

You can still stuff a Chimera full of monkeys, if that's your thing. There's also an entertaining book that dishes out special rules to an Inquisitor's unit based on who the enemy is- two rules if they use allies 

Valkyries are available as transports, but not Vendettas.

Issues: They've changed Psi-Shock again so it's clear, but almost useless (you now have to wound the Psyker to get the Perils)
Psybolt for vehicles, including the Crusader, costs 1 Meltabomb, which seems mental since it costs three times that to give Psyflame to the Redeemer.
Hereticus seem a bit weak.


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Majere613 said:


> All you get is the Inquisitor and the Warbands, but those are every bit as nasty as they were, and then some. Taking the Inquisition as Primary gives you a special Force Chart and makes all warbands Scoring- Coteaz does this even as an ally. Inquisition is an extra ally, BB with all Imperials.


Define special? And does it just make the Warbands scoring or actually turn them into Troops choices (assuming they're normally Elite)? Does 'Extra' ally mean we can now have three separate detachments in 2000 points?



Majere613 said:


> Psybolt for vehicles, including the Crusader, costs 1 Meltabomb, which seems mental since it costs three times that to give Psyflame to the Redeemer.
> Hereticus seem a bit weak.


They've been very much on a kick where weapons get the same price regardless of effectiveness on the models that can take them lately. See melee weapons on Sororitas, or Plasma Guns for practically any Imperial force. It makes a lot of weaponry a steal on some and meh for others. It makes the math very iffy IMO.


----------



## Majere613 (Oct 14, 2008)

Shandathe said:


> Define special? And does it just make the Warbands scoring or actually turn them into Troops choices (assuming they're normally Elite)? Does 'Extra' ally mean we can now have three separate detachments in 2000 points?


It only has a compulsory HQ and IIRC four Elites. Warbands are Elite, but Scoring. You can have your Primary, the Inquisitorial detachment, and an Allied detachment at any points you can fit it into.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

My full review is out. Enjoy it (or not): http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/11/review-codex-inquisition.html


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

Hey guys I don't have any apple devices except for ipod classic, how can I view this digital codexes??


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Stormxlr said:


> Hey guys I don't have any apple devices except for ipod classic, how can I view this digital codexes??


Grab the ePub version instead, you can open it on your computer - if you don't want a dedicated program, there are several browser plugins.


----------



## Ddraig Cymry (Dec 30, 2012)

Stormxlr said:


> Hey guys I don't have any apple devices except for ipod classic, how can I view this digital codexes??


If you buy it through Black Library you can print it out, as per their purchase agreement. Or you could buy it directly through Black Library and read it through an ePub reader on your browser.



Zion said:


> My full review is out. Enjoy it (or not): http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/11...quisition.html


Good review Zion! Now I won't have to get any Grey Knights in my Inquisition if I don't want to haha!


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Zion said:


> My full review is out. Enjoy it (or not): http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/11/review-codex-inquisition.html


I enjoyed it  Note on the Land Raiders, the Battle Conclave - possibly with an HQ choice attached - is really the only thing Sororitas would WANT in a Land Raider (Repentia being a poor, poor option), so yeah. Kinda wondering whether an IC attached to an Allied Inquisitorial Warband can hop into one


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

Sweet I thought the new codexes are only on itunes :3


----------



## Sworn Radical (Mar 10, 2011)

Right, I absolutely loved what they (the authors) did to the digital Codex Adepta Sororitas, and thus was looking forwards to Codex Inquisition very very much. Pre-ordered the thing as soon as possible and downloaded it last night six minutes after midnight when it popped up on the BL website.

_DON'T _buy this digital _'Codex'_ ! Really, _DON'T_ ! Period.

For 20 € you get an almost *exact ripoff* of the (now two years old) Inquisition content from Codex Grey Knights !
What ?
Yes, that's true.

The only things that are _'new'_ to the codex are:
- Warlord Traits ... big deal, everybody gets those in 6th ed.
- 3 (!) Relics ... couldn't have been a couple more, like in the Sororitas ebook, no ?
- The option to choose more Land Raider variants plus the Valkyrie as a dedicated transport. Ok, that's neat.

Everything else that is game-related is 95% copy-pasted from Codex Grey Knights, like mentioned above, and then it's even done so badly there's errors in there (Hurricane Bolters anyone ... etc.).

