Now, this has not been announced, but I have been told it recently by a GW store manager.
The necrons are getting an update, and it will probably happen next year. Apparently, the following points will be covered:

1) There is going to be an option for lesser C'Tan as standard HQ choices.
2) There will be a new light vehicle.
3) The monolith will either cost more points or lose 'Living Metal'.
4) All Necrons will have Feel No Pain instead of We'll Be Back.
5) The greater C'tan will be weaker, and the background will describe them as 'Avatars', not the gods themselves.
6) There may be a new C'tan. (I think it'll be the dragon.)
7) Due to the general weakening of the army, they are getting rid of the Phase Out rule.
8) Pariahs will gain a 2+ armour and 4 or 5+ invulnerable save.
9) Warscythes and C'tan no will no longer ignore invulnerable saves.
10) Plastic Immortals.

Topic open for discussion, anyone heard anything else?

God... this makes them even worse than they are now.

I swear if they take away the WBB rule for the FNP universal rule, I will up and quit. Not even my army, but if thats the way the ship is headed Im jumping off.

I have heard the rumblings of the Dragon C'Tan getting a model and rules, though if the fluff is to believed (not that GW follows their own fluff), this would turn the Imperium upside down.

1). Hmm, do Gods belong in games of 40K, lesser or otherwise?
2). Intriguing
3). If Living Metal stays, please sort out the wording to stop all arguments
4). That's a given
5). Much like in Dawn of War computer game, this is a better option than 1.
6). Is the Void Dragon the Machine God? Or is that the other one?

The Emperor is the Omnissiah, the Dragon still sleeps according to Mechanicum.

3) and 4) - Hurrah!

6) Really? So he's NOT on Mars and when he 'awakens' he won't throw the Imperium into the biggest civil war since the Heresy?

The Dragon sleeps under Mars, kept under watch by a guardian for ten millennia.

So he's not there at the moment then? Bother, I was going to get out my telescope

If you read the latter bit of Mechanicum carefully, you'll see that the Emperor bound the Dragon on Mars a long time ago, and the psychic presence sort of fuelled the technological creativity of the Tech-Priests, so basically the Dragon made the Imperium.

I thought that if the dragon escaped then the whole of the Martian priesthood would come crashing down. Mind you, if the Inquisition found what had happened, they would probably chuck an exterminatus at Mars!

I am sure this is from a manager who read the internets (aka this is all old news already out for quite some time). But hey I want new Necron rumors so I'll bite.

I swear if they take away the WBB rule for the FNP universal rule, I will up and quit. Not even my army, but if thats the way the ship is headed Im jumping off.

WBB is a terrible rule and needlesly complicates the game. It needs to go. Surprised this is even an issue for folks that it would change.

It doesn't mean there won't be boosts to it via monoliths and lords either (ways to ignore the AP2 rule and ways to reroll it I am sure are in the works for Necrons if they do go to FNP).

It's probably fruitless even trying to keep this from becoming another 10 page thread. But the store manager likely read these rumors on a message board, because they're the same wishlistly points that have been floating around for a long time. Doesn't mean they might not come true someday. But keep in mind store staff know about as much as you or I do these days.

Funny, I think the WBB rule is much less powerful than FNP, because of the following things:

1) You get to roll to get up as soon as they go down with FNP, unlike WBB.

2) You don't have to have a whole bunch of other necrons around to try to do FNP.

3) Good news for lords: You get to roll to get back up for each lost wound, not just on death.

I'd change Living Metal to something simple like a 5+ invulnerable save or;

go down the Borg route and say that a weapon will only work on it once e.g. a Lascannon causes a penetrating hit on Turn 2, but from Turn 3 onwards, Lascannons will no longer work or;

have it regenerate/repair any damage.

Just some random Flashman ramblings

EDIT @ Gorgon, yes it is fruitless, this is what the internet is for

I like the ideas of an invulnerable save and self-repair.

BrookM wrote:The Dragon sleeps under Mars, kept under watch by a guardian for ten millennia.

You mean one of those 8 pts Eldar dudes? You've gotta be kidding me, they couldn't guard their own spandex jumpsuits if their lives depended on it. Not to mention that a single S3 T3 model is going to do much against (a) God almighty....

Nightwatch wrote:

BrookM wrote:The Dragon sleeps under Mars, kept under watch by a guardian for ten millennia.

You mean one of those 8 pts Eldar dudes? You've gotta be kidding me, they couldn't guard their own spandex jumpsuits if their lives depended on it. Not to mention that a single S3 T3 model is going to do much against (a) God almighty....

