PDA

View Full Version : I Don't Get Daemon Hunters and Witch Hunters...



EvilGenius1
09-04-2007, 00:34
I was reading the Daemon Hunter and Witch Hunter codices today and I noticed...that they are practically the same army. The only difference is that Daemon Hunters use Grey Knights and Witch Hunters use Sisters of Battle. Really, I had a hard time finding any different between the two, many of their army choices are identical. Now, why would GW put all the time and effort into making these two, tiny, ultra-specialized armies when core armies like Orks and Dark Eldar hadn't gotten any attention in like 7 years? Just a thought...

Dragonlv8
09-04-2007, 00:37
Yea I don't no eather percinally though I think witch hunters are better because like the only unit in deamon hunters is grey knits so your going to get out numbered pretty badly.

Xenocidal Maniac
09-04-2007, 00:38
Well, they really aren't the same army. The wargear and psychic powers are entirely different, and there are many units available to each that are not available to the other. I guarantee you that they don't play the same.

I dunno, man... not trying to pick a fight here, but this sounds like another one of those "why are teh orks and dark eldar so neglected gw is teh suck" threads...

GhostLegion
09-04-2007, 00:43
Though the two armies appear the same (and granted they are similar in many respects) there are vast differences in both play and army list construction. Sisters vs Grey Knights is a vast difference in unit size and in capabilities...not to mention numbers. There are also the psychic powers to consider. Though I can understand some people thinking and taking the point of view that old armies need to be updated prior to new army releases, remember that Grey Knights, Sisters, and Inquisitors have been in the rules and background since Rogue Trader days without a codex or specific list allowing their specific play. Orks, though not really up to date, nor truely on par with the other armies, already had a codex when the Daemon Hunters and Witch Hunters were released for the first time.

and please dont forget, the ork codex is still playable even without a new cover or fancy new rules for 4th edition.

Lord Malek The Red Knight
09-04-2007, 00:44
different Psy Powers, different Wargear, different flavour (Arco's, Pen. Engines, SoB, Repentia vs GKs, Daemonhosts etc), different Special Characters.

although IMO when they re-release them for 4th ed they will put it all in one book w/4 sections: Inquisition (inc. Storm Troopers, Assassins, Orbital strikes etc), DH (GKs), WH (SoB) and AH (DW) - there's no need to repeat all the generic Inquisition stuff. splitting each section by "Radical" and "Puritan" would be a nice touch too (effectively giving you at least 9 different armies in one book: Ordo Xenos, Ordo Hereticus and Ordo Malleus, all in either Radical or Puritan form, plus pure GK, DW and SoB... plus you could use them alongside other codex lists...). :D

~ Tim

Thommy H
09-04-2007, 00:44
Well, Grey Knights and Sisters of Battle have existed in 40K since forever, and players who fielded them wanted real Codecies. At a guess, I suppose Codex: DH was an outgrowth of the Inquisitor project (the 'retinues' of Inquisitors are essentially translations of the warbands in Inquisitor into 40K) and they realised it was a good way to give the Grey Knights a Codex.

Naturally, from that, they could kill two birds with one stone and do Sisters/Ordo Hereticus in one book too.

And yes, the armies are similar, at least in terms of the army list. They're not similar in terms of imagery though - compare the glowing paladins of DH to the grubby, frothing zealots of the WH. They're thematically distinct.

The reason they put the effort in is because new armies are cool and fun. GW like to bring something new to the table now and then - you could argue that there was no point ever introducing the Tau, or how about all those different Space Marine Chapters, eh? Dark Angels have more in common with normal Space Marines than DH do with WH, yet no one questions that Codex (nor should they).

EvilGenius1
09-04-2007, 00:57
So what are these armies anyways? They're not really Space Marines or Imperial Guard and they seem to only do one thing well.

I know the imagery is different for each, but you don't see any other army getting seperate codices for different themes (I doubt they'll belease a Craftworld, Ork Clan, or Tyranid Hive specific codex).

I was just saying that it seems strange that they would release two armies that don't release have widespread appeal and are so specialized in lieu of updating hopelessly old core armies.

I am curious as to what these armies are like, is it possible to build one or the other out of mostly plastic? What would one buy to make 1000 pts of either one?

