Tuesday, 3 December 2019

Sisters of Battle- the Canoness Cock-up



I've had a chance to try out the new Sisters of Battle rules now (the new models are still on my painting table) and for the most part I love them. However, there's a glaring issue in the army set that really needs to be talked about a bit more because I think it shines a light on one of the recent GW trends that is distinctly negative.

The picture above is the mono-build Canoness model included in the army box.  Now the first, and relatively minor, issue here is that she's not the Canoness shown on the back of the box- that model has an icon of the Ecclesiarchy and a Condemnor Boltgun and is, as I understand it, the as yet unreleased multi-option kit. The good old 'box contents may vary from those shown' disclaimer is doing some heavy lifting here, but that's about it. As an aside, I'd be interested to hear in the comments if anyone actually got the other Canoness. Given that the instructions in the box specifically refer to the model pictured above, I think that's a little unlikely.

However, that's only a side-show to the real, and more serious, issue with the model. You see, gentle reader, that Canoness is illegally equipped. She has a Power Sword (or possibly a Blessed Blade), a Rod of Office, and a Plasma Pistol which you could be forgiven for not seeing because it's tucked in behind her right leg (on the left as we look at the picture). All of those weapons are valid options for the model- but not in that combination. I couldn't find a picture of the Canoness' rules and I'd rather not risk the wrath of GW's lawyers by taking one myself, but the default equipment for the Canoness is a bolt pistol and chainsword as well as the inevitable frag and krak grenades. Her options, which I'll reproduce verbatim here, are as follows:

  • This model can be equipped with 1 boltgun and 1 power sword instead of 1 bolt pistol and 1 chainsword. If this model is equipped with 1 boltgun and 1 power sword it additionally has a rod of office.
  • This model can be equipped with one of the following instead of 1 bolt pistol: 1 condemnor boltgun; 1 weapon from the Pistols list.
  • This model can be equipped with one of the following instead of 1 chainsword: 1 power sword, 1 blessed blade.
  • If this model is equipped with 1 chainsword, it can have a brazier of holy fire or a null rod.
The Plasma Pistol is available from the Pistols list along with the Inferno Pistol and Hand Flamer.

So as we can see, in order to get the Rod of Office (a very useful little item that boosts the Canoness' re-roll to a 9" radius) we need to take the first option of a boltgun and power sword. Unfortunately, so doing locks us out of any of the other options and there's absolutely no wriggle room. Therefore, although we can easily work out the points value of the Canoness as equipped in the box, there is no currently legal way to field her. It's doubly baffling given that it seems it would have been much simpler and more flexible to just allow the bolt pistol and chainsword to be replaced with one weapon option each, then add the choice of the null rod, rod of office, or brazier as the 'special' option.

Firstly, this lead in to an odd issue in the new Sororitas Codex in general, which is a lack of previously available options for no discernible reason. The Eviscerator, for example, is completely gone outside of the Repentia version. Missionaries have barely any options at all outside of replacing their autogun and laspistol with a shotgun and bolt pistol. Sisters Superior can no longer get Storm Bolters and the Canoness, as we've seen, loses access to any sort of longarm other than a bolter or Condemnor Bolter. Several of these changes actively invalidate existing models, including the legendary Plasma Preacher and Redemptor Kyrinov who was re-released as Made To Order to coincide with the set coming out!
Now I get that the idea here is to sell the wonderful new Sororitas models, but here's the thing- it's entirely unnecessary. Existing Sisters of Battle players have been clamouring for plastic models for years, not because they needed loads of new options but because the old solid metal models were heavy, chipped all over the place as soon as you touched them, and were extremely expensive. We were already going to buy the new stuff like it was limited-edition oxygen, we didn't need our existing models made unplayable.

Unfortunately this seems to be part of a wider trend at GW of limiting and reducing the options for character models and squad Champions, from stripping Marine (and particularly Chaos Marine) characters of mobility options like bikes and Jump Packs to restricting almost all newly-released characters to a very limited suite of equipment indeed. I consider this to be an extremely retrograde step for GW to take- ask almost any veteran 40k modeller what their first conversion or kitbash was and it's very likely that it was to add a desired weapon option to a model for which an official kit wasn't available. Removing the incentive for such simple, entry-level conversions weakens the hobby as a whole.

Still, the worst thing about all this from my point of view is that once again, it shows that GW have released a high-profile product that contradicts itself within its own contents- and in this case, in a particularly obvious and egregious way. Given the great strides they've made in recent years, it's unfortunate to see.

2 comments:

  1. Send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com and point it out. Sometimes things get overlooked. When they updated the rules to 8th edition, the Chaplain Dreadnought wasn't given the Heavy Plasma Cannon that its marketing materials were shown with, I emailed about it and it has since been errata'd to include it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Agreed, it seems GW has taken the Warmahordes approach of 'we want all models to look the same, only the paint jobs vary' and kit-bashing, something GW has had a literal monopoly on for years in terms of play-ability has gone out the window. Gotta make it easy for those short attention span kiddies they're always trying to swoon I guess.

    ReplyDelete