Most droll sir.

The WBB rule may have its flaws, but it has its bonuses as well.

The main reason I dont want to see it go is it makes the Necrons unique. What army out there can come back AFTER it died? Necrons. What army has FNP Universal Rule... pretty much all of them.

I seriously don't want to see this game turn into "For your armies special rules, see page 26 of the Main Rule Book"

Just sayin.

And while the dragon Ctan would be awesome, GW would have to redo pretty much every Imperial army to compensate for the loss of the Mech.... or their fluff will make absolutely no sense.

I have to agree. Do not want the Dragon. Especially when the Outsider was hinted at waking up during the 13th crusade world wide stuff. His minions showed up and killed the hell out of some Chaos marines and saved a bunch of IG. Besides, I want an Insane metal god that Hates Harliquins! Who wouldn't?

Oh, and the dragon would royally F up the fluff.

Nightwatch wrote:

BrookM wrote:The Dragon sleeps under Mars, kept under watch by a guardian for ten millennia.

You mean one of those 8 pts Eldar dudes? You've gotta be kidding me, they couldn't guard their own spandex jumpsuits if their lives depended on it. Not to mention that a single S3 T3 model is going to do much against (a) God almighty....

Har Har Har! silly, this is a prefall eldar guardian! he's AMAAAZING!


The dragon would be awsome to have, but lesse ctan is just a little too much for me... the night bringer would just eat them.

we'll be back is part of what makes necrons unique, I'd be sad to see it go, but I dont have experience with it, so...

more points for a monolith! how many points are they? over 200 right?

I think it's about 360 points. A Monolith at the moment is pretty much a super-heavy tank that doesn't have structure points. If I play a 1500 point game with a Monolith and the Nightbringer, unless the opposition has mega-tactics, you can just whack the living backside of all who oppose you.

combatmedic wrote:God... this makes them even worse than they are now.

I swear if they take away the WBB rule for the FNP universal rule, I will up and quit. Not even my army, but if thats the way the ship is headed Im jumping off.

I have heard the rumblings of the Dragon C'Tan getting a model and rules, though if the fluff is to believed (not that GW follows their own fluff), this would turn the Imperium upside down.

If WBB -> FNP would make you quit, you might as well quit now, because that rumor seems the most likely of all.

These changes all seem quite sensible. Light vehicles will surely give the Necrons that extra edge they need to dominate the game.

combatmedic wrote:The WBB rule may have its flaws, but it has its bonuses as well.

The main reason I dont want to see it go is it makes the Necrons unique. What army out there can come back AFTER it died? Necrons. What army has FNP Universal Rule... pretty much all of them.

I seriously don't want to see this game turn into "For your armies special rules, see page 26 of the Main Rule Book"

Just sayin.

And while the dragon Ctan would be awesome, GW would have to redo pretty much every Imperial army to compensate for the loss of the Mech.... or their fluff will make absolutely no sense.

I completely understand what you're saying, at the same time there are great advantages in making every army work by a diffferent combination of USRs. It would chime with the concept that modern kiddies are unable to calculate VPs adding up more than 10.

OTOH we already have a host of codex specific special rules in the SM and Ork codexes so why not have more in a Necron codex?

Of course everything I say assumes that GW Design Studio moves according to a well-thought-out strategic plan, whereas I suspect they actually just toss off a bunch of rules that 'seem right' depending on a combination of the moon phase when the codex has to go to print and what the lead author had for dinner the night before.

Flashman wrote:1). Hmm, do Gods belong in games of 40K, lesser or otherwise?

How do you define 'god?' In this case, the C'tan are gods because no one is really willing to argue the matter with them. They're much more 'physical' than the Chaos gods, sure, and if you read the description of the way they manifest in a body for the tabletop representation, it's really a lot more like the Eldar Avatar. I say let them stay, as long as they're balanced. (I wouldn't want them in Necromunda, for example. Well, maybe as a 'boss' for a weird scenario...)

I like the idea of C'Tan being represented by Avatars. Dawn of War: Dark Crusade did this (the Necron Lord can transform into the Nightbringer) and it made sense to me.

Ardensfax wrote:The necrons are getting an update, and it will probably happen next year.

Topic open for discussion, anyone heard anything else?

Awesome! I look forward to everybody being able to understand how Necrons fight:
- Simplified and nerfed C'Tan? Yes.
- No more "Living Metal" questions? Great!
- FNP over WBB? Perfect!

The only question I have is how GW is going to implement a simplified Phase Out, because that's gotta stay.

