Codex Adeptus Arbites for 6th Edition

[Haravikk]

I would either lower most BS in the army to 3, or drop the armor down to 5

I think to do so would be break their fluff completely; they're trained in the schola progenium like sisters of battle, and carapace armour is pretty much their standard issue. They're not huge forces after all, but well equipped enough that they can outlast any (sometimes literal) siege upon imperial authority. Remember they're not local law enforcement, they're the guys that tell the local law enforcement, planetary officials, and planetary defence forces to follow imperial law… or else. Sure they do do a bit more than that, but they're practically outfitted with belief that they could very well have to fight every other living thing on the planet if it comes to it, with precinct fortresses to make it a reality.

It's reasonable that there may be more lightly armoured arbites for specialist roles, but not the other way round, and they're going to be fearsome opponents by the time they join, so their standard of training is high. Not to say that the Imperial Guard aren't trained, but the schola progenium is a different beast entirely.

I think the availability of plasma cannons in Necromunda was odd to begin with and shouldn't serve as "precedent". The Necromunda Heavies carry their weapons around like Space Marines, while Guardsmen, with the exception of some special characters, need tripods or carriages. So the gangers probably have access only to smaller, less powerful versions of these weapons.

I'm kind of midway on the Plasma Cannon point. I think it's not unreasonable that a precinct would have one or two for dire emergencies, and I do think that a heavy with properly augmented armour would be able to fire one; the old arbites models don't represent it but I'd imagine carapace armour is versatile enough to allow shock-absorbers and some powered components to allow stable firing, not as much as power armour but then much of power armour's augmentation is just so you can actually wear it in the first place

I think a suitably fluffy way to handle it would maybe be to have some rarer options that are "unlocked" by the Judge perhaps?

[Ambience 327]

On the BS/Sv issue, I really couldn't have said it better myself Haravikk. I agree completely with everything you say there. Thank you for the support!

I think a suitably fluffy way to handle it would maybe be to have some rarer options that are "unlocked" by the Judge perhaps?

That isn't really a bad line of thought, but one of the key factors I am trying to stick to on this Codex is simplicity. Adding in things like character-based unlockables adds needless complexity - which is the same reason I have decided not to add in any of the "auxiliary" units to this Codex. I figure if people want PDF, Hive Gangs, Penal Legion, Leman Russ, etc - they can just use the Allies rule to get them in there. I did my best to stick with a solid core of units that make for a list that really feels "Arbites" - at least to me.

As of right now, this list also seems to make a pretty decent force that can at least be moderately competitive without seeming over-the-top in any way (that I have noticed anyway). It has its strengths (short/mid-ranged firepower, very predictable Reserves, pinning/disruption, unique Psychic abilities), as well as definite weaknesses (limited long ranged firepower, limited anti-armour, mediocre close combat ability). So far I am very happy with where they are, but I still need to do some more serious playtesting to make sure they are truly solid.

[Haravikk]

That isn't really a bad line of thought, but one of the key factors I am trying to stick to on this Codex is simplicity.

Oh I completely understand; actually, a much simpler alternative might be to make the Plasma Cannon limited to one per slot, so if you wanted to take more than one you'd have to take two distinct lots of support teams. Like I say though I'm of two minds about it, I'm just throwing out some alternatives


Anyway, since I've now had a chance to properly read the updated list I'll give my thoughts on it. First up I wanted to say good work as usual, somehow you've made the list leaner than ever without seeming to lose any of the character established in the 5th edition version! So, here goes:

• Shield Wall Formation - This rule seems like it needs a bit of tweaking, as the all models requirement and such make it a bit unwieldy. What if it were something like; models with suppression shields strike at Initiative 6 in all rounds of combat so long as at least two other models with shields are in coherency. So basically two lone suppressors wouldn't be much use but at least three can still go back to back or form a wedge. Plus, if a character joins the squad and has a shield then while they themselves wouldn't benefit, they can still form part of the shield wall for the remaining suppressors, which I don't think the current rule allows (unless I've misunderstood it). I dunno, it just seems like the current rule's a little bit unwieldy still. I do love the suppression squad otherwise though; as arbites with riot shields are by far my favourite models (though painstakingly collecting the stock shields is not cheap, even with eBay!).
• Webbers - I'm loving the webber rules, though I've yet to find a conversion idea that I really like on how to model them, a shame since I'd take them on almost everything if I could! Anyway, I'm thinking these might be a bit overpriced at 10 points; the damage they do is less than a flamer, and given the range (8" max) the utility of Strikedown is mostly just as a means of taking the edge off of an enemy charge; handy for the arbites being comparatively weak in combat, but still about equivalent to a Flamer I'd say, so 5 points should be fine really?
• Repressor - One of my (minor) complaints with your 5th edition list was that the Repressor wasn't quite distinct enough, and I think that the changes to the Riot Plough have helped with that as it means its 12/11/10 armour is now unique. I know it's only a smallish change, but it makes a big difference I think; Torrent on the Web Cannon also makes it that bit more flexible (unlike its targets ), really rounds it out nicely. That said, it may be a bit underpriced now, as a twin heavy flamer razorback (which is very roughly equivalent) is 65 points with less passenger capacity, standard Rhino armour and no fire points. I think 60 points is the minimum for the Repressor personally as while a Web cannon doesn't do as much damage, it does have more range, plus Strikedown is more useful on a vehicle since you can attack anything you like.
• Assault Vehicle - I don't think you need to repeat this rule on the Eagle shuttle, it should be fine to leave to the rulebook version I think?