I love buying codex- and army books, and I don't care if it's ebooks or lavishly printed books like _Massacre_ from FW. And while I clearly enjoy a true hardcopy, there's nothing wrong with an ebook either, it's even simpler to bring to the gaming table. 
Codex Adepta Sororitas was a fine example of an e-codex in my humble opinion, and a good buy.
Codex Inquisition sadly is not.

Peace.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Stormxlr said:


> Sweet I thought the new codexes are only on itunes :3


Thankfully it was only initially they did this


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

Sworn Radical said:


> _DON'T _buy this digital _'Codex'_ ! Really, _DON'T_ ! Period.
> 
> For 20 € you get an almost *exact ripoff* of the (now two years old) Inquisition content from Codex Grey Knights !
> What ?
> Yes, that's true.


I thought the Adepta Sororitas eCodex was a lazy copypasta with nothing new and showing absolutely no idea on what to do with that army even after almost 20 years.

But this? This is a joke. It's a poorly made copy/paste job. I've seen fandexes with much higher quality and balance and they didn't try to rip 20€ off me.

It's fun in that it adds a unique option, but this super low quality low cost high price bullshit is grating on my nerves so hard.


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

I'm a newcomer to the hobby so I can't really assess the quality of a Codex but from what I know isn't Codex ]I[ supposed to be just an update on already successful Codex GK. I guess it would be good if they had special rules/armies for each Ordos to better show the distinction between each one which in my opinion is very poorly represented, and deathwatch with ordo xenos completely missing from what I know


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

Stormxlr said:


> I'm a newcomer to the hobby so I can't really assess the quality of a Codex but from what I know isn't Codex ]I[ supposed to be just an update on already successful Codex GK. I guess it would be good if they had special rules/armies for each Ordos to better show the distinction between each one which in my opinion is very poorly represented, and deathwatch with ordo xenos completely missing from what I know


It's a poor copy and paste of parts from a codex from a previous edition with only a very select few parts updated to current standards and several options cut, and we're not even talking about straight errors and things that just don't make sense.

I understand they wanted to give Inquisition a place without having to shoehorn it into any other army where it would never properly fit regardless of their efforts, but this is a crappy rush job, subpar even for GW standards, which seem to be extremely low for anything that isn't Space Marines.

Also, Valeria got cut because there's no model and the Chapterhouse trial made it clear that if they make rules with no models it's fair game for everyone, which would explain why they're rushing tyranids in December. I smell another pile of turd coming, Chaos Marines level.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

As a counter point to all the =I= bashing I've got a couple of small points to raise:

1. Anyone else besides me remember how we had rumors last year of mini-dexes? Codexes that weren't full sized books and didn't use the standard "every slot gets something" formula? That's what we have here.

2. With a lot of stuff being shared with the Grey Knights codex there was likely not a lot of room to change things, especially if they did anything to improve the options you can take because then you alienate the GK players who think you're trying to make them buy a second book to run their stuff properly.

3. There is no author. No one is credited for the work here. This tells me that this may not be a studio project, but an independent one done by the GW: Digital Editions team that they either got the go ahead for release afterwards, or where given as a kind of test of what they'd do with something like this. Either way if that's the case then I can't imagine they had a lot of freedom in this either. Especially taking into consideration item 2.

4. The only real people who are going to want a copy of this are Sisters players because it adds 2 new Battle Brothers to our army (Inquisition and Red Hunters Chapter Marines). If you don't need, or want the Inquisition don't buy it. If you have a passing interest in the book look at my review on TWG. If you like it but don't want to spend $32 USD get the BL one, it's about $10 USD less, and has all the same information, just no fancy cross linking through the whole book.

As for Nids, they were slated for January. The bump up is supposibly related to an issue with the Smaug motel not being approved, so the big box set for the Hobbit is on hold until it is. To plug that hole in went Nids. It's not a rush job, they were already done and ready to go, it's just a slight bump forward on when they're being released.


----------



## Sworn Radical (Mar 10, 2011)

Zion said:


> As a counter point to all the =I= bashing ...


Actually, Zion, there was no _=][= bashing_ at all. 
It's simply a fact that 95% of the rules and information relevant for actual game purposes (see how I exclude the fluff of things) are just copy-pasted from the 2-year-old Grey Knights book.
There's simply no denying that, and no way to make this look better.
People even *still* have to field Coteaz if they take =][= as an allied detachment and want for those Acolythes to be scoring units. That's just a joke.
So, yes, there was plenty of room for improvements.