How is Phase Out not simple enough? You lose 25% of the Necrons in your army, you lose. Simple as that.

Previous rumors said that instead of having the C'tan themselves on the battlefield, the models would represent Necron Lords channeling their C'tan god. That is to say, a way to remove the C'tans from regular 40k without scrapping the current models. Weaker "C'tans" in 40k are justified and new models can be made for Apocalypse!

With that in mind, giving the Dragon a model would make sense in that it would simply be a possessed Lord; not the actual C'tan.
Well... I don't care what GW does, as long as it means that Necrons have more choices and variety in their army. I really like the models, especially when they are painted in non-metallic colours. New C'tan, new vehicle... my brushes are itching

As for FNP, I'd imagine that a new gimmick would be put in place to preserve the Necron flavor, much like IG losing the whole "use points to buy special units/tactics" and getting orders in return.

Cheese Elemental wrote:How is Phase Out not simple enough? You lose 25% of the Necrons in your army, you lose. Simple as that.

You can't expect gamers to understand percentages or fractions that gaks complex. Did you know 1/2 * 1/2 is 1/4, that doesn't make any sense! How can multiplying two numbers get a smaller number?!? Multiplying makes things bigger.

I just want to see a new codex.removing the complcation of the WBB to FNP does not bother me to much.Just fix it so it has almost the same effect as WBB did so it retains the flavor

avantgarde wrote:

Cheese Elemental wrote:How is Phase Out not simple enough? You lose 25% of the Necrons in your army, you lose. Simple as that.

You can't expect gamers to understand percentages or fractions that gaks complex. Did you know 1/2 * 1/2 is 1/4, that doesn't make any sense! How can multiplying two numbers get a smaller number?!? Multiplying makes things bigger.

Because 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/4 you halve the halve so 1/2 of 1/2 = 1/4

Hey, looks like the same rumors we've seen time and again.

Ardensfax wrote:1) There is going to be an option for lesser C'Tan as standard HQ choices.

There are supposedly only four C'Tan left. We know of two and speculate on the state of two others. Exactly where do these "lesser" C'Tan fit into the current fluff? Papa C'Tan "getting busy" with the SoB?

I hope the Necrons get to keep their special rule. I like that it makes them unique. I do hope the Necron Codex comes out next year as I'd really like to start a 'cron army.

sonofruss wrote:

avantgarde wrote:

Cheese Elemental wrote:How is Phase Out not simple enough? You lose 25% of the Necrons in your army, you lose. Simple as that.

You can't expect gamers to understand percentages or fractions that gaks complex. Did you know 1/2 * 1/2 is 1/4, that doesn't make any sense! How can multiplying two numbers get a smaller number?!? Multiplying makes things bigger.

Because 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/4 you halve the halve so 1/2 of 1/2 = 1/4

He was being sarcastic and speaking to the "dumbing down" of the rules.

Breotan wrote:

Ardensfax wrote:1) There is going to be an option for lesser C'Tan as standard HQ choices.

There are supposedly only four C'Tan left. We know of two and speculate on the state of two others. Exactly where do these "lesser" C'Tan fit into the current fluff?

I would suspect that GW will be treating Necron C'Tan as akin to Chaos Powers.

That is, for each C'Tan:
- Greater Avatars might be like a C: Daemons Greater Daemon
- Lesser Avatars might be like a Marked C: CSM Daemon Prince

Essentially, this would turn the CSM model on it's head:
- vanilla / Marked / Cult HQs
- vanilla Troops

instead of CSM:
- vanilla / Marked HQs
- vanilla / Marked / Cult Troops

I for one hope that everyone gets their wish and necrons have no special rules at all and the monolith is reduced to a stationary model with 1 str 3 shot per turn at 6 in range for 600 points and the whole army suffers phase out if even one model is killed.

How dare an army based upon a theme of undeath be more difficult to kill than my beloved spaec mareens

40kenthusiast wrote:Hey, looks like the same rumors we've seen time and again.

Agreed. Really there is nothing new here.

If you want to get into debatehammer then what they need to address in the new codex are some problems.

1. Cheaper vehicle is needed. All or nothing choices aren't the best.

2. Movement. The whole fluff about necrons slowly marching around is all nice and dandy to read about. However speed and the flexibility of movement is king in 5th ed. Yes, you can teleport a few units around, too bad the "port yourself to safety tactic" move relies on chance (dice roll) to work. The other fast units (scarabs, destroyers) can't take objectives and the destroyers don't want to move far away from an orb anyways. SOME sort of flexibility needs to be brought in.

