Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Sisters of Battle Rumours

42K views 485 replies 66 participants last post by  shanewatts 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
Surprised Zion hasn't got to this first. Anyway I couldn't find a thread mentioning this yet so here it goes.

Sisters of Battle are getting a codex. What is it and how will it look is still a ways out. I have been hearing an occasional whisper or two on what is coming. Here is a brief on what I have been hearing over the last few months. But wait, there is some new hints of Sisters of Battle that were suggested over at the Enter the Citadel event. I have those listed here as well.


Sister's of Battle
From Various Sources and a lot of speculation
*They are not being dropped. They are getting their codex.
*There was some model design issues (common knowledge) from some time ago
*The army is currently not up to 6th edition standards, and needs to be fleshed out a lot (more units variability background etc)
*The codex was being worked on at one point, and stopped.
*Whispers of an Inquisition codex may have some bearing on this codex. (like moving from Daemonhunters to Grey Knights)

Recent Sisters of Battle News
via Enigwolf on dakka (thanks for the links)
I attended all of the Design sessions and because there weren't many people around, I manage to have very good, long conversions with Phil Kelly, Jervis Johnson, Guy Haley, and Jes Goodwin. I asked almost all of them about SoBs, and from the sounds of it it's not in the pipeline anytime soon. However, Phil Kelly has expressed interest in it, although he really wants to work on the IG 'dex because there's a certain "human" element to it missing from all the other races. He also mentioned that there are 3 Citadel Designers who have full SoB armies as their main army, and reassured me that they're still around. It's apparently also hard to "get rid" of a dex's contents once introduced, so no fear of Codex: Black Templars, etc. becoming a supplement. I prodded him more about how Witchhunter and Daemonhunters became Codex: GK, and he told me he wasn't involved in that, but it was an oddity within the office.

Oh yeah, one last thing about the Sisters of Battle. According to Phil Kelly, the reason why they never got plastic minis was because they couldn't be plastic moulded by the current process. He wasn't really sure what the issue was, but there was something about the sculpt which meant that it could only be cast in metal. Presumably this led to declining SoB sales and a lack of development in them as a result.
http://www.natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/sisters-of-battle.html?m=1
 
#2 ·
I was out part of the day. Until Heresy gets a staff cafeteria I need to do things like go shopping for food, and filling out paperwork for the community college,.

I'll add a couple notes of my own:

Sisters currently have issues in there current design having a lot of undercuts. I'm sure the newer designs have tried to address this, but there is still an issue with the sleeves and how to attach them so they hang naturally in relation to the arm position. I don't know what the proposed solution to that is.

I've also sent in a 9 page letter last month (yes a letter, not an email) detailing everything I could give them in both pros and cons on everything from my experiences playing the army and talking to others who do. This was basically play test feedback to give them some ideas of how the army is holding up and actually plays. I can't say they'll read it but I figured it was more proactive than sitting on my butt hoping for a new codex.
 
#27 ·
I was out part of the day. Until Heresy gets a staff cafeteria I need to do things like go shopping for food

Unacceptable. You will be fed when and if we remember to put dry food in the staff munchies bin.
 
#3 ·
Yeah most players - Sisters players at least - were aware of the modelling issue. Which does make sense. So assuming this rumour is true it will be interesting to see how they have got around the issue.

Well for me I'm buying my sisters from GW still, yes it's costing me a lot, only buying one set a month so 3 sisters a month - some times more if I'm a good boy - , but at least it would mean GW are selling sisters even if I'm the only one doing it. So that's my way of doing something.

If true, its interesting that Phil Kelly has an interest in Sisters and 3 Citadel Designers have Sisters as their main force, since that flys in the face of the belief that people in the design team or at GW had any interest in them. So that could only be a good thing.

The final part regarding the lack of sales seems logical too, but that reads to me as a confession that the lack of sales is mostly down to it being metal, which is something many players have stated frequently.

I'm not taking any of it as gospel and just keep my hopes up for more info each Month, but it is somewhat interesting if true though.
 
#6 ·
Less and less good as each new codex comes out. They have a good shot against Tyranids, Vanilla Marines, Blood Angels, Grey Knights and Space Wolves, but everything else has been an attempt to not get tabled in my experience.

This is new information? Sorry, must be in a time warp here, sounds like everything that has been said about them for the past few years just repeated.

'Sisters are not being dropped' and 'can't transition into plastic' is pretty much EVERYTHING that has been said to this point for the past few years.
Wake me when it's something new.