Don't get me wrong, I got this little ebook to finally be able again to field my combined Sisters / Inquisition forces without the need for Codex Grey Knights. 
Oh, I just paid 20,- € for the exact same information I allready own ? Really ?

Charging 20,- € for this is a ripoff, nothing more. 

Peace.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Sworn Radical said:


> Actually, Zion, there was no _=][= bashing_ at all.


My apologies I must have missed the well balanced, constructive critiques somewhere in there.



Sworn Radical said:


> It's simply a fact that 95% of the rules and information relevant for actual game purposes (see how I exclude the fluff of things) are just copy-pasted from the 2-year-old Grey Knights book.


Which I mentioned and even gave possible reasons why. Tells me you didn't read past that sentence in my post. I'm so glad I took the time to type up some valid counter-points to the all negative postings only to have them not be read.



Sworn Radical said:


> There's simply no denying that, and no way to make this look better. People even *still* have to field Coteaz if they take =][= as an allied detachment and want for those Acolythes to be scoring units. That's just a joke.


Or run the Inquisition as a Primary Detachment and ally in your other army. You do know that Allies of Convience and Battle Brother troops are scoring right?



Sworn Radical said:


> So, yes, there was plenty of room for improvements.


I won't deny that, but I don't think there was a lot of room for the writers on this one to _make_ those improvements. Maybe when GK gets updated we'll see some auto-updates changing things here. 



Sworn Radical said:


> Don't get me wrong, I got this little ebook to finally be able again to field my combined Sisters / Inquisition forces without the need for Codex Grey Knights.
> Oh, I just paid 20,- € for the exact same information I allready own ? Really ?


Well and more fluff, Relics, more DT options, and nice art. Oh and the ability to take Red Hunters as Battle Brothers too.



Sworn Radical said:


> Charging 20,- € for this is a ripoff, nothing more.
> 
> Peace.


Subjective statement is subjective. Maybe it's just the cost of my textbooks (over $500 USD this semester alone) but the $32USD I paid for this doesn't feel like a rip off. How much is a full hard cover codex again? Eldar was nearly $50 so I think the $18 discount from a full codex price to a lower one for these min-ones isn't that bad. But value is subjective and what I see as being too highly priced is not the same as what you see as a "ripoff" (it's called "choke price" if you want to get into Economics, and it varies from person to person for a lot of reasons).

Calling this book a ripoff I think is going too far because you're assuming the value you set for the product is the same that everyone else is setting. If you're going to make subjective statements like that at least preface it as your opinion, not fact.


----------



## Sworn Radical (Mar 10, 2011)

Please, spare me your irony, Zion. It's not needed, and I'm clearly able to see each and every one of the points your raising.

Well, sure, you're right, I didn't bother to give any constructive criticism .... because there was no new material that would've been worth digging into. 

Sure, someone who never picked up the Grey Knights book in the past will find information aplenty, but not us people who allready own that one.
At the very least, GW could've been hinting at that, stating that Codex =][= will be a compilation of formerly published rules (plus the 3 relics ... yeah). 
So, I'm neither_ 'bashing'_ nor _'raging'_ nor whatever ... I'm simply a very dysatisfied customer, quite unhappy with the product I've recently purchased. Let's see if they give a refund ...

As for the detachment rules you've been metioning ... if you'd read my post you'd have seen I was talking about =][= as the allied detachment. I'm quite aware it works the other way 'round.
Fluff, sure, I love fluff, even if I believe that a fair amount of the fluff in Codex =][= has been pusbilshed before as well. 
New Artworks ? Most were actually shown before in FFG's Dark Heresy line of books.


----------



## Majere613 (Oct 14, 2008)

To be honest, you can go round and round as to whether it's worth the asking price. It's cheaper than a full Codex, but in terms of sheer volume of rules there's not much in there.

On the other hand, what it adds to Imperial forces can be game-changing. I don't see it being too handy for Marines, but for Sisters you get access to an excellent assault unit complete with Land Raider- I used a Xenos with Hammerhand, Rad Grenades and a Force Axe accompanied by Crusaders, DCA and a Priest today and the unit was just brutal. It's also another way to get a Flyer for Sisters without Forge World, albeit the less broken one.
For Guard, you get a Psyker with Divination for an absolute pittance of points who doesn't need to bring any Troops with him, and of course the assault option is handy, though less necessary since in my experience Guard don't have to get as close as Sisters do. The Punisher, in particular, has good reason to celebrate.