3. Make units that people want to take. Wraiths? Nice idea but too few and still die quickly. Flayed Ones? See: sub-par hth unit. Pariahs are deadly, but too expensive and don't count as Necrons. These units need to be reviewed.

4. More unit types.

5. Forget bringing gods to the battle field. Again, that's nice to read about but stupid in practice. "Hey, lets knock over that water tower! I KNOW! Lets bring GOD!" Pay for an effect on the battle field. Warped reality, spooky moving darkness, whatever. Looks like they've added some mind-bending horror aspects as of late (Planet strike special tactic, the Dragon warping reality like H.P.Lovecraft talks about), so why not go with some of that.

6. Move some of the ideas of Apocalypse into the army in a scaled down way. Energy barries that dull/negate shots, etc. Take a page from that book of creativity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breotan wrote:There are supposedly only four C'Tan left. We know of two and speculate on the state of two others. Exactly where do these "lesser" C'Tan fit into the current fluff? Papa C'Tan "getting busy" with the SoB?

More along the lines of bringing a Great Unclean one to the battle instead of bringing big old Nurgle himself.

40kenthusiast wrote:Hey, looks like the same rumors we've seen time and again.

So in about a week's time BoLS will copypasta them as new news! Awesome!

And the circle completes itself once more.

In that case, Een Beefaw lawk.

Cheese Elemental wrote:In that case, Een Beefaw lawk.

I wonder how many times you're gonna post that today.

BTT: Yah, I dont have anything to contribute

This is only the second time.

Ah, forgot that one on the last page, I'll edit the 1st post. The Phase Out rule is going away totally, according to the Store Manager. The PO rule was designed to balance the necrons because they were too strong. They are going to be weakened considerably, I think.

Ardensfax wrote:Ah, forgot that one on the last page, I'll edit the 1st post. The Phase Out rule is going away totally, according to the Store Manager. The PO rule was designed to balance the necrons because they were too strong. They are going to be weakened considerably, I think.

Aren't they weak enough?

Apparently not. Also, now you can't destroy vehicles with Glancing Hits any more, then the Gauss Weapon special rule has been dropped down the drain. At least they will lose phase out, thank god.

Cheese Elemental wrote:How is Phase Out not simple enough? You lose 25% of the Necrons in your army, you lose. Simple as that.

Can't decide whether that was sarcasm, or proof of why the rule needs to go ?

Moopy wrote:
1. Cheaper vehicle is needed. All or nothing choices aren't the best.

2. Movement. The whole fluff about necrons slowly marching around is all nice and dandy to read about. However speed and the flexibility of movement is king in 5th ed. Yes, you can teleport a few units around, too bad the "port yourself to safety tactic" move relies on chance (dice roll) to work. The other fast units (scarabs, destroyers) can't take objectives and the destroyers don't want to move far away from an orb anyways. SOME sort of flexibility needs to be brought in.

3. Make units that people want to take. Wraiths? Nice idea but too few and still die quickly. Flayed Ones? See: sub-par hth unit. Pariahs are deadly, but too expensive and don't count as Necrons. These units need to be reviewed.

I can agree with these, but all things would need to be balanced out, especially if Necrons are kept distinct from another brand of Space Marines.

Moopy wrote:
5. Forget bringing gods to the battle field. Again, that's nice to read about but stupid in practice. "Hey, lets knock over that water tower! I KNOW! Lets bring GOD!" Pay for an effect on the battle field. Warped reality, spooky moving darkness, whatever. Looks like they've added some mind-bending horror aspects as of late (Planet strike special tactic, the Dragon warping reality like H.P.Lovecraft talks about), so why not go with some of that.

Again, you and many people seem hng up on the term 'God.' If an Inquisitor of loose morals lands on Planet Xyzzy and convinces the primitive savages he's their god, does that mean there's no room for an IG with Inqusition HQ?

The C'Tan are effectively immortal, sure, but what is found on the tabletop is little more than an 'avatar' of the greater entity, which seems to be a force of nature that is impossible to control, but not nearly as wide reaching as the bigger 'gods' of the setting.

'God' is just a state of mind.

Alpharius wrote:
6) Really? So he's NOT on Mars and when he 'awakens' he won't throw the Imperium into the biggest civil war since the Heresy?

BrookM wrote:The Dragon sleeps under Mars, kept under watch by a guardian for ten millennia.