:boredom:
The new part was Jervis specifically stating that Sisters were being worked on and weren't forgotten and Phil Kelly actually saying anything about them. But yes, it's what most Sisters players already knew.
 
#5 ·
This is new information? Sorry, must be in a time warp here, sounds like everything that has been said about them for the past few years just repeated.

'Sisters are not being dropped' and 'can't transition into plastic' is pretty much EVERYTHING that has been said to this point for the past few years.
Wake me when it's something new.

:boredom:
 
#9 · (Edited)
OK so the "New bit" isn't actually mentioned in the thread until now.

I have to agree with Kettu this is really nothing more concrete than anything that has gone before.

The "telling" statement from the reported discussions for me is "It's apparently also hard to "get rid" of a dex's contents once introduced" which points very strongly to them having looked very seriously at removing the army.

The only concrete thing I have seen in recent times that might be classified as something new for the Sisters is there absence from Apoc.
Not sure if anyone can confirm and I've not really seen the book beyond a quick flip through the shop copy but do they even rate a mention anywhere in the book?
 
#10 · (Edited)
The comment about getting rid of an army could also be applied the Templars though and their book. Either way it's a wait and see game.

So this came out of another Faeit212 post:

Phil Kelly confirms that Sisters of Battle could not be plastic moulded (and told us to check with Jes Goodwin for more information - I stupidly forgot to do so). He mentioned it had something to do with the amount of detail on every side and the way that the moulds were limited in two directions as well as their method of release.
I'd say that firmly points to Sisters will likely see at least some changing in their aesthetics as their current design that the studio was shooting for didn't work, assuming they weren't just trying to update them with the least amount of changes in plastic.

Perhaps there are issues with the shoulder pads and they haven't worked out how to make those a separate piece without making things worse? The detail there would cause some issues if it was still attached to the torso for molding I'd bet.

Honestly I can live with losing the sleeves as long as the boob-plate becomes less pronounced, or becomes something more reasonable, and the Sisters still keep their iconography. We'll see however. I'm just prepared for them to gain a new look that doesn't match the old one.
 
#11 ·
I'll keep my fingers crossed for you guys. I also want to be able to say that I've fought every army. Of course, that still leaves Black Templars for me to fight too. Of course, I should have kept track of which of my armies fought each too.
 
#15 · (Edited)
@Loli

I think that if you dig up one of the older threads by MadCowCrazy in 2010-2011 (before the WD codex hit), you'll find the exact same points being made on the status of SoB updates, with the exception of the edition being 5th instead of 6th.

- Sisters were hard to sculpt.
- Sisters were not being dropped.
- Sisters would probably be reincarnated with some Inquisition elements, seeing as how GK were being revamped.
- The Witch Hunter codex needed to be updated anyway. Rhinos were still 50 points apiece at the time.

Also, sad to say, it's probably the very reason it hasn't been posted here when it came up. This is nothing the SoB community doesn't already know.
 
#16 ·
I'd point out comment from the studio wasn't about the sculpting being hard, but rather the basic design of the Sisters not compatible with the plastic casting technology they have right now.

A great example of a problem area that would cause problems in casting is the shoulder pad. If the torso is cast as a solid piece like it usually is then the shoulder pad would have under cuts on it due to the details on top and the curved surface. If you attach it to the arm then the army can't be reposed as the shoulderpad isn't attached to the arm like the Marine one in the Sister's design and would look wrong if repositioned. If made a seperate peice than you have to take into consideration how it attaches to the torso, and if the torso is made in two like the Marine one to get past the undercut on the curved surfaces you still have small undercuts on the sculpted detail on the shoulders on the wings that surround the Ecclesiarchy I and the Fleur-de-Lys due to both having curved sections that move in the opposite direction from the rest of the detail creating a problem where the small detail would get hooked in the mold and likely be damaged when the sprue is removed.

Now this isn't impossible to fix, as I mentioned making it a separate piece, but then ensuring it always fits the same place means that the torso has to be split and then a peg or tab set-up used, and this requires testing and tweaking to ensure it always comes out right.

Then you have sleeves, and rosary beads that circle the waist (more small detail that could be sheered off), and so on. All these things in the design need to be adjusted, or possibly removed and tested over and over. I was reading in one of the Faiet article comments sections that it can take upwards to 10 months for them to be ready to mill the final version of a sprue to use for production, and that's assuming there aren't complications. With Sisters, it could be a year or more if they started with a design that was heavily based on the one we have currently.