Oh, and I'd absolutely take a Castigator with three web cannons; wouldn't be the most optimal choice, but blanketing big Ork hordes doesn't exactly hurt!

[Haravikk]

Got a couple other things I wanted to raise.

Firstly, I was thinking more on the utility of Webbers and one problem cropped up; namely the number of units with Frag grenades, the problem here being that they will effectively ignore the webber. The all too common Space Marines being a big culprit on this one, so I was thinking it might make sense either for Webbers to additionally ignore assault grenades, or perhaps make such a condition part of the Shield Wall Formation rule, since the Suppressors are the unit that is intended to deal with combat when you have to. The latter option maybe makes most sense, and keeps the Webber simple, plus it makes Suppressors even more important when planning your deployment and overall strategy, as Webbers on regular squads will be better used to support other squads instead, though still useful against enemies with more massed combat troops (who are less likely to have assault grenades). Nullifying assault grenades could be a condition of Suppression shields in general, e.g - if more than half a squad has them, but adding it to the Shield Wall Formation is probably easiest.

On a related note; I think that Suppression Shields shouldn't really count as an extra close combat weapon. While they're certainly usable as a weapon, it's really an either/or kind of deal, as I don't think it's that easy to bash with a shield like that and still use another weapon at the same time. In fact, it should really function like a Storm Shield etc. which prevents the model from gaining the extra attack for two weapons. Instead it might make sense to have Counter Attack be a property of the shield, since that's the kind of case it makes more sense in as when (counter) charging it would be easier to use the shield in tandem with a weapon since you're using your momentum for the bash, rather than a swing or push while stationary.

This would weaken Suppression teams a bit, but with the change I noted in my last post for the Shield Wall Formation they would be more effective in the long run I think, so it might balance out.


Also, I was rethinking the Halligan and I think it currently it feels a bit more like a Dedicated Transport than a support vehicle. I like the new weapon profile idea, but I think it that while 12/11/10 armour is nice, the weapon just isn't useful enough. It's pretty hard to justify taking it over a fire support team with missile launcher or lascannon, or a castigator with a cheap squad with breaching charges (okay, cheaper, but the castigator is a bit more flexible). I think the Halligan could do with some transport capacity, and a bit more punch from the weapon to make it a more appealing prospect.

I think a good mix would be for ~80 points, it'd be a Repressor (profile and riot plough) with transport 6, and the Halligan missile launcher as Heavy 2, 24", S7, AP3, Melta, twin-linked for vehicle/building busting or Heavy 6, 24", S3, AP-, Pinning, Blind for messing up the enemy before your passengers assault. Maybe throw in the ability to take up to two Hunter Killer missiles to round of its support role. Not sure about fire-points, probably would reduce or drop them to leave it as the vanilla Repressor's thing, since the missile system would likely make it difficult to fire effectively.

This way the Castigator is the anti-infantry assault vehicle, and the Halligan is the anti-tough-stuff alternative; taking one of each plus a flexible trio of fire support teams would give you a force to reckon with

[Ambience 327]

Thank you VERY MUCH for all that valuable feedback. It really means a lot to me!

Oh I completely understand; actually, a much simpler alternative might be to make the Plasma Cannon limited to one per slot, so if you wanted to take more than one you'd have to take two distinct lots of support teams. Like I say though I'm of two minds about it, I'm just throwing out some alternatives

That may very well be the perfect compromise. Consider that idea under very serious consideration.

Anyway, since I've now had a chance to properly read the updated list I'll give my thoughts on it. First up I wanted to say good work as usual, somehow you've made the list leaner than ever without seeming to lose any of the character established in the 5th edition version! So, here goes:

Shield Wall Formation - This rule seems like it needs a bit of tweaking, as the all models requirement and such make it a bit unwieldy. What if it were something like; models with suppression shields strike at Initiative 6 in all rounds of combat so long as at least two other models with shields are in coherency. So basically two lone suppressors wouldn't be much use but at least three can still go back to back or form a wedge. Plus, if a character joins the squad and has a shield then while they themselves wouldn't benefit, they can still form part of the shield wall for the remaining suppressors, which I don't think the current rule allows (unless I've misunderstood it). I dunno, it just seems like the current rule's a little bit unwieldy still. I do love the suppression squad otherwise though; as arbites with riot shields are by far my favourite models (though painstakingly collecting the stock shields is not cheap, even with eBay!).

It may seem complicated, but in practice it is very simple. All Suppressors and their Proctor are always equipped with Suppression Shields anyway - they can't replace it. The "all models" clause only comes into effect when a character has joined the unit. This basically prevents non-shield-carrying characters from benefiting from the rule in an unfluffy way. (I'm not sure - is it clear that the rule is usable by attached characters or not? I might need to add "including attached characters" to the effect portion of the rule.) Your suggestion would require much more "model-by-model checking and measuring". The current rule just requires the unit to be in coherency, not locked in combat and universally armed with shields. Is there anything else about the wording that makes my above explanation unclear?

Webbers - I'm loving the webber rules, though I've yet to find a conversion idea that I really like on how to model them, a shame since I'd take them on almost everything if I could! Anyway, I'm thinking these might be a bit overpriced at 10 points; the damage they do is less than a flamer, and given the range (8" max) the utility of Strikedown is mostly just as a means of taking the edge off of an enemy charge; handy for the arbites being comparatively weak in combat, but still about equivalent to a Flamer I'd say, so 5 points should be fine really?