Ardensfax wrote:If you read the latter bit of Mechanicum carefully, you'll see that the Emperor bound the Dragon on Mars a long time ago, and the psychic presence sort of fuelled the technological creativity of the Tech-Priests, so basically the Dragon made the Imperium.

I thought that if the dragon escaped then the whole of the Martian priesthood would come crashing down. Mind you, if the Inquisition found what had happened, they would probably chuck an exterminatus at Mars!

Uh, guys? I've read MECHANICUM (And liked it quite a bit!).

My point number 6) reference involved sarcasm.

Of course, if they are going the "avatar of the C'tan" route, all bets are off.

How can anyone seriously think WBB is complicated?

I bet Hunt the Fallen and Greater Daemon possession was to complicated, and that dang confusing LatD list.

You know what? Assault is way to complicated, lets get rid of that.

Editisregard, didn't notice the second page

I don't play Necrons, but I won't mind if Phase Out goes away. No other army suffers from that penalty. This is hopeless wishlisting, but just get the rules and point costs right, and forget Phase Out. I think it's poor game design to have any army curl up and die because the player falls a few too many WBB rolls. I don't think it adds character, it is just a way to make the Necron have less fun.

The phase out rule is stupid.. It assumes the necrons are a GOOD army that is so powerful that other armies can only kill 75% of them.. This is entirely not the case thus the rule is pointless

As stated FNP is better than WBB in most situations.. Quitting over FNP is quite absurd, on the other hand please link me your ebay army and I will send you plenty of small violins!

dietrich wrote: I think it's poor game design to have any army curl up and die because the player falls a few too many WBB rolls.

As opposed to curl up and die due to a few to many failed saves, scatter rolls, reserve rolls etc?

I wouldn't be bothered about seeing phase out go, but the argument above seems a bit bizarre - the whole game largely revolves around the luck of the dice. As with anything it is something the necron player is fully aware of and can account for in army building and tactics.

Cheese Elemental wrote:How is Phase Out not simple enough? You lose 25% of the Necrons in your army, you lose. Simple as that.

Actually, it's 25% remaining. You have to lose 75% of your army before you will 'Phase Out'.

just imagine how tough the models would have to be to have a 'Phase Out' (drool) it'd be awesome. 'Movie Marines' vs Super Necrons. Sign me up!

Dude that army is not weak in any respects whatsoever! That army should be chopped and reformatted so that it isn't so gay. They need to keep that phase out rule because it equalizes what that army is capable of. How many times have you seen a necron army phase out? Hopefully when they are refitted they won't be so strong! The fact that a Necron player failing some WBB rolls and people trying to rationalize it and say that it shouldn't happen is lame. Remember that they also fail a generous 3+ save before that even happens. People complaining about cheese is so lame.

I must be in the company of wargaming gods here, I play a Necron player on a regular basis, we've played at least 50 games together, if not more, and in all of that I've only caused him to phase out once (1)

If a Necron player knows his rules, the army is tough as house bricks.......I'm praying that any future codex really brings the Necrons down a peg or two.....

Still having said that, the current Necron codex really does have a lot of character.

puree wrote:

dietrich wrote: I think it's poor game design to have any army curl up and die because the player falls a few too many WBB rolls.

As opposed to curl up and die due to a few to many failed saves, scatter rolls, reserve rolls etc?

I wouldn't be bothered about seeing phase out go, but the argument above seems a bit bizarre - the whole game largely revolves around the luck of the dice. As with anything it is something the necron player is fully aware of and can account for in army building and tactics.

Fair point. Maybe it's just that it seems so anti-climactic. It's not a matter of whether your 4 tactical marines can hold out against the 3 heavy bolters aimed at them - it's a matter that you still have roughly 25% of your army left, and you just stop playing. I just don't like the mechanism at all, it just doesn't seem to fit right properly into the game. I think the concept is fine, but why do IG fight to the last man (or Eldar - a dying race!) but automatons flee? No one else has that penalty. Especially considering that the Necron army can actually have more left on the board than the other player, and still Phase Out, it just doesn't seem right to me.

Hmmm seems like one of the old rumors is missing here... Necron Warriors will be given Slow and Purposefull..... which never made much sense to me, other than fluff-wise.

How can anyone seriously think WBB is complicated?

I'll bite, except I said needlessly complicated.

There's a whole page in the GW FAQ dedicated to WBB. And that doesn't cover all the issues. Nor does it speak to the amount of time TOs spend on Necron questions in general, and WBB in particular.

That is why in my opinion WBB is needlessly complicated.

Aren't they weak enough?