I'm alright with GW making tweaks and changes, I understand that it comes with the nature of dealing with plastic, but I also know that they're going to try and stick with the original vision of the army while at the same time updating it's feel to fit in with the more modern aesthetics of the army which means this will take time.

Honestly I'm willing to bet that the models have been sculpted (Jes is frankly too good at what he does, and there are too many sculptors there to assume that there hasn't been at least some work done. Updating the current kits actually -reduces- the number of different models needed as the default pose will be the same for all of the Battle Sisters bodies frankly. We're looking at going from 51 different models to maybe 20, not counting conversions and different wargear combinations) and maybe there is stuff sitting around waiting for the next codex project to kick off, but the sprues, and thus the models those will make, will need to be finalized so that all the versions of the Sisters we see (online, in the book, in the WD, in the studio armies, and the ones we get) match up so when we finally see everything it all looks like one solid, cohesive product line.

Sisters are coming, and considering the level of pride the Studio employees have in their work I'm willing to bet they'll be awesome when they get released.
 
#19 ·
I can't help love the eternal optimism of SoB players and their almost masochistic wishes for some love from GW.

I'm willing to bet that GW already have the codex and minis done because their having too much fun pulling the rug out from under the SoB players feet and crushing their willing to live just to see it rise up again.

SoB players reminds me more and more of Cubs fans.

Cubs fans: This year we'll win the world series! Doesn't win. AHWWWWW!
SoB players: This year we'll get a new codex! Doesn't get a new codex. AHWWWWW!


(For the record I do have a small SoB army too.. :) )
 
#20 ·
The original post really sounds to me like some over-enthusiastic SoB fan spoke to the designers and was told what they need to hear.

No self respecting member of the GW team is going to turn to anyone, especially a big SoB fan and say "actually, we soft canned them, we can't ditch them but right now we have popular armies to work on" - it would be a PR nightmare, anything more is reading into what was said imo.
 
#22 ·
I Commit Thread Necromancy

*Rolls D20*

19, My action passed.

***

Wait, wait... It's a 'new' and relevant rumour post.

So just the other day I was talking to the Redshirt- *Wait! Please, just hear me out*
So, as I was saying, Redshirt at one of my local GWs and our conversation came to Appoc, the absent Sisters and if they even still counted as a faction any more at this point.

At this point he showed me an email the store had received 'A few months ago' from 'on high'.

I can't remember the exact wording but in a nutshell it said that the Sisters of Battle are not to be mentioned as a faction within 40k nor are they (the store) to try and sell them for the time being. If a customer wishes to buy them, show them how to do so but otherwise they are not to be considered a part of the game despite the miniatures still being available via the net.

My friend, the Redshirt, then explained to me it's most likely the no codex situation that prompted this as it doesn't read like the emails they get when certain stock is actually being removed for good but otherwise there is no justification given for the email there-in and unlikely to be one at all given, even if he was to ask.

So there you have it.

At least as far as the Australian stores are concerned, the Sisters no longer exist.
For what reason or to what extent or timeframe isn't known and unlikely will be.

Store Location and Staff Name withheld in advent I wasn't to actually know about this.
 
#24 ·
That's a little depressing. But I do get it as there is no easy way to get the WD codex. But a solid answer would be nice. Not telling new players about them but letting the models be bought online is so odd.
 
#26 ·
At this point I don't even care anymore if they squat them, I don't even care if GW's marketing department takes a plane to go right in my house and pass twenty minutes laughing their hoarse, spitful laughter right in my face before boldly announcing they're canning my models and have been enjoying drinking my tears for all this time.

I just want to know if there will ever be a future or if it's just indecision on whether to soft can them or actually cancel because they don't have the guts to handle it on a PR level and aren't sure whether anyone actually cares enough to cost them sales. There will come a day when I will have a little better personal situation and thus enough money to devote a small part of it to models, and I'd like to know whether I can still play Warhammer or not.

I'm just asking for a clear answer, all this passive aggressive PR silence bullshit is really starting to get to me.
 
#33 ·
I'm just asking for a clear answer, all this passive aggressive PR silence bullshit is really starting to get to me.
And you'll get that answer. When some random WD comes out on the other side of the planet accidentally ahead of schedule and gets scanned to the internet or suddenly GW no longer sells the models anywhere. Whichever comes first!

I could understand not wanting to kill sales by announcing a book for an army that might screw some of it's models but SoB being online only and in metal... I just don't see that as an issue for GW so I would agree. Say something... or don't already. Thanks GW.

:laugh:
 
#31 ·
And yet i speak to the "Redshirts" and have heard only that Sisters will get a full Codex treatment sometimes late next year, also a full relaunch of all products in plastic and finecast.