Worth considering. However, Strikedown can definitely hamper the enemy plans, especially if they are trying to get somewhere and not intending to assault the unit you are hitting them with - plus it is worth remembering that there is both an Initiative Penalty and the potential of a failed charge when trying to charge a unit that has just Webbed you. (Also note that the Initiative penalty will be applied even from Overwatch wounds, and that the Strikedown effect takes hold the moment you succeed on the To Wound roll since it works on both Saved and Unsaved wounds.

Repressor - One of my (minor) complaints with your 5th edition list was that the Repressor wasn't quite distinct enough, and I think that the changes to the Riot Plough have helped with that as it means its 12/11/10 armour is now unique. I know it's only a smallish change, but it makes a big difference I think; Torrent on the Web Cannon also makes it that bit more flexible (unlike its targets ), really rounds it out nicely. That said, it may be a bit underpriced now, as a twin heavy flamer razorback (which is very roughly equivalent) is 65 points with less passenger capacity, standard Rhino armour and no fire points. I think 60 points is the minimum for the Repressor personally as while a Web cannon doesn't do as much damage, it does have more range, plus Strikedown is more useful on a vehicle since you can attack anything you like.

Thanks - and I will consider upping the cost of the Web Cannon - as I agree that Torrent was a perfect addition to make it a truly unique and useful tool.

Assault Vehicle - I don't think you need to repeat this rule on the Eagle shuttle, it should be fine to leave to the rulebook version I think?

Oops. I thought I removed all the rules covered by the new Rulebook special rules summary. I guess I missed that Assault Vehicle was in there. I will remove it for the next version. THANKS!

Oh, and I'd absolutely take a Castigator with three web cannons; wouldn't be the most optimal choice, but blanketing big Ork hordes doesn't exactly hurt!

Got a couple other things I wanted to raise.

Firstly, I was thinking more on the utility of Webbers and one problem cropped up; namely the number of units with Frag grenades, the problem here being that they will effectively ignore the webber. The all too common Space Marines being a big culprit on this one, so I was thinking it might make sense either for Webbers to additionally ignore assault grenades, or perhaps make such a condition part of the Shield Wall Formation rule, since the Suppressors are the unit that is intended to deal with combat when you have to. The latter option maybe makes most sense, and keeps the Webber simple, plus it makes Suppressors even more important when planning your deployment and overall strategy, as Webbers on regular squads will be better used to support other squads instead, though still useful against enemies with more massed combat troops (who are less likely to have assault grenades). Nullifying assault grenades could be a condition of Suppression shields in general, e.g - if more than half a squad has them, but adding it to the Shield Wall Formation is probably easiest.

Nobody quite ignores the webber. Strikedown isn't just a "difficult terrain" maker. It also causes the unit to "halve its Initiative", so even those who have frag grenades will be effected by it a bit. (SM's would be I2. You would need at least base I5 to strike simultaneously with I3 Arbites, and at least base I7 to strike first.) Shield Wall already takes this into account - anyone affected by Strikedown will be striking after a Shield Walled Suppression Team - they strike at I10, and nobody has I21+!

On a related note; I think that Suppression Shields shouldn't really count as an extra close combat weapon. While they're certainly usable as a weapon, it's really an either/or kind of deal, as I don't think it's that easy to bash with a shield like that and still use another weapon at the same time. In fact, it should really function like a Storm Shield etc. which prevents the model from gaining the extra attack for two weapons. Instead it might make sense to have Counter Attack be a property of the shield, since that's the kind of case it makes more sense in as when (counter) charging it would be easier to use the shield in tandem with a weapon since you're using your momentum for the bash, rather than a swing or push while stationary.

This would weaken Suppression teams a bit, but with the change I noted in my last post for the Shield Wall Formation they would be more effective in the long run I think, so it might balance out.

I have been on the fence about this for a while, but the alternatives would be making them less effective in Close Combat or giving them 2 Attacks base. I kind of see it more that the "crackling power field" is discharging into people who are striking the shield rather than it being actively used to attack. As to making Counter Attack part of the shield, that was basically the idea of the "Hammer of Wrath" rule, which I think works just a bit better as it gives a benefit on the charge, where Counter Attack would only work when receiving a charge. Allowing the Suppression Team to then have Counter Attack on their own gives them more tactical options. Characters with Shields will be less likely to actively try to receive a charge, so they want the get the Hammer of Wrath bonus instead.

Also, I was rethinking the Halligan and I think it currently it feels a bit more like a Dedicated Transport than a support vehicle. I like the new weapon profile idea, but I think it that while 12/11/10 armour is nice, the weapon just isn't useful enough. It's pretty hard to justify taking it over a fire support team with missile launcher or lascannon, or a castigator with a cheap squad with breaching charges (okay, cheaper, but the castigator is a bit more flexible). I think the Halligan could do with some transport capacity, and a bit more punch from the weapon to make it a more appealing prospect.

I think a good mix would be for ~80 points, it'd be a Repressor (profile and riot plough) with transport 6, and the Halligan missile launcher as Heavy 2, 24", S7, AP3, Melta, twin-linked for vehicle/building busting or Heavy 6, 24", S3, AP-, Pinning, Blind for messing up the enemy before your passengers assault. Maybe throw in the ability to take up to two Hunter Killer missiles to round of its support role. Not sure about fire-points, probably would reduce or drop them to leave it as the vanilla Repressor's thing, since the missile system would likely make it difficult to fire effectively.