It's always amusingly odd hearing claims that Necrons are weak in 5th edition. They still have what amounts to two saving throws, their most common small arms can still at worst glance every vehicle in the game, and they have the most indestructible vehicle of any 40k army in the form of the Monolith.

And I'll have to agree that WBB is needlessly complicated, since I rarely hear it mentioned in games at game stores without a big debate over exactly how it works in certain situations. Feel No Pain would be a much more elegant way of giving Necrons a second saving throw.

Old rumors are old.
I like the idea of relentless FNP warriors with rending gauss rifles, make em' 18-20 pts a pop and ditch phase out.

Oh yeah, IB4L!

The reason I think necrons are kinda weak in 5e is because of assault. They need stubborn because they just get broken in HTH and then they get swept. Necrons are still pretty good against shooty though.

I was told basically the same thing from one of the employees at my local GW and by an employee that usually works at a different GW and most of this was confirmed by both of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

neiltj1 wrote:The reason I think necrons are kinda weak in 5e is because of assault. They need stubborn because they just get broken in HTH and then they get swept. Necrons are still pretty good against shooty though.

I recently discovered that necrons have the same INITIATE as orks..... Wow that's sad for the orks.

...Because both of these employees are aware of the interwebz. These rumors were posted on Bols a while back and then Bols stated that GW called crap on them, if I recall properly. Do you REALLY think that a REDSHIRT knows anything more than you or I?

combatmedic wrote:You know what? Assault is way to complicated, lets get rid of that.

Yeah I second that... see what you do is we both drop like $200 or $300 on mini's and paint them and make terrain. Now the trash talking starts and we deploy....then the we flip a coin to see who wins.....and until the coin flip FAQ is out no the real tactics come into play. After the new "How to flip a coin" Rulebook comes out ($52.99 US)....shorty there after followed the the "Calling a coin flip" Appendix (free download .PDF format)....then "Regulation size" wooden GW coins come out.....and then the fist fights start, bringing back the assault phase.

I'm still not convinced that an army with 2 saving throws and not to mention that there is probably a res orb somewhere needs anything more. Phase out is fair because of the amount of small arms fire they can take. And yes they have the monolith too. Necron warriors should be slow and purposeful and cost more and have phase out. The living armor on the monolith needs to be rethought out. The rule is ridiculous. How many times have you cracked the armor on the monolith AND blown it up........... Well nuff said

orkishlyorkish wrote:I recently discovered that necrons have the same INITIATE as orks..... Wow that's sad for the orks.

Orks have furious charge.

SW40KMP wrote:I'm still not convinced that an army with 2 saving throws and not to mention that there is probably a res orb somewhere needs anything more. Phase out is fair because of the amount of small arms fire they can take. And yes they have the monolith too. Necron warriors should be slow and purposeful and cost more and have phase out. The living armor on the monolith needs to be rethought out. The rule is ridiculous. How many times have you cracked the armor on the monolith AND blown it up........... Well nuff said

I sincerely hope that your statement is sarcastic, but from it's tone I don't think it is. I think you honestly believe what you wrote. I'll break the tradition of the interwebz at this point by not telling you why you are wrong, in a very not-nice fashion, and simply ask if you are new to 40k. Are you new to 40k?

To: SW40KMP
As a matter of fact, using... let's see...

1) A carnifex
2) A predator annihilator
and
3) A baneblade cannon

I have regularly killed off monoliths.

To: Kungfuhustler:

You said: "I sincerely hope that your statement is sarcastic, but from it's tone I don't think it is. I think you honestly believe what you wrote. I'll break the tradition of the interwebz at this point by not telling you why you are wrong, in a very not-nice fashion, and simply ask if you are new to 40k."

I love this forum! On the Runescape forums everybody breaks tradition by just telling people they are rubbish without giving them a reason, and nobody uses proper english. This place is so much better!

combatmedic wrote:How can anyone seriously think WBB is complicated?

...

You know what? Assault is way to complicated, lets get rid of that.

In my six years of playing 40k, by my estimate, We'll Be Back has caused more rules arguments than all other rules put together. As others have said, it's needlessly complex.

The real problem with it is that it is a very complex (in comparison to about 95% of the other rules out there) rule that only applies to one army, and as such in a typical game involving Necrons you're likely to only have one player intimately familiar with the rule; many of the arguments I've seen stemmed from someone learning the nuances of We'll Be Back on table trying to kill Necrons.

Moving it to Feel No Pain (with bonuses; I'm sure we'll see Resurrection Orbs that let Necron models within 12" take Feel No Pain rolls against attacks that ignore armor) puts it into the realm of rules that all players should be aware of.