Oh by the way, almost all the rumours that Sisters are getting squatted originate from GW HQ, it is a marketing ploy.
 
#36 ·
The thing is Kettu, that the precedent hasn't been repeated since 2nd Edition and to continue to use it as a baseline isn't really fair to GW when we have other old codexes that have sat around for a while only to get an update at a much later date (Dark Eldar and Necrons both come to mind). Realistically there are two baselines that need to be looked at, not just one, and to cling to only the worst possible outcome as the only solution isn't realistic to the actual possibilities.

Furthermore, if this is being pushed globally, or even just in Australia, it could be a conscious attempt to not bilk customers. Currently Sisters are made only in metal (outside of the Immolator kit which is plastic and is the base of the Exorcist kit as well), a material GW is moving away from and doesn't do large batches of for anything. Furthermore all metal models are all direct only, meaning the only real way to get them is through GW directly, or by the store spending a larger chunk of their budget on ordering them. Add in the codex which has (inexplicably) not been reprinted or moved over to a digital release of any kind and you get a recipe for the worst army to sell to new players.

We've seen a lot of positive comments coming from GW Devs lately about the Sisters and how Kelly has a strong interest in doing them, and how there are members of the dev team who have Sisters as one of (if not their only) main army/armies. There was no such support or interest mentioned for Squats, and the talk about them paints it as pretty unanimous in terms of them being removed, something I don't see here.

Now can GW still drop the Sisters? Yes. I will fully and freely admit that the Sisters could get the axe for any number of reasons, but I'll also say that while I'm prepared for it, I also don't see it as the only recourse for the army. There is just too much coming out of the studio that seems to say "this army will be coming as soon as we feel we can do it justice without sacrificing what it already is" for me to subscribe to Doomsayers Weekly just yet.
 
#38 ·
The thing is Kettu, that the precedent hasn't been repeated since 2nd Edition and to continue to use it as a baseline isn't really fair to GW...
*Cough*Dogs of War*Cough*Chaos Dwarves*Cough*

:whistle:What? I didn't say anything.

But anyway, I know all this.
I'm just a cynic.
 
#37 ·
Well I didn't really think after 13 years or so that Dark Eldar really even existed. So I could certainly see a sudden Sister release hit like a brick. Really no point in printing them in the allies chart if they didn't plan to release something before 7th ed. or ever. I'd just have saved the ink.

Hard to guess, but I wouldn't be surprised by either outcome.
 
#51 ·
Really no point in printing them in the allies chart if they didn't plan to release something before 7th ed. or ever. I'd just have saved the ink.
They learned their lesson with the Squats not to totally invalidate armies and models. It's a service to their customers to ensure that their models continue to be usable in the game. It's really nothing more than that, and nothing more to derive from it than that. It's not an indication of a new line. The Squats stayed gone because they have no usable rules and no produced models. GW still produces and sells Sisters, even if only in limited quantities.

Really, what should give Sisters players some hope is that GW has increased its design staff by 30% this FY. If they keep that extra staff in FY14, they should finish all of the core armies that haven't gotten a 6th Edition treatment by next year, maybe early FY15. That will then allow them design assets to devote to a niche product like SoB. Now, of course, all this hinges on them retaining the extra design staff, and not merely releasing the extra personnel when they finish all of the products. But it's more than the Sisters ever had before when GW couldn't even get a codex and new models to market for every army in every edition, which was why perennially the Sisters couldn't get any attention in the past. They were never judged to have a high enough ROI to demand design assets while other armies still needed to be completed.

Ultimately though, every answer you get from GW should just be tossed out the window. They're not going to confirm the demise of the Sisters, nor are they going to confirm their resurrection. That's not how they operate. If you're getting an answer at all, it's a blow off. Write them letters, pester them, sure. It never hurts to show there are still people out there interested in the army. But no answer you ever get is going to have even a shred of truth to it. At best, eventually one of the rumors has to be true, lol.
 
#50 ·
There was a mention that SoB's had issues in production to plastic/finecast, i call bollocks.

I can't and won't believe that in 2013 and with the best production technology available that GW can have issues in producing plastic SoB's, considering that any plastic SoB will be a new design specifically to be used for plastic and finecast.

So i call bullshit on that.

GW could have the whole SoB range up and running cosidering on whom you believe they have been working off and on SoB over the last few years, the main issue is that someone in GW needs to bite the bullet and get SoB on track and within 6 months we will have SoB.
 