This way the Castigator is the anti-infantry assault vehicle, and the Halligan is the anti-tough-stuff alternative; taking one of each plus a flexible trio of fire support teams would give you a force to reckon with

Yeah, I have been thinking the Halligan may need beefing up or reworking in some way. Your suggestions are quite well thought out, and I will consider them when I take a good look at the unit. I particularly like the last bit about defining roles for the Castigator and Halligan. That is what I have always hoped to achieve with those two vehicles.

[Haravikk]

As to making Counter Attack part of the shield, that was basically the idea of the "Hammer of Wrath" rule

What I meant is that Counter Attack would be in place of the shield counting as an extra weapon, so it'd be in addition to Hammer of Wrath, as both would effectively represent the same thing except that Hammer of Wrath is when they've launched a charge of their own rather than rushing to meet the enemy's. This still gives the Suppression squad an effective 3 attacks on the charge and 2 when receiving a charge.

On the issue of assault grenades, I somehow completely forgot about the Initiative side of Strikedown; somehow I had it in my head it was only doing it as a consequence of Difficult Terrain, so ignore all that lot as you're completely right, my mistake!


Regarding the actual wording of Shield Wall Formation though, I do understand it but it seems a bit weird to have it only apply when the enemy charges you, rather than basically having high Initiative all the time to represent the difficulty for the enemy of actually getting their attacks in against a shield wall while the Suppressors themselves strike as the opportunity presents itself. Especially when Counter Attack already helps them receive an enemy charge. Having individual models check for coherency would be harder to use though you're right, it could be simplified to something like "Models wielding Suppression Shields with this rule strike at Initiative 6 so long as the squad has at least 3 models with Suppression shields remaining". In that case it wouldn't matter if characters without shields joined, but if they do have a shield then they would add to the minimum required to maintain an effective shield wall. It's purely my opinion of course, but I think it might represent a skilled Suppression team using their shields to secure and maintain a strong position, plus it would also give them a slight boost that might balance reduced attacks if you went with the shield changes above. I dunno, I'm not too fussy, just want to let you know my thoughts on it.

If you do keep the rule as it is though then I'd simply have it read something like "If a model with this rule is charged, and not already in combat, then it will gain Initiative 10 until the end of the phase. This has no effect if one or more models are not equipped with a Suppression Shield". I think that something along those lines should be fairly concise, as there should be no need to elaborate for pile-ins etc. as the being charged part triggers the Initiative 10, so piling in and striking first should all follow naturally from that. It's more just that while verbose rules are nice, in this case it's maybe a touch too much, and describing it in terms of the enemy's assault phase is a bit of a strange way to do it, as it implies that all suppressors somehow gain Initiative 10 in the enemy assault phase so long as they're not in combat, but this would actually apply to any that are in no danger of being charged as well, it reads a bit weirdly that's all.


Related to this; how is the Mancatcher intended to interact for the Suppression teams? Being two-handed the model would be unable to wield their shield as well, would this (or rather should this) break the shield wall?

[Ambience 327]

Once again you have given me a lot to think over. I will consider changing the Shield Wall, but I'm just not sure whether I will and if I do what direction I will take it.

One thing - you seem to be pushing for I6 over I10. Is there a particular reason for that, or does it just feel more "right" to you?

As to the Mancatchers - I hadn't really thought much about it. I am pretty sure, however, that by the way the "Two-Handed" rule works, it doesn't really affect anything. It simply prevents you from gaining bonus Attacks from fighting with two weapons, so you would still get Shield Wall Formation, Hammer of Wrath, etc. - just not the +1 Attack for the "additional close combat weapon" portion of the Suppression shield.

[Haravikk]

One thing - you seem to be pushing for I6 over I10. Is there a particular reason for that, or does it just feel more "right" to you?

Ah, well nothing specific to the value, only that if it were to be taking effect all the time in combat it seems like it should be a lower bonus. Even I6 may be a bit much the entire time. One thing I was thinking actually is that it could be an ability, requiring a Leadership test. Sorry to be pushing it, it's ultimately your list and your vision for the army, it's just that I think it might represent things a bit bit better as it doesn't really make sense to me that after being charged they wouldn't do everything in their power to remain in their shield wall formation; after all with the army being relative underdogs in close combat it's the biggest advantage they have. With a leadership test ability it would represent them rallying to meet a charge, but also losing the formation in the heat of the battle then reforming to press the advantage again as they gain and lose the ability depending upon how well they handle the tests.

[Ambience 327]

Believe me, I in no way feel that I must incorporate anyone's ideas, and I certainly take my own views as the final verdict. However, as you can probably tell, I am very open to suggestion and will change things if I am persuaded that they are better in some way (fluffier, simpler, more effective, more fun).

Like I said, you have given me a lot to think over, and the codex may see some changes thanks to your feedback. Keep it coming!!!

[Ambience 327]

New version uploaded. Change log:



Updated the Fire Support Team to limit lascannons and plasma cannons to 1 per Heavy Support Choice.


Removed the "Assault Vehicle" rule summary from the Codex - it is in the Rulebook, so no need for it to be in the Codex too.