There's no comparison to Assault -- Assault is a standard part of the game, and anyone playing the game has to know how Assault works. Assault may otherwise be more complex than We'll Be Back, but it applies to everyone.

Ardensfax wrote:3) The monolith will either cost more points or lose 'Living Metal'.

Taking away Living Metal from Monoliths would be like taking Assault Ramps from Land Raiders.
Sure they should simplify it to Always counts as Obsucred or something, but to remove it altogether would not be right.

p.s. WBB is not that complicated a rule.
And while I would prefer they keep it (perhaps with some rewording to fix any confusion), I would not be entirely opposed to FNP as a replacement.
The Orb would change simply enough, though a Tomb Spyder would need a new gimmick.

as much as i hate necrons i think they are too full of character to screw with the way the rumors are saying.

BoW- John

Lagduf wrote:

orkishlyorkish wrote:I recently discovered that necrons have the same INITIATE as orks..... Wow that's sad for the orks.

Orks have furious charge.

Yes but if I assault first then they don't get a bonus.

WBB is not complicated at all at the necrons next turn guys can come back to life on a 4+, unless they were instant deathed or didn't get their 3+ armor save. it's as hard to understand as fnp. The only thing I think they need to change is the whole deep strike monolith followed by entire army and living metal and the indestructible crystal is annoying.

How to take a WBB roll:

Did the weapon that killed your necron a double strength, or a no-save CC weapon? If there is no Orb, you dont get to roll.

Did your necron die due to a normal shooting or close combat attack? If so is there another model of the same type within 6"? If so take a roll.

In all my days of playing this game, and all the fights against necrons, even when the codex first came out, no one has ever had an issue with WBB. If this is to complicated for you, why are you playing?
Could they make the WBB rule simpler? Yes, I wont deny that. But taking it away cause its base value is "complicated" is stupid, the modifications the other units add make it difficult for someone who doesnt want to take more than 5 minutes to read the books rules.

Glad to see WBB is so perfectly clear to so many people out there, but unfortunately it's not so clear to a whole lot of players, many of them Necron players. Like some others have reported here I've seen this rule botched many times, often by the Necron players themselves.

It can be confusing to those of us who are slightly challenged with the cranial logistics... (If you understood that, then you aren't one of them. Offence-free comments, hooray! )

@combatmedic: You should write GW rules. You fail to cover all sitiuations and interactions with other rules, just as they do.

There's no reason to have models strewn all over the board, gacking up movement. Or having to measure and see if like units are nearby. Or arguning over how a res orb works when they go through a monolith. Or whether a res orb still works if the Lord is down. etc etc.

I want to know what happens if they get Tank Shocked. Do you get Orbed or not? Probably not.

Ardensfax wrote:Funny, I think the WBB rule is much less powerful than FNP, because of the following things:

1) You get to roll to get up as soon as they go down with FNP, unlike WBB.

2) You don't have to have a whole bunch of other necrons around to try to do FNP.

3) Good news for lords: You get to roll to get back up for each lost wound, not just on death.

QFT

You'll loose combat by alot less, will have to take less ld tests. (Why your not fearless to begin with I'll never know.)
I hate WBB!! So many little issues can come in game... Me in my mate already house ruled it as FNP and it's so much smoother and better for him.

LBB: Making necrons fearless with init 2 would be the same thing as handing them a death sentence. Stubborn works much better because fluff-wise necrons DO run away if they are completely screwed, but they are not going to run away until then. I will personally take a stubborn unit over a fearless one any day.

As I've said many times, if lying models down and picking them back up is the most characterful thing Necrons have going for them, it just underlines what a conceptual mess they are in the first place.

At the end of the day, lying models down is a representation. That bit of cotton wool coming out of the gun turret of the destroyed tank is not really cotton wool. It is actually a billowing cloud of smoke which comes directly after a lascannon shot lancing an explosion through one side of the tank before spearing out of the other, sending the gun turret flying into the air, or some other equally imaginative act of mayhem.

A similar thing is with the Necrons, IE: A warrior lying on his side represents scattered and smoking peices of metal, ominously crawling together.

Warhammer is, by its very nature, a game of representation. If you want the literal view of what really is happening, play Dawn of War!

Kungfuhustler wrote:LBB: Making necrons fearless with init 2 would be the same thing as handing them a death sentence. Stubborn works much better because fluff-wise necrons DO run away if they are completely screwed, but they are not going to run away until then. I will personally take a stubborn unit over a fearless one any day.