Most of the art is new to me, which is ultimately all I can say on that subject.


----------



## Varakir (Sep 2, 2009)

I'm quite disappointed about the lack of assassins - i really wanted to run one with my allied Inquisitorial entourage.

The annoying thing now is that i could still do that with the GK codex, but i'd prefer to be flexible on taking Coteaz, and i miss out on the battle brothers rules.

I think i'll probably pick this up, but it's a shame there are a few more options in the book.


----------



## Majere613 (Oct 14, 2008)

Varakir said:


> I'm quite disappointed about the lack of assassins - i really wanted to run one with my allied Inquisitorial entourage.
> 
> The annoying thing now is that i could still do that with the GK codex, but i'd prefer to be flexible on taking Coteaz, and i miss out on the battle brothers rules.
> 
> I think i'll probably pick this up, but it's a shame there are a few more options in the book.


Call me cynical, but if we don't see something very similar for Assassins at some point I will be _very_ surprised.

TBH, neither Assassins or non-Malleus Inquisitors ever really belonged in the GK book in the first place. Next time they come around, I suspect they'll be removed in favour of including them via the mini-dexes.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Sworn Radical said:


> Please, spare me your irony, Zion. It's not needed, and I'm clearly able to see each and every one of the points your raising.


Actually, it's sarcasm. I know irony has basically lost it's meaning, but that was not an attempt to be ironic. 

Also, it'd be nice if you saw them if you had acknowledged them, even in passing, just so I knew that you didn't skip the rest of my post (which is something that has and does happen).



Sworn Radical said:


> Well, sure, you're right, I didn't bother to give any constructive criticism .... because there was no new material that would've been worth digging into.


There is stuff that's changed, but yes it's not much. I really do think it's because of the GK book though as they'd be punishing Grey Knights players for not having the "new" and "better" rules by changing things too much. What little did change can be done via an errata if need be, but to drastic of a change and they'd basically have to publish new pages for the GK book or piss off all the people who run GK Inquisition armies.

Does it mean the book is less awesome than I hope? Yes. Does it mean that the book is a steaming pile of gak? Not in my mind. I think that thanks to the nature of it being a digital only codex that when GK get their update this codex can be rather effortlessly updated with all the changes without any real issues and without forcing people to buy a new version.



Sworn Radical said:


> Sure, someone who never picked up the Grey Knights book in the past will find information aplenty, but not us people who allready own that one.


Except all the changes to allies, FOC and things like that, sure. But maybe, just maybe this book isn't strictly for GK players. Not everyone could take Inquisition without being stuck at Allies of Convenience _or worse_ like GK could.



Sworn Radical said:


> At the very least, GW could've been hinting at that, stating that Codex =][= will be a compilation of formerly published rules (plus the 3 relics ... yeah).
> So, I'm neither_ 'bashing'_ nor _'raging'_ nor whatever ... I'm simply a very dysatisfied customer, quite unhappy with the product I've recently purchased. Let's see if they give a refund ...


You're also posting with a strong bias and doing so in such a way that it suggest you're claiming objective facts and not opinions.



Sworn Radical said:


> As for the detachment rules you've been metioning ... if you'd read my post you'd have seen I was talking about =][= as the allied detachment. I'm quite aware it works the other way 'round.


If you're aware then posting like there isn't a work around is a little misleading.



Sworn Radical said:


> Fluff, sure, I love fluff, even if I believe that a fair amount of the fluff in Codex =][= has been pusbilshed before as well.
> New Artworks ? Most were actually shown before in FFG's Dark Heresy line of books.


Yes, it's probably all recycled, but it's also all consolidated for easy reference and there is art I haven't seen because I don't own all the Dark Heresy books (and some people have possible never seen it) so it doesn't make it less "new" to us exposure wise. It's good art and fluff and I'm glad to have it all in one easy to find place now.


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

@Mokuren by your standards what's a good Codex and whats a bad one? I think Codex Dark Angels is quite good but a bit lacking, while chaos codices are good imho .
@Majere613 actually Ye I agree and honestly Codex inquisition should have been a proper Codex that has all 3 ordos and their militant arms represented in 3 different chapters of the book with personal rules, relics, wargear, heroes, and armies. Alas we got 2 half assed digital mini Codex that failed to represent =][=nquisition for a vast, omnipotent organization that it is.