Simplified and toned down the Shield Wall Formation rules for the Initiative a bit, and added a special bit about improving the cover save they grant to other units if they are the intervening models.


Updated Suppression Shields to bring them closer in-line with Storm Shields while still making them an attractive option and representative of their fluff and the old "energy surge on the charge" effect by removing the "counts as a close combat weapon" but adding Counter Attack on top of the Hammer of Wrath they already had.


Removed Counter Attack from Suppression Teams, since they will now get it from their shields. Also reduced their points cost by 2 points per model to reflect the decrease in their close-combat prowess due to the changes to Shield Wall Formation and Suppression Shields.


Added Missile Lock to the Eagle, and changed it from a twin-linked missile launcher to 2 missile launchers.


Fixed the Grav Chute Insertion rule to be in-line with the new Imperial Guard FAQ.


Beefed up the Halligan a bit to make it a more attractive option in comparison to the Fire Support Team.

- Improved the Halligan Missile Launcher to Heavy 2 and Twin-Linked to make it a bit more accurate and damaging so that the Halligan can fulfill its role of armour-buster more effectively.

- Added a Transport Capacity of 6, allowing it to carry a unit forward. It was already generally advancing a bit to get in range of enemy armour, so this provides a bit more utility to the vehicle. (No fire points means it can't act as a mobile bunker - merely a nice APC.)

- Allowed it to take up to two Hunter-Killer Missiles for a bit more early-game punch - at a hefty cost though.

- Upped the cost to 70 pts to reflect some of these changes (though it was needing a bit of beefing up anyway, so I didn't raise it much).


Raised the cost of the Twin-Linked Web Cannons on the Castigator just a tad. The addition of Torrent to the Web Cannon made this just a wee bit too effective for the cost.


Added a small selection of special characters for a bit of extra flavor. (I wanted to get the main codex more or less working properly before adding them - that point has been reached I think.)

[Haravikk]

Great to see another update!

I like the current Suppression Shields, I think it's just easier all round and still plenty powerful!

You're going to hate me, but I'm still not happy with the Shieldwall rule! The kind of thing I have in my head would be something more like:
"Models with this rule and armed with Suppression shields double their Initiative during the Fight sub-phase so long as at least two other models with Suppression shields are in the squad, and the squad is in unit coherency. In addition, models with this rule partially obscure enemy shooting as Intervening Models, then the target will receive a 4+ Cover Save instead of the usual 5+."
Even that might be a bit verbose. Anyway, my thinking is that you need at least 3 models with shields to make any kind of meaningful shield-wall, but this way simply having a character in the squad without a shield won't somehow break their formation, but if you do give them a shield then they contribute to the shield wall, even if they don't benefit from it themselves. I dunno, it's still mostly a minor niggle, but while I understand wanting to encourage characters with shields in suppression squads, I'm not sure it should be forced.

I'm liking the Halligan tweaks; I think it's right at that sweet spot where it's about even with the Castigator with respect to their different roles, to the point that a tooled up Castigator (web-cannons and hurricane bolters for me ) and a Halligan, each with a small strike team of some description are quite hard to choose between, and personally I'd want to take both


On that issue actually, I'm wondering if 5-man Troop squads is the right fit for a current edition list; Sisters of Battle for example are stuck with 10 minimum for a Battle Sisters squad despite their cost, iirc Dark Eldar can get away with five but I'm not sure if it's the right fit here. I just wanted to mention it anyway, and one good option could be to force 10-man squads but add Space Marine style combat squads for those units, which still lets you run the small squads. Though I'd possibly rename the rule as combat squads of combat teams could get confusing! It's another on the line kind of deal, as kill points do kind of encourage you to bulk up a bit anyway, and more, or more survivable, objective holders is never really a bad thing, so it's not like there isn't reason to take bigger or more squads as it is.

there is plenty of precedent for small squads with lots of special/heavy weapons (SM Devastators, SOB Dominions, IG Veterans etc).

I think I missed this before, but I wanted to point that Dominion Squads actually are stuck with two per five models now. Really annoyed me as I liked my squads with four Storm Bolters in 5th edition; though 6th kind of ruined them since regular bolters are almost as good but I'm getting a bit off topic. I'm not really sure if it warrants action, but then Devastators and Retributors are four heavy weapons which is okay I think since they're not desperately mobile (well except Heavy Flamers but you pay through the nose for them), but special weapons seem to be aimed at two for five now. Imperial Guard veterans are minimum 10 models with three specials, while Storm Troopers only get two I think, regardless of squad size.

An alternative might be to split them into Response Teams and Heavy Response Teams; largely similar options but different focuses on heavy and special weapons, though I think both should retain the ability to have a mix, e.g - a Response Team with one model wielding a Heavy Bolter.


It's also great to see the return of the special characters, as I liked the mix from the previous codex! I think being able to add Judge Schindler to a Suppression Team and have them still get Shieldwall is another good reason to tweak it, as they're the only squad that can really put up with her as for other squads she's going to be more of a penalty as they get gunned down while she's busy strutting about in her Terminator armour

[semper_fi]

im looking up my arbites army tonight this fandex looks verry promising!!

[Ambience 327]

Great to see another update!

I try to chip away at them until I feel they are "done". Especially the Arbites - they have always been my favorites!

I like the current Suppression Shields, I think it's just easier all round and still plenty powerful!

