# leaked sisters of battle codex pages?



## hells (Mar 11, 2011)

today at my gaming club i had a few members come up and ask if id seen the leaked codex pages for sisters, one showed me and pointed out where to look for them. honestly i have no idea if their real or fake but all in all its quite interesting looking.

atm there seems to be 4 pages, 3 on troops choices, the last just a list of a few weapons. main things i can see is sisters now come in squads of 5 - 20, 10 points each with a few extra bits of wargear, relics seem to be the new way of giving a squad faithful (a few club members believe that, im inclined to agree there)

well anyway heres the link to the page, ill try to edit in the pictures onto this page, no garantues.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2011/03/leaked-sisters-of-battle-codex-page.html

MadCowCrazy: Removed the pics, leaving the link to where they can be seen.


----------



## Ferrus Manus (Apr 28, 2008)

Ive never owned a Sisters of battle codex but i found the see page XX interesting which implies the book isnt finished so it could be a new one


----------



## Kobrakai (Jul 25, 2008)

Wow.. interesting stuff!

If this is actual play test stuff then it should at least keep people keen and give hope for a new codex in the not *too* distant future.

Great find thanks for sharing!


----------



## Marneus Calgar (Dec 5, 2007)

It's definitely a new style codex.

Probably a play testers, does this mean we could be seeing them next year?


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

I don't care about sisters wheres the necron codex!


----------



## traitor_dice (Apr 1, 2011)

Looks pretty legit. I'm glad the Arbites get a bit more love.
The Repressor looks great too.


----------



## Svartmetall (Jun 16, 2008)

Given the number of spelling mistakes, I'm thinking fake...


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Svartmetall said:


> Given the number of spelling mistakes, I'm thinking fake...


Thats what makes me lean a bit more towards legit. If its a play test Dex then it would have Spelling mistake, hell half of my 3rd ed and 5th ed Codex STILL have spelling mistakes or improper Grammer. The writing on the page about possible changes keep me from dissmissing it all together.


----------



## Vinci76 (Sep 12, 2008)

It just seems far to close to April fools for me to accept anything "leeked"... 

the rule with games workshop is simple - 

does it have a price tag? = real.

no price tag and no cease and decist order thrown at heresy = false.
:grin:


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

It could be real it could be fake, without an email from GW and some brand spanking new plastic sisters to go with it,i cant really get my juices flowing,with PC software and a little imagination its not dificult to match a codex style and without photos of actual new models and a release date its just a leaked or faked document made even less plausable by its closeness to april 1st.


----------



## Azezel (May 23, 2010)

If only there were a stickied five-thousand post long thread about this sort of thing.

Consensus is that it's fake, by the way.


----------



## callred (Jun 24, 2008)

hmm does look similar to the 'leaked' Titian dex if so all things good for Sisters - but will wait with baited breath of course k:

but ..... having just looked a R-24" , sniper, assault !, always hits psykers and daemons on a 2+ seems a bit OP considering nothing in the GK codex comes close to that !!!!


----------



## MadCowCrazy (Mar 19, 2009)

I'm in a bit of a dilemma here, GW takes serious offence to the posting of leaked material from their playtest dexes etc. We and other forums have been warned in the past not to post such things.
I'm leaving the link but removing the pictures, it's really hard to make a legal call on this.
These pics have been known for about a week now but I did not post them because if they are legit GW legal team might come around again.

Leaving the link to where you can see them should be ok but it's still dodgy as leaving a link to a site where you can download GW copyrighted codicies etc would cause GW legal to take actions.

I'm leaving it like this for the moment, remember I might be forced to delete or close this thread if GW takes offence.


----------



## Tahiri (Feb 28, 2011)

Certainly hope its fake, we need to be flamer and fire heavy and that doesnt really look to be the case with these pages.

Also not be around all that long so I dont know, but how often has GW added stuff from Forge World and the like into the mainstream 40k stuff?


----------



## callred (Jun 24, 2008)

5 points for shield that confers 5+ inv save against all attacks and 3+ Armour save in cc !!!
my PAGK with their pointless Nemesis Swords are very angry if thats true :angry:


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

I too am hoping it's fake. Mainly because even in these mere four pages there's just too many Non-Sisters around.


----------



## Tahiri (Feb 28, 2011)

callred said:


> 5 points for shield that confers 5+ inv save against all attacks and 3+ Armour save in cc !!!
> my PAGK with their pointless Nemesis Swords are very angry if thats true :angry:


Because rolling a 2+ to wound, and ignoring said 3+ armor save with your power weapons all while going first is terrible.



Shandathe said:


> I too am hoping it's fake. Mainly because even in these mere four pages there's just too many Non-Sisters around.