+_Void_Crusaders_+
09-04-2007, 01:00
It's the Inquisition... It's not supposed to be that different... I can imagine Xenos will be different as they are somewhat unorthadox. Aside from that I think the reason GW did it is because A) they were very shortsighted and B) they knew it would sell (Space marine look-a-likes and Imperials are usually a fav).


I am curious as to what these armies are like, is it possible to build one or the other out of mostly plastic? What would one buy to make 1000 pts of either one?

Honestly, plastic would take a lot of converting and you would need to use either a lot of IG or converted space marines with glaves etc. etc. Other than that I don't think Witch Hunters can be done as you'd have to go all IG (making it basically a weak IG army).

Wraithbored
09-04-2007, 01:12
I was reading the Daemon Hunter and Witch Hunter codices today and I noticed...that they are practically the same army. Perhaps the same could be said of all power armour armies. But enough talk! HAVE AT YOU!!!:D

Jesting aside IMHO they are quite different. Feel and rules wise.

Lord Malek The Red Knight
09-04-2007, 01:15
I was just saying that it seems strange that they would release two armies that don't release have widespread appeal and are so specialized in lieu of updating hopelessly old core armies.
you realise that neither C:WH or C: DH has had a 4th ed release yet either, and that we had to wait for almost all of 3rd ed for them, right?

the thing with complaining about an old codex compared to one that was released much later is that while youve been waiting for an updated codex, players of the other army have been waiting for a codex full stop! :p

now, if you want to complain about armies that have had a 4th ed release while early 3rd ed armies are still waiting, then thats a different matter: rant away. ;)

~ Tim

sabre4190
09-04-2007, 01:18
Yeah the only difference is the whole grey knight/sisters thing. But thats a pretty big difference. While DH have daemonhosts and WH have acro flagellants, the difference in the chamber militants is pretty big. Grey knights are space marines on steroids. Better weaponry with a speciality in cc that few can match. Sisters are in power armor, but focus on affordable firepower and cost efficiency (among other things). I've seen people take pure Gk armies and pure sisters armies. I would definately say that they are different. Should they be combined into one "inquisition" army with alien hunters? Yeah i would say they have enough similarities to do that. But they are still distinct forces.

Wraithbored
09-04-2007, 01:20
Also it would be nice to have all the Adversaries rules in one place.

The Emperor
09-04-2007, 01:26
remember that Grey Knights, Sisters, and Inquisitors have been in the rules and background since Rogue Trader days without a codex or specific list allowing their specific play.

Actually, there was a Codex: Sisters of Battle in 2nd edition. Very nice book. Small, but jampacked with background and an interesting, albeit threadbare, army list.


you realise that neither C:WH or C: DH has had a 4th ed release yet either, and that we had to wait for almost all of 3rd ed for them, right?

the thing with complaining about an old codex compared to one that was released much later is that while youve been waiting for an updated codex, players of the other army have been waiting for a codex full stop!

Exactly. Orks had something like three books in 1st edition. They had a Codex in 2nd edition. They had a Codex in 3rd edition. Dark Eldar got their first Codex in 3rd as well as a revision. Sisters of Battle only had the 2nd edition Codex prior to that, and Grey Knights didn't have jack until then. So why're you complaining? Soon as the Dark Eldar were introduced, they had a Codex. The Orks have had a Codex every edition thus far. Grey Knights, on the other hand, didn't get a Codex until LONG after they were introduced. And Sisters of Battle didn't get their 3rd edition Codex until after the Orks got theirs. And from what we've heard, Orks and Dark Eldar will get their 4th edition Codex's before either Sisters of Battle or Grey Knights get theirs, so quit complaining. Like Malek said, if you want to complain about something, then complain about an army like Tau or Chaos getting a 4th edition Codex before Orks.


Also it would be nice to have all the Adversaries rules in one place.

I'm hoping they appear in the Chaos Codex.