Yeah - I think they are really good now, nice balance of offense and defense, while staying in line with the Storm Shield. Sort of a nice "middle of the road" between the fully defensive Storm Shield which only offers an Invulnerable Save and precludes the bonus Attack, and the Combat Shield which allows two weapons in addition to the Invulnerable Save. I think it really is right where it needs to be now.

You're going to hate me, but I'm still not happy with the Shieldwall rule! The kind of thing I have in my head would be something more like:
"Models with this rule and armed with Suppression shields double their Initiative during the Fight sub-phase so long as at least two other models with Suppression shields are in the squad, and the squad is in unit coherency. In addition, models with this rule partially obscure enemy shooting as Intervening Models, then the target will receive a 4+ Cover Save instead of the usual 5+."

Even that might be a bit verbose. Anyway, my thinking is that you need at least 3 models with shields to make any kind of meaningful shield-wall, but this way simply having a character in the squad without a shield won't somehow break their formation, but if you do give them a shield then they contribute to the shield wall, even if they don't benefit from it themselves. I dunno, it's still mostly a minor niggle, but while I understand wanting to encourage characters with shields in suppression squads, I'm not sure it should be forced.

I don't know - I think I want to play with it as it is right now and see how it goes. I might drop the requirement for attached characters to have shields, or maybe just make it so that if non-shielders outnumber shielders (unlikely, but possible), that they can't use it.

I'm liking the Halligan tweaks; I think it's right at that sweet spot where it's about even with the Castigator with respect to their different roles, to the point that a tooled up Castigator (web-cannons and hurricane bolters for me ) and a Halligan, each with a small strike team of some description are quite hard to choose between, and personally I'd want to take both

Hmm...

"hard to choose between"

"I'd want to take both"

...I think we're done here.

On that issue actually, I'm wondering if 5-man Troop squads is the right fit for a current edition list; Sisters of Battle for example are stuck with 10 minimum for a Battle Sisters squad despite their cost, iirc Dark Eldar can get away with five but I'm not sure if it's the right fit here. I just wanted to mention it anyway, and one good option could be to force 10-man squads but add Space Marine style combat squads for those units, which still lets you run the small squads. Though I'd possibly rename the rule as combat squads of combat teams could get confusing! It's another on the line kind of deal, as kill points do kind of encourage you to bulk up a bit anyway, and more, or more survivable, objective holders is never really a bad thing, so it's not like there isn't reason to take bigger or more squads as it is.

I see IG and Sisters as more regimented and less flexible, where Space Marines and Arbites should be a bit more "think on your feet" and more flexible. I don't want to go the "Combat Squad" route, as I think that needs to stay with the Marines. As you said, the rules and objectives tend to favor the larger Teams anyway - and forcing 10-man teams (even just the Troops choices) would make the Castigator and Halligan more difficult to use, since many/most units wouldn't fit.

I think I missed this before, but I wanted to point that Dominion Squads actually are stuck with two per five models now. Really annoyed me as I liked my squads with four Storm Bolters in 5th edition; though 6th kind of ruined them since regular bolters are almost as good but I'm getting a bit off topic. I'm not really sure if it warrants action, but then Devastators and Retributors are four heavy weapons which is okay I think since they're not desperately mobile (well except Heavy Flamers but you pay through the nose for them), but special weapons seem to be aimed at two for five now. Imperial Guard veterans are minimum 10 models with three specials, while Storm Troopers only get two I think, regardless of squad size.

An alternative might be to split them into Response Teams and Heavy Response Teams; largely similar options but different focuses on heavy and special weapons, though I think both should retain the ability to have a mix, e.g - a Response Team with one model wielding a Heavy Bolter.

I am pretty sure I meant Retributors! I get sometimes...

Anyway, this goes hand-in-hand with the regimented vs/ flexible argument above. Plus I just love the thought of the 4-heavy-bolter Executioner Team.

It's also great to see the return of the special characters, as I liked the mix from the previous codex! I think being able to add Judge Schindler to a Suppression Team and have them still get Shieldwall is another good reason to tweak it, as they're the only squad that can really put up with her as for other squads she's going to be more of a penalty as they get gunned down while she's busy strutting about in her Terminator armour

This paragraph proves that you so totally get me. I have really grown fond of the Special Characters that I made for my 5th Edition codex. Some, like "Arco-Judge" Murphaeus and Special Detective Eleanor Nash (who sadly is a bit too complex to squeeze into my "keep-it-simple" structure for this 6th edition Codex) were adapted from ideas I gleaned from some of my fellow Arbites fans. Shira Calpurnia is, of course, taken from Matthew Farrer's fantastic Enforcer novels. The rest, however, are my homage to the crazy pop-cuture, actioin-star and real-life based characters that GW loves to pepper their works with.

Judge Schindler is probably my favorite of these, followed by "The Dreaded" Judge Joseff Spartacus. Schindler is, as many have noticed, based on "Judge Judy" Sheindlin of TV fame, and I simply love the way you characterize her as "strutting about in her Terminator armour", as that is exactly how I picture her. I've actually created a model for her, and I am nearly finished painting it. I plan to start up a modelling/painting log with my Arbites stuff very soon, so I will share her when I do. Your mention of her hanging around with a Suppression Team because they are "the only squad who can really put up with her" is both hilarious, as well as insightful and among the main reasons I am considering further altering Shield Wall Formation.

I love Spartacus because is a lovely cross between the two sci-fi lawmen played by Sylvester Stallone - Judge Dredd and John Spartan (from Demolition Man). It really is hard to go wrong when making a cheeseball character based on a Stallone character, and mixing two of them into one was even more fun.