Exactly, We are all wanting a "Sisters of Battle" codex, not a "Witch Hunters" codex which would be half inquisitors. But it would seem with half of the old Witch Hunters Codex appearing in the just released Grey Knight Codex, the Sisters well have a codex to themselves.


----------



## Rathios1337 (Jul 2, 2010)

just me or are there actually ANY unit with a cap of 15 other than the "Leaked Arbites"?


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Rathios1337 said:


> just me or are there actually ANY unit with a cap of 15 other than the "Leaked Arbites"?


Dark Eldar Wyches do!


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

I am not convinced it's the real thing, 
that said I am well aware that GW have wanted to reintroduce arbites for awhile now and the timing in regards to playtesting sounds just about possible


----------



## SGMAlice (Aug 13, 2010)

Meh! As much as i would like this to be true, I'm more inclined to call fake on this one.
The wording on the entries are wrong when compared to how the current Codices are written.

And if i am not mistaken: An Inferno Pistol is a Pistol Flamer; yet this material lists it as a Melta weapon.
Which would be an Infernus Pistol even though they are a BA only weapon as far as i can remember.

SGMAlice


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Screw the frigging Arbites. The Sisters are Ecclesiarchy, with a myriad of duties over the different kinds of Orders. In some capacity, Inquisition, with yet more. They're seriously wearing too many hats as it is. The Adeptus Arbites are a wholly different branch of Imperial government that needs to bloody well not bother us 

I'm sure they can function just fine without the help.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

And the stormraven was suppose to be blood angels only too.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

aboytervigon said:


> And the stormraven was suppose to be blood angels only too.


...really? Did you even read the stormraven entry in the blood angel Codex? It said they got it from the Grey Knights!

@SMGAlice
Inferno pistols are basically melta pistols. They only difference between them and Infernus pistols is the ap value.


----------



## Azezel (May 23, 2010)

SGMAlice said:


> And if i am not mistaken: An Inferno Pistol is a Pistol Flamer; yet this material lists it as a Melta weapon.
> Which would be an Infernus Pistol even though they are a BA only weapon as far as i can remember.


An Inferno Pistol is a melta pistol with AP2 that apears in Codex witch Hunters. An Infernus pistol is a melta pistol that apears in Codex More Pointless Space Marines and has AP1 because Space Marines must always be better.



Shandathe said:


> Screw the frigging Arbites. The Sisters are Ecclesiarchy, with a myriad of duties over the different kinds of Orders. In some capacity, Inquisition, with yet more. They're seriously wearing too many hats as it is. The Adeptus Arbites are a wholly different branch of Imperial government that needs to bloody well not bother us
> 
> I'm sure they can function just fine without the help.


Well said.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Crock of shit. I've myself made a codex in part for Deamonhunters; and easily copied the layout of the 5th edition codex in publisher with relative accuracy.

Edit - and I did page XX. It's been available for some time, and while I'm not going to go around blowing my own trumpet, but christ that doesn't half bear similarities to some of the GK entries I made for the Arbites - Stun Grenades, Riot Shields...


----------



## callred (Jun 24, 2008)

Tahiri said:


> Because rolling a 2+ to wound, and ignoring said 3+ armor save with your power weapons all while going first is terrible.
> 
> 
> > Ok point taken  rant mode off


----------



## hungryugolino (Sep 12, 2009)

Shandathe: Surely carryover from WH is a good thing? IST do need to be in at least one codex... (If not plastic...)


----------



## Vinci76 (Sep 12, 2008)

callred said:


> Tahiri said:
> 
> 
> > Because rolling a 2+ to wound, and ignoring said 3+ armor save with your power weapons all while going first is terrible.
> ...


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

hungryugolino said:


> Shandathe: Surely carryover from WH is a good thing? IST do need to be in at least one codex... (If not plastic...)


There's Storm Troopers in the Imperial Guard, which is exactly where they belong. With the Inquisitors moving to Codex: Grey Knights, the Storm Troopers they brought along should also disappear (and yes, that's just Storm Troopers. The whole IST instead of ST is just because they were brought in that way). 

Note the Grey Knights aren't bothered by Storm Troopers anymore either, and the Inquisition in Grey Knights is fine because the Grey Knights ARE Inquisition. They're the heavily mailed fist of the Ordo Malleus. Note Inquisitor Karamazov and his Throne of Judgement are now in that book, he was originally in Witch Hunters.