Wraithbored
09-04-2007, 01:30
I'm hoping they appear in the Chaos Codex.
Now there's a very good idea!:D

fracas
09-04-2007, 02:25
i wouldn't mind SoB getting their own codex while the inquisitorial lists are combined into one, with limitations on what you take based on what sort of inquisitor is your hq

Lord Malek The Red Knight
09-04-2007, 02:26
i wouldn't mind SoB getting their own codex while the inquisitorial lists are combined into one, with limitations on what you take based on what sort of inquisitor is your hq
but then you would need 2 codex books to field an army you can currently do with just one. :confused:

~ Tim

fracas
09-04-2007, 02:35
i suspect most SoB players field pure forces. but yeah, it would be a pain to use two books.

fine with things as they are.

wickedvoodoo
09-04-2007, 03:42
although IMO when they re-release them for 4th ed they will put it all in one book w/4 sections: Inquisition (inc. Storm Troopers, Assassins, Orbital strikes etc), DH (GKs), WH (SoB) and AH (DW) - there's no need to repeat all the generic Inquisition stuff. splitting each section by "Radical" and "Puritan" would be a nice touch too (effectively giving you at least 9 different armies in one book: Ordo Xenos, Ordo Hereticus and Ordo Malleus, all in either Radical or Puritan form, plus pure GK, DW and SoB... plus you could use them alongside other codex lists...).


Oh we can hope. This release would quite possibly make me drop my anti imperium mindset. Especially if there were a couple of good plastic kits released alongside it.

Angelwing
09-04-2007, 04:11
Actually, there was a Codex: Sisters of Battle in 2nd edition. Very nice book. Small, but jampacked with background and an interesting, albeit threadbare, army list.



Excellent, gorgeous book. *checks stasis field around his own copy*:cool:

Yes indeed, i would like to see a combined inquisition book. I would even like it to be a large hardback in order to cram it all in.

god octo
09-04-2007, 10:11
I wouldn't mind a combined inquisition book (I play witch hunters!), but only on the condition that the armies fluff and rules and feel isn't compacted into a 80 page codex, so it becomes little more than a book of rules. Also, I would like more variety, so let the ordos mingle a little and give us more random options.

xibo
09-04-2007, 10:44
Wow, if Deamon Hunters and Sister of Battles are 'similar', what are blue, black, green, red and (ultramarines-)blue power armours then? There are 3 complete codices for those and 2 minidexes...

god octo
09-04-2007, 10:56
Wow, if Deamon Hunters and Sister of Battles are 'similar', what are blue, black, green, red and (ultramarines-)blue power armours then? There are 3 complete codices for those and 2 minidexes...

I was thinking that- a large, brand spanking new codex, and a possibly update isn't enough, they have to have separate codexs for all the minor groups.

Onisuzume
09-04-2007, 11:47
I know the imagery is different for each, but you don't see any other army getting seperate codices for different themes (I doubt they'll belease a Craftworld, Ork Clan, or Tyranid Hive specific codex).
They more or less did in the past...
I could see GW making a codex: Ork Clans. (unless the new ork codex fixes that already)
Craftworld is more or less unneeded due to the new eldar codex.
As for a Tyranid Hive Fleet specific codex: I doubt it. Maybe one with forgotten fleets, but not one for specific hive fleets; they can pretty much all be done in the current 'dex. (which seems to be the current trend at GW)

As for SoBs and GKs being similiar; they play very differently.
The only real thing they have in common is that they're both being used by the inquisition, wear power armour, and use bolter-like weapons.

SoBs fight the heretics&stuff, while the GKs fight daemons&stuff.

Especially if there were a couple of good plastic kits released alongside it.
Yeah, I don't think that plastic GKs and SoBs would hurt too much.
As for putting them in one big codex: I'm all for it, though it would lack a bit in the fluff department I guess.

Master Jeridian
09-04-2007, 12:24
If you think Sisters and Grey knights fight identically, then you have never played with or against either TBH.

As has been mentioned, there are far more game/fluff/artistic difference between DH and WH, than there are between Blue Marines and Green Marines, and Red Marines.

yankeeboy
09-04-2007, 13:35
Not to mention the fact that you can build VASTLY different types of armies with each book:

-All grey knight force with termies and deep striking forces.
-Grey knights with a marine force
-all Sisters of Battle (vastly different than Grey Knights!)
-The Witchhunter super zealot crazy army, with tons of zealots, priests, arco flaggellents, penitent engines, etc (no sisters)

The only real crossover is that both lists feature Inquisitors, Stormtroopers and Assasins. But even among the Inquisitors, the Daemonhunter and Witchhunter varieties are different, especially with reagrd to retinue options and wargear.