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

Stormxlr said:


> @Mokuren by your standards what's a good Codex and whats a bad one? I think Codex Dark Angels is quite good but a bit lacking, while chaos codices are good imho .


Codex: Chaos Marines is a bad joke.

There's one good unit (the Heldrake) and everything else varies between mediocre and utter trash. I still remember hearing about this being the first codex of 6th edition so everything was changing, as the edition turnover really did shake things up rules-wise and forced everyone to re-think their army. It was even being said that as soon as a good chunk of 6e codexes would come out, the game would turn a bit more balanced and out of its power creep curve.

No. Bullshit. This was proven to be false over and over. They told us it was impossible to detail the various Chaos legions and produce rules for them and that we should stop being nostalgic old farts only capable of crying about how good we were in 3rd edition, and THEN they made Codex: Space Marines with a 7-in-one deal.

This edition thoroughly nerfed assault units, and yet the dedicated CC units from Chaos Marines that didn't go up in cost were _nerfed further_. Berzerkers are unplayable, Mark of Khorne is an expensive bad joke, Daemon princes are only good for abusing Iron Arm combined with flyer cheese and even then Codex: Chaos Daemons made them better anyways. Daemonic possession was _nerfed_ for no apparent reason despite vehicles being a lot frailer in 6th edition already.

Oh but the other codexes balanced things, right? Yeah, sure, aside from loyalist marines being only 1 point more expensive than their chaotic counterparts and getting ATSKNF _and_ chapter tactics for that one extra point, Eldar got a noticeable boost on their wave serpents and most of their previously problematic or subpar units (except Banshees, because apparently assaulting was overpowered? I seriously don't know), Tau got plenty of upgrades and point discounts and the ability to be battle bros with people like Eldar and Space Marines, the Imperial Guard has some of the best cost/benefit ratio for flyers _and it's still a 5th edition codex_, Necrons have extremely cheap flyers and skimmers who got boosted by virtue of being flyers and skimmers.

And now we have Adepta Sororitas who still have models from 1993, are losing more and more options at every update and are still the army with the worst model cost/game effectiveness ratio. Go look how much you need to shell out for 10 seraphim with two special weapons. Go look how much this immolator spam will cost your wallet. Go look and compare with other armies' "competitive" lists. Now remember they're models from over a dozen years ago, so old they're out of scale with the rest of the range.

Practically a month later, Codex: Inquisition comes out of the blue, and look! It's a copypasta of the same rules we had in Codex: Grey Knights! With a price tag! For something you probably already have! Oh sure, let's be honest and say they have updated the Priests to be on par with Adepta Sororitas standards. That is: they copy-pasted that part from the Adepta Soriritas codex instead of the Grey Knights one, because everything else has Grey Knights costs back from 5th edition and it shows. Damn it shows. It shows so hard. Power armour and bolter acolytes for _more_ than a Space Marine? Yeah, sure! Maybe it made sense back when Space Marines were 18 per model without grenades, I guess whomever made this "digital codex" hasn't played the game since then.

But I guess I'm also tired of all the fanboy apologism. They're blatantly playing favourites and coming up with poor copy-paste to rip off more and more money with practically no effort, and I'm being told I should be grateful I'm getting to pay for the option to field a super special new detachment and look at some yet again recycled art? As if people couldn't do image searches on the internet or fan art never existed? Seriously? I'm supposed to be glad part of those 20€ went into the privilege of looking at pictures on a tablet?

Yes, I know, I'm annoying myself too. Tell you what, I'm fucking done. I'm not buying into an army where models from 1993 cost me 11€ each, I'm not spending twice that much for the privilege of knowing how I'm supposed to field them and I'm not spending way more than that as a tax for the privilege of knowing how to play the game at all, not when I already have miniatures from other manufacturers with free rules where I can expand without feeling like I'm being laughed at for picking the "wrong" side.

I'm sorry, this time I'm done, I'm fucking done. Time to bring my business elsewhere as they say.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

So all this back and forth and the feeling that people seem to pay attention to my points more when I write them as an article led to me writing them up an article: http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/11/editorial-codex-inquisition-what.html

It's not me defending what happened, it's just my thoughts on what may have gotten us what we got.


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

I think it just completes Codex: Witch Hunter to 6th edition rules. All my loaned out ]I[ will be returning to the Bosom of my Sisters army. And the Guard now get ]I[ add-ons.


----------