----------



## hells (Mar 11, 2011)

MadCowCrazy said:


> I'm in a bit of a dilemma here, GW takes serious offence to the posting of leaked material from their playtest dexes etc. We and other forums have been warned in the past not to post such things.
> I'm leaving the link but removing the pictures, it's really hard to make a legal call on this.
> These pics have been known for about a week now but I did not post them because if they are legit GW legal team might come around again.
> 
> ...


my apolagies if it does cause any problems, dont get why theyd get mad at fans who are interested in it instead of the guy who leaked it :shok:

but yeah as i said in first post im not sure if its real or not, no one ive talked to really is, i just found it an interesting read and figured chuck it up for you guys 

the Adeptus Arbites actually have me midly interested, hoping its real cause the models would look awesome with their riot shields and shock battons making the front rank then shotguns at the back  id prob get a few squads just to have lying around to look pretty


----------



## MadCowCrazy (Mar 19, 2009)

Tahiri said:


> Certainly hope its fake, we need to be flamer and fire heavy and that doesnt really look to be the case with these pages.


I used to think like you but then I noticed the unit size is 5 sisters, that's 2 special weapons per 5 sisters. Does not say but maybe you could take 8 special weapons in a 20sister squad?
It says you can add up to 15 more sisters but does not say if you can add extra weapons per 5 sisters.

I can totally see why the heavy flamer was removed, it would get silly really fast with 5 sister squads with a flamer and heavy flamer all over the place.




hells said:


> my apolagies if it does cause any problems, dont get why theyd get mad at fans who are interested in it instead of the guy who leaked it :shok:


The same logic could be applied if I provided everyone with a link to where you could download the new GK codex. I wouldn't have made the scans or whatever and Heresy would not be hosting the files but there is no way GW would appreciate me doing something like that.

It's just hard to determine right now, allot of forums have posted the pics and GW does not seem to have contacted them. This could mean the pics are fake, I know allot of people got banned etc for posting pictures from the leaked GK codex on other forums.
As for now I'd rather take the safe route and not have the pictures on the site, I'm leaving the link though as I believe everyone should be able to take a look at these pics.

Fake or not I have to look at the greater picture and the good of the forum.


----------



## callred (Jun 24, 2008)

Good call and the risk is appreciated by all I hope so we can at least see the pages for ourselves and determine from there what we think - fake or not it does at least stimulate interesting debates and hey who doesn't want to give some love to the Sisters  (maybe Necron and Tau players - sorry  )


----------



## StalkerZero (Oct 3, 2010)

It could be bad news for Necrons potentially if we're seeing Sisters leaks on this scale already.

But that does look pretty solid from a design perspective to me. I tried thinking of some lists in the old codex (a friend of mine has an old 7000 point sister army) but didn't really see much that looked like a lot of "fun".


----------



## Sworn Radical (Mar 10, 2011)

There's hoping they bring back the zealots / Frateris Militia as core units in the new Codex, whatever it's final name might be. I just love my zealots.
The entry for the Sisters squad seems pretty crappy - no Hvy. Bolter or Hvy. Flamer, no nifty gear for the Sister Superior ... bleh.


----------



## hells (Mar 11, 2011)

Sworn Radical said:


> The entry for the Sisters squad seems pretty crappy - no Hvy. Bolter or Hvy. Flamer, no nifty gear for the Sister Superior ... bleh.


sisters troops couldnt take heavy bolters, that was retributiers  but i do agree on lack of cool gear for veteran, cant seem to find the book anywhere, silly gw forgot it

atm i has my fingers crossed for soon, im really looking forward to new models and a few new rules for pentient engines and repentia so they live longer


----------



## Kettu (Nov 20, 2007)

Something really important to add to this thread: (Warning, these links lead to 4chan)
*EDIT: Removed the links. They are now dead.*

These will not stay up all that long, /tg/ by nature won't have pages last generally more then a day.

*Take this with as much salt as the original pages. I see no reason this could be fake but also see no reason this could be real either.*

To paraphrase what is said:


> MFW people are still posting stuff I wrote as an April fool three days later and thinking it could be real, despite me fucking up a load of details because I was rushing it.





> ...and just in case anyone doubts that I really did fake it, here's a screenshot of a page before I messed around with it in photoshop to look like a scan.


Dear mods, I do know the rules about posting copyright material in picture format but if this is true then would the rules apply for my attached picture? I do not mean to intentionally break rules here but to me it seems they might not entirely apply.


----------



## MadCowCrazy (Mar 19, 2009)

There we go, pretty much proof the pics were fake 

or is this GW trying to do some sort of cover up? :crazy:


----------



## Cruor99 (Mar 11, 2009)

MadCowCrazy said:


> There we go, pretty much proof the pics were fake
> 
> or is this GW trying to do some sort of cover up? :crazy:


As little as GW makes themselves noticable on the more popular 40k forums, I doubt they would even glance at teegee.


----------



## StalkerZero (Oct 3, 2010)

Cruor99 said:


> As little as GW makes themselves noticable on the more popular 40k forums, I doubt they would even glance at teegee.


Because they are probably busy in other sections of that website instead?

Well, it was pretty interesting stuff at least.