So how are these the same army? And the previous poster is correct with regard to the age of these books and the LONG time we waited for them. The existence of these books doesn't impact the availability of new Xenos codices in any whay. So why the complaining?

electricblooz
09-04-2007, 14:51
I really really hope that they don't redo the Inquistion codeces any time soon because I like them just the way they are. As the books stand now, you can build several very different, very characterful armies from them; I suspect that if they were to redo them (expecially if they were mushed into one book) that the rules that making each force so unique and interesting would end up get turned into some "streamlined" gelantinous mass of tofu.

SwordsofChaos
09-04-2007, 15:14
Perhaps the same could be said of all power armour armies. But enough talk! HAVE AT YOU!!!

A bit too much Castlevania perhaps?:angel:

Back to topic, I donīt think they are all the same, they are atleast more different than some of the SM codexes. Grey Knights and Sisters play a big part in each of their armies and are very different (from what I can tell atleast)

Wraithbored
09-04-2007, 17:53
A bit too much Castlevania perhaps?:angel:
Nope too much internet meme

Bolter Bait
09-04-2007, 18:27
WH and DH have very different elements contained with their respective books, but in the end, they are both arms of the Inquisition, so of course some things are going to end up similar. =][= Storm Troopers riding around in Chimeras will of course be seen in both, as will the overlap in Inquisitors/retinues and several identical psychic powers (Hammerhand, Scourging, etc). This is because the Inquisition is pretty homogenous at the lower levels and it is only at the upper echelons where individual Inquisitors find their speciality (Heretics, Daemons or Xenos) do differences really start to appear.

But to say that they're essentially the same book is quite the fallacy. WH have Canonesses, Battle Sisters in all their various squad types, Sisters Repentia, Arco-flagellants, Penitant Engines, a lousy Psyk-Out orbital strike, and the dreaded Exorcists. DH have Grey Knights (which are Marines on crack, as someone said earlier, and relish in combat which is opposite of most WH units), GK Terminators and one of the best Character/MC-killing HQ choices in the game (Grey Knight Master with Str 6 Force Weapon :eek: ).

Off Topic - If the various books eventually get redone or even combined into one big Inquisition Codex, I'd like to see more options for Radical Inquisitors. Right now, DH can take daemonhosts but other than that, there really isn't anything too radical. Being able to take a weak Daemon weapon on your Inquisitor would help to show just how radical she is. Same goes for the the WH. Other than the Inquisitors, there are no options for including more psykers (heck, even the penitant psykers in the retinue do not even count as psykers in game terms) or having anything really "witchy," like heretical wargear or weaponry. Something that if taken, no Adepta Sororitas could be taken in similar vein to daemonhosts = No GKs.

Khorne warrior
09-04-2007, 18:46
OK. Think of Grey Knights like uber space marines with psychic abilities who fight in small armies.

Now, Witch Hunters are more like T3 Imps with better armour and fate bonuses

RavenMorpheus
09-04-2007, 21:12
I was reading the Daemon Hunter and Witch Hunter codices today and I noticed...that they are practically the same army. The only difference is that Daemon Hunters use Grey Knights and Witch Hunters use Sisters of Battle. Really, I had a hard time finding any different between the two, many of their army choices are identical. Now, why would GW put all the time and effort into making these two, tiny, ultra-specialized armies when core armies like Orks and Dark Eldar hadn't gotten any attention in like 7 years? Just a thought...

Simple - the almighty $.

I get Daemonhunters - all the time, right up my Khorne Daemon Lord's you know what. :mad: :D

Anyway I don't think they are exactly the same as someone mentioned the GK are SM and the Witch Hunters are basically IG with a bit of power armour thrown in for good measure - and considering the average T in the Witch Hunters army is 3 and in the Daemonhunters army it's 4, not to mention other stats being different: WS, BS etc, I don't see how anyone can say they play the same.

I see your point about the lack of an Ork and Dark Eldar codex though and that's either down to lazyness, reorganisation at GW HQ or they haven't sold enough Ork or DE stuff to warrant a new codex.