#53 ·
From what I have heard Zion they actually do pretty much have some of the best equipment out there.

The issue with producing any model on plastic is a injected plastic mould costs roughly 10k per sprue to produce or more. Bane blade was 200k so they are not cheap.

It's probably an issue of not believing they can sell enough of them to cover the costs of the mould.

And because something sells for say $115 does not mean that is how much they make. A majority of their sales are done at 60 percent retail so on that $115 model they only make $68ish, from that they have to pay packaging, production costs, material costs, and shipping costa. So let's give them the benefit that they make $35 from that $115 model. How many units would they have to sell before they cover design and the mould?
 
#54 ·
From the last time someone talked to the Devs (I think it was Jes or Phil) the problem of not having the right equipment for what they were trying to do came up. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying their stuff sucks, just that there is even better stuff out there that they don't have yet and if Sisters need something like a sliding die mold setup to be done correctly then that cost is being added to their potential release and they have to feel that whatever they do is going to make up for that cost too, something that you have to sell to bean counters and board members, even if you can use that same technology for other products the cost is likely being added to the Sisters which makes them even more expensive to update.
 
#56 ·
Alright, fair enough, but it was just an example. The point is that the Devs said they can't quite get the models where they want them and it's because they don't have the equipment they want to do it. Unless they can mitigate by pushing the cost onto another army that they know will sell better Sisters will be stuck with the bill and then seen as "too risky" to update at the moment.

Who knows though, maybe the capital from this Marine release will bring in enough cash to offset the problem somewhat.

Of course we're all speaking in "ifs" and assumptions and without any better info to dig through we're basically stuck at this level of examination of the issue.
 
#58 ·
Ah, I thought you were saying it used slide-die molding.

Regular molding dies are typically two parallel faces, this means that all detail has to run perpendicular to the face of the die or parallel with it in such a way that it doesn't create an undercut.

Slide-die molding is a multi-stage molding process that has you do an initial cast, then move one of the faces and do a secondary cast. It doesn't solve the issues GW might be having with the Sisters, but it is an example of a technology that exists that I could use for an example.
 
#62 ·
I thought the issue with the Sisters was one of GW wanting them to be a posable multi-part kit, but the sleeves on the arms being unable to hang properly when placed in certain positions.

Basically, what happens when people try to be too creative with, say, the Chaos Marine bolters with those awful ammunition belts, which then end up sticking out at odd angles and defying gravity. Sisters arms that were posable would have ended up with gravity defying sleeves if players tried to pose them any other way than the "proper" way. Basically defeating the purpose of having multi-part posable plastics in the first place.

However, ultimately I think the biggest problem for the Sisters has been a perceived lower potential ROI than on other products. After all, they've tried to launch Sisters twice, and neither time has been overly successful
 
#63 ·
I thought the issue with the Sisters was one of GW wanting them to be a posable multi-part kit, but the sleeves on the arms being unable to hang properly when placed in certain positions.

Basically, what happens when people try to be too creative with, say, the Chaos Marine bolters with those awful ammunition belts, which then end up sticking out at odd angles and defying gravity. Sisters arms that were posable would have ended up with gravity defying sleeves if players tried to pose them any other way than the "proper" way. Basically defeating the purpose of having multi-part posable plastics in the first place.

However, ultimately I think the biggest problem for the Sisters has been a perceived lower potential ROI than on other products. After all, they've tried to launch Sisters twice, and neither time has been overly successful
I hate those frakking ammo belts.

What does ROI mean?
 
#66 ·
Mildly interesting reference to SoB in the new Marines codex after a brief mention of Black Templars' relationship with teh ecclesiarchy: "Many times in its glorious history, the Black Templars have gone to war alongside the devout Battle Sisters of the Adepta Sororitas, and a complex web of mutual obligations and honour has evolved." The rule book allies chart lists Black Templars as "desperate allies" (the same as Eldar, Dark Eldar, Necrons and Tau) as opposed to "allies of convenience" which is what most space marines are. One wonders whether this just fell through the cracks in editing or if there will be a change to the allies matrix.
 
#67 ·
Well on the bright side, black templars are now part of the space marine codex and thus use the space marine ally chart.

On even a brighter side I heard these rumores:

An interesting tidbit I overheard being discussed recently is that Sisters of Battle are getting a digital codex release soon. Unfortunately, I'm still in the dark as to if there will be a physical codex release, or whether this is new material or just a repackaging of the current list.

A digital release of the White Dwarf list, no doubt. Several writers I've met this year said the real codex is currently under way.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top