As you can probably tell - I really love the special characters I've added. As I mentioned, I only waited as long as I did because I wanted to get the rest of it "right" before moving into them.

im looking up my arbites army tonight this fandex looks verry promising!!

Thanks - I appreciate it. I hope you find the list fun!!!

[Haravikk]

Anyway, this goes hand-in-hand with the regimented vs/ flexible argument above. Plus I just love the thought of the 4-heavy-bolter Executioner Team.

Oh absolutely; my four Heavy Bolter Retributor squad for sisters is a must-include unit for me as it's one of the few things the White Dwarf codex got right, and they're surprisingly handy at downing flyers when you've got no better choices to hand

The question though really is whether they should be able to have the four special weapons, as GW don't seem to be allowing that any more and I kind of see why as their mobility means they aren't limited in the same way as heavies which become far less effective when you move them; plasma guns especially have become more powerful this edition, and both they and meltaguns make a mockery of armour. I think at the very least the plasma gun needs to go up to 15 points, which I think is the standard cost anyway (it's how much Imperial Guard special weapons teams pay), which at least takes the edge off those.

You could split into separate Executioner and Response team entries, with the former having four heavies at any size (or three heavies and one special/heavy choice, so you can still take a slight mix). While the response team would be two in five, or maybe three basic with an extra one at ten models? Just some thoughts anyway


Oh and I missed the extra cyber mastif options, I just need to get more of those models now as I've somehow managed to only collect one! In the games I've played with your rules I've been using skaven giant rats as stand ins, but it doesn't look quite so much like the picture of imperial justice that it should

[Ambience 327]

I really want to avoid splitting them into two units, as I am quite happy with the number of choices per Force Org slot right now. I may look at upping the cost on some of the weapons if they seem too powerful, but I want to leave them with their current choices.

[The Highlander]

Very interesting army list, and one of the few home brew list I’ve seen which isn’t full of complicated and beardy rules. I do however have a few observations to make.


Shotguns – I think it would be a good idea if these were made S4 as standard (personally I think the guard ones should be S4 as well but that’s a different topic). As a veteran guard player I know how limited the effect of S3 shooting is (even delivered on mass). Given that most Arbrite squads are only going to get one or two rounds of shooting they really need to be able to make it count. S4 shots would also tie in nicely with the executioner rounds, and make moving less of a restriction.

I don’t like that the only minimum HQ choices available being basically identical (just different power levels and price). It might be a better idea to make the Arbitrator General into the ‘combat’ character and make the Judge into more of a support character (proving moral and skill boosts to nearby units and weakening enemies)

In a similar vein, the two different basic Arbrite squads are also almost identical, and given the very minor difference in price I can’t really see much reason to take the patrol team. I think it would be better to either make a bigger deference between the squads or combine them into a single unit.

Finally, given that the use of shields is such a key part of the Arbrite's background it's a shame that the only unit in the army that can take any form of shield is the suppression team. I can understand the desire to keep them as the 'riot squad', but I think there is space for a few more. How about if some squads could take a 'riot shield' that let them re-role armour saves (basically a lump of metal to hide behind), while leaving the suppression team with the full energy shielded version. If the patrol squad came with them as standard it would help to differentiate them from the combat team.

These are just a few things I thought about while reading your list, I hope you find my suggestions interesting.

[Haravikk]

How about if some squads could take a 'riot shield'

Actually just taking a couple Suppression shields as-is could be handy with the new wound allocation; same thing I do with Crusaders in inquisitor warbands/battle conclaves, since they let you (hopefully) shrug off hits that otherwise ignore armour.

[Ambience 327]

Very interesting army list, and one of the few home brew list I’ve seen which isn’t full of complicated and beardy rules. I do however have a few observations to make.

Thanks for taking the time to look it over, and especially for your comments!

Shotguns – I think it would be a good idea if these were made S4 as standard (personally I think the guard ones should be S4 as well but that’s a different topic). As a veteran guard player I know how limited the effect of S3 shooting is (even delivered on mass). Given that most Arbrite squads are only going to get one or two rounds of shooting they really need to be able to make it count. S4 shots would also tie in nicely with the executioner rounds, and make moving less of a restriction.

My knee-jerk reaction here was that I didn't want to change things, as I was pretty happy with how they were working. However, after thinking it over a bit, I am thinking about making a change that would improve the "keep-it-simple" idea I've been building towards. What I am considering is removing the standard Shotgun ammo altogether, and giving them Executioner Shells only (like the Space Marines get Manstoppers). However, if I do this, I need to make the Executioners sufficiently unique, but keep them balanced against bolters to the point where bolters are still preferable in some ways.

What I am thinking right now is: 18", S4, AP6, Assault 2, Ignores Cover

This lets the bolter still be better at range and against 5+ saves, and twin-linked bolters cover the accuracy bit. The "Ignores Cover" replaces the old "Twin-Linked" (and represents our lovely "tiny robot brains"), and allows them to completely screw 6+ armour (with the reduced AP6) and do more damage for those hiding behind cover better than their standard save.

Thoughts?