----------



## Tahiri (Feb 28, 2011)

MadCowCrazy said:


> I used to think like you but then I noticed the unit size is 5 sisters, that's 2 special weapons per 5 sisters. Does not say but maybe you could take 8 special weapons in a 20sister squad?
> It says you can add up to 15 more sisters but does not say if you can add extra weapons per 5 sisters.
> 
> I can totally see why the heavy flamer was removed, it would get silly really fast with 5 sister squads with a flamer and heavy flamer all over the place.


 


Another thing to point out is, what is the deal with squads with 5 members. Sisters aren't space marines, I don't want them to turn even more into space marines by running small combat squads. But then again the current codex has no benefit of taking squads of greater then 10 as you do not get the benefit of additional special/heavy weapons.


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

MadCowCrazy said:


> There we go, pretty much proof the pics were fake
> 
> or is this GW trying to do some sort of cover up? :crazy:


im indiffirent on this but just because someone proved that you can easily fake things like this with photo shop doesnt prove fake or not fake. I wouldn't be surprised if the guys at GW also use programs such as photoshop or acrobat to make the pages of there codexes. (please no one take this the wrong way at all.)

Now I see some of you had said why would there be a sisters leak when necrons are gonna be the next codex. Well at a place like GW they arent just working on one dex at a time they would be working on multiple projects at once each having a staff dedicated to work on it. They may plan on releasing necrons before the sisters but that doesnt mean they would be working on it while they finish up the necrons dex. Most things such as this are done weeks even months before the release date. so are the pics real or fake well I cannot say but they don't look too faked and from reading them it looks like there was some thought behind these and not just some random ass prank. 

Another way to help support the theory of multiple projects is that if you guys have heard Matt Ward wrote up the GK dex but is more less adding support within the necrons dex and the rumour is the he isnt even involved in the sisters book. This helps support the theory for one reason. It shows that although we like to think of matt ward being an agent of chaos he is still human and cannot work on all projects.

On a final note I have read somewhere that jervis has stated every army will get a new dex before they even dare put out a 6th ed. Which tells me that since there are only three updates trully left we will more than likely see them wrapping up sometime into next summer. Given the pattern when looking at the past codex release dates that show a new dex around every 4 to 6 months and also another pattern that shows a fantasy book in between each 40k dex along with diffrent random model releases and the occasional expansion.

This only me giving an assesment not any fact is actually within this post I know just about as much as anyone else. So no calliing me a blundering idiot that doesnt know what he is talkin about. I have not actually delved deep into researching these leaked pics but I will soon and then I shall share whatever I manage to dig up. I f anyone has new information to help my research please PM me about and then I can evaluate it and see if it is credable.

I stress again DO NOT send any hate towards me over an assesment!!!


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

Ok after analyzing the pics a bit closer I have another assesment on this. 

The first two come real close to being legit.
They follow the current codex build not only in layout but in font as well. The first pic of all looks quite legit i would prolly say a 55% chance because of the statment above and it looks more like a scan and not a photoshop creation. Mainly look at the odd fold to the left.

The second however gets a lil less legit looking It still follows the same layout and font but doesnt look like a scan much like the first I would say its an even less percent chance of being official. The last two look nothing like a codex They don't use the same font at all and they look way more like a photoshop creation not to mention the free hand writing on one pic which looks more digital than actual hand writing. Another thing to note would be that it could be a rough draft but I doubt it. If only one pic looks offical more than likely they are all fake. Now this does raise another question. Whoever leaked this informtion could be covering there tracks in attept to save ther own ass by creating fakes to go with it but I can't see why someone would do such a thing. Take it for what it is worth wait until we see the next dex come out and then we will more than likely get better information and leaks altogether.


----------



## Sworn Radical (Mar 10, 2011)

hells said:


> sisters troops couldnt take heavy bolters, that was retributiers


Clarification:

In the 2nd ed. Codex Sisters of Battle the standard Sisters squad had the option to include one sister w. Hvy. Bolter.

In the 3rd ed. Codex Witch Hunters the standard Sisters squad had the option to include one sister w. Hvy. Flamer.

 :wink:


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

does anyone have any credintials on this site faeit: 212


----------



## andrewm9 (Aug 21, 2008)

Sworn Radical said:


> Clarification:
> 
> In the 2nd ed. Codex Sisters of Battle the standard Sisters squad had the option to include one sister w. Hvy. Bolter.
> 
> ...


The Heavy Flamer is an Assault weapon though. If it was actually Heavy nobody would take them but Terminators becuase they have no range. Battle Sisters have no heavy weapons currently and why would you take them if you could having to take 10 sisters kludges up all the other weapons that have 24" range or less. If the squad goes to 5 Sisters minimum it might work. It works for Space Marines becuase they can combat squad.


----------



## SilverTabby (Jul 31, 2009)

Heh. Having seen what real playtest versions look like, that's what I'd expect one written by someone guessing at how they look would do it... :wink:


----------