I don’t like that the only minimum HQ choices available being basically identical (just different power levels and price). It might be a better idea to make the Arbitrator General into the ‘combat’ character and make the Judge into more of a support character (proving moral and skill boosts to nearby units and weakening enemies)

The Judge does have quite a bit more in the way of options - and many of those allow him to be "support" for an army too small to field a Personal Staff. He also has the option to "mount up" as Cavalry or a Biker to keep up with the Fast Attack choices. The Arbitor General allows you to keep your HQ really cheap if that is what you want.

In a similar vein, the two different basic Arbrite squads are also almost identical, and given the very minor difference in price I can’t really see much reason to take the patrol team. I think it would be better to either make a bigger deference between the squads or combine them into a single unit.

The basic weapon is different, as are some of the weapon options. I used to have a rule requiring you to have at least as many Patrol Teams as you have Combat Teams, but I dropped that for simplicity. I am mainly counting on Arbites purists to field the Patrol Teams to keep with the fluff, without requiring it. I think the Combat Shotgun (in either its current form, or the above proposed form) still offers some mobility and counter-assault capability that Combat Teams with bolters lack, so they aren't completely useless.

Finally, given that the use of shields is such a key part of the Arbrite's background it's a shame that the only unit in the army that can take any form of shield is the suppression team. I can understand the desire to keep them as the 'riot squad', but I think there is space for a few more. How about if some squads could take a 'riot shield' that let them re-role armour saves (basically a lump of metal to hide behind), while leaving the suppression team with the full energy shielded version. If the patrol squad came with them as standard it would help to differentiate them from the combat team.

Have you seen my 5th Edition codex? I had all kinds of fancy toys in there, including Riot Shields. I decided to drop them in favor of the "keep it simple" motto. I've never really seen Shields as being a huge part of the Arbites outside of the Suppression Teams, though there is some precedent (even in my favorite "Enforcer" novels) of Shotgun/Shield Arbites. I might consider adding Riot Shields back in, but I'm not really sure what niche to give them. +1 Save? 6+ Inv? Stealth rule? Comments?

These are just a few things I thought about while reading your list, I hope you find my suggestions interesting.

Again, thanks! You have given me more to think on.

Actually just taking a couple Suppression shields as-is could be handy with the new wound allocation; same thing I do with Crusaders in inquisitor warbands/battle conclaves, since they let you (hopefully) shrug off hits that otherwise ignore armour.

Worth considering, but I don't think I want Suppression Shields as an option for everyone.

[Aunodin]

Well joined WarSeer just so i could comment on this codex to be honest. Great codex by the way I really like the lore and fluff dealing with the Aribites.

I do have a couple of suggestions and complaints though though they are relativity minor.

One thing I read was to make the shotguns str 4. My thoughts on this is that they should be str 4 while the executioner rounds could be AP 4 since they are supposed to be able to home in on weak points in armor so it would make sense that they could break through someone wearing carapace armor.

Another suggestion is a new type of grenade for the grenade launcher, a smoke grenade. Basically it would be fired at a unit on a blast or large blast template but instead of doing damage wherever the template lands creates a cover save of +5 against line of sight for everyone who is obscured by it including your own units. It can be used this way to help shape the battle field and help narrow down shooting opponents like a tau army.

One problem I have with the army list right now is there are no troop choice units with shields. Suppression and Riot shields are very common to all Aribites forces and should be represented in the army list. So including a troop choice unit with shields would be something to think about but have them work differently that the suppression squad with shields and shotguns since that is one of the most common Aribites tactics. I call dibs on them being called an Enforcer Squad though.

The Aribites general should be called Aribites Marshall since that is the military title for the Arbitrator branch leadership. This can be found in a few source books but the best and easiest one to find would be dark heresy core rule book and the book of judgment from dark heresy as well. You could also go with Marshall general if that is something you would want. A suggestion would also to include a higher WS and LD 10 version called a lord Marshall. Another option would be for the marshall char to take power armor

As of now it seems that the HQ choices are very very slim on what you can take. This is outside of the Special character you can take, although the ones you have are cool I think that you need more generic HQ choices first.

In that same vein the Personal Staff should be an HQ choice instead of elite since they work like a command squad or honor guard of other armies.

Judge Judith Schindler is one that I don't think needs Terminator armor since it is kind of weird to see an Aribites wearing something like that. I think maybe using artificer armor would be a better choice if you want to have the 2+ AV save.

Repressors should also have the option to take a heavy flamer because that would also be an effective form of crowd control.

The Cyber-Mastiff Hunting Pack might also be a good fast attack choice but either way Fleet might be a good rule to add to them sense they chase down criminals.

I will end this post now and come back if i think of more ideas but ya I like the codex so far just needs to be fine tuned a bit

[Haravikk]

One thing I read was to make the shotguns str 4. My thoughts on this is that they should be str 4 while the executioner rounds could be AP 4 since they are supposed to be able to home in on weak points in armor so it would make sense that they could break through someone wearing carapace armor.

I think this is the right idea for the shotguns; bearing in mind that the space marine shotgun is no longer really on par with a boltgun anymore (if it ever really was) thanks to the changes to Rapid Fire, meaning its only real advantage is being able to assault afterwards, which isn't really all that big of a bonus for arbites. So I think an extra optional round still makes sense on top of the standard strength 4 shot.

I'd go with either the older idea of a strong longer range, but fewer shots (18", S4, AP4, Heavy 1), or perhaps something like 12", S4, AP-, Assault 1, Ignores Cover. Basically it gives you the ability to trade off on weight of fire when ignoring cover will (hopefully) give you better damage instead.