No you have to backwards I think. If they do run (ld 10 is a 1/9 chance) init 2 their almost insta dead against anyone. Fearless = I loos by 6 ok 6 armour saves 2 fail, feel no pain, Ok 1 more dies my whole unit sticks. Loosing by 6 is also kinda big if you loose by one or two your pretty much fine. I rather have plauge marines over a ld 10 chaos marine unit. Just my thoughts anyway.

I don't mind if WBB goes, yes it can be a bit clumsy (in its current wording), but Necrons do need something unique and characterful (more than just FNP) or they'll just be boring 'robots with the same stats as MEQs' - surely the whole point of having a separate race is that they should play very differently than other races.

Personally I think a major rejig of the basic unit and weapon stats lines (and points cost rejig to match) is the way to go. This has been discussed here and elsewhere many times, and there are heaps of fluffy interesting options, e.g. Necrons could all become T6, or get 2+ armour saves, or 3+ invulnerable saves or whatever, and the Gauss rules could also be changed (the general principle is fine, but maybe range could be changed or gauss could all become Assault weapons or something). If that means the basic Necron ends up being 30 points (or alternatively 10 poiints if reduced stats instead) then fine, at least it won't be just another MEQ.

I don't know... 30 points each would really mess you up for 1000 point tournament armies. The minimum you could spend on troops would be 600 pts, and assuming a lord costs 150 points average, that only leaves 250 to spend on interesting stuff.

Also T6 means bolters and most other standard infantry weapons only wound on 6s. I reckon that's overpowered.

I think most points are pretty good. 16 points for scarab swarms with fields attached. What if they made Warriors and Immortals both troops? Or maybe bring pariahs or flayed ones in as troops. Take one of the elites out and make it a troop is what I am saying. then, add in a nice elite choice.

Also a lesser C'Tan would be cool. I do not understand the fluff, so someone please explain what the big deal about the Dragon is? I love my 'crons....I think that phase out leaving is good, FNP being better, either that or some leadership modifier for assault. It sucks to take a lot of losses and not get to use WBB because you were swept.

What if the 'crons went along with some 'themed' army. Like you have nurgle, slaanesh and what not. So, have each C'Tan be a greater being for the Lord to change into, or take on their abilities.

combatmedic wrote:How to take a WBB roll:

Did the weapon that killed your necron a double strength, or a no-save CC weapon? If there is no Orb, you dont get to roll.

Did your necron die due to a normal shooting or close combat attack? If so is there another model of the same type within 6"? If so take a roll.

In all my days of playing this game, and all the fights against necrons, even when the codex first came out, no one has ever had an issue with WBB. If this is to complicated for you, why are you playing?
Could they make the WBB rule simpler? Yes, I wont deny that. But taking it away cause its base value is "complicated" is stupid, the modifications the other units add make it difficult for someone who doesnt want to take more than 5 minutes to read the books rules.

The WBB rules are not the confusing part, it's the ridiculous and ambiguous situations that occur with WBB that are confusing. Such as downed Necrons moving with their parent unit, or being wiped out by sweeping advance, or exactly when to check for WBB status, ect. Now many of those things have been clarified but often to the benefit of the Necron opponent and not the Necrons.

Or wierd things like Necron models that don't meet the conditions to make a roll are just left on the table, apparently.

Oh yes, talking of Pariahs, they will be getting the 2+ Armour, 4+ invulnerable, and basically be the same stats as chaos terminators. Also, warscythes and C'tan will no longer ignore invulnerable saves. Better amend post 1...

vipcaniac wrote:What if the 'crons went along with some 'themed' army. Like you have nurgle, slaanesh and what not. So, have each C'Tan be a greater being for the Lord to change into, or take on their abilities.

Basically, it's been strongly suggested to point that most folk are certain it's true that the Void Dragon is burried on Mars and possibly worshipped by the Mechanicus as the Omnissiah. Either way it has inspired the Mechanicus in there creations. And, of course, you have the minor issue of if a C'tan Stargod suddenly breaks out of Mars and starts warping in Necrons, taking command of Titans and such the Mechanicus will fall.

Of course, in theory the thing could escape quietly instead...the Nightbringer was too weak to risk getting burried again and even a Star God is likely to be worried by an Imperitor when he's desperately weak and hungry. He might just get the hell out of dodge if he's released rather than screwing up Mars. Which is less interesting and tastes more like Games Workshop.

In DoW, Destroyer Lords could "possess" enemy vehicles. Wonder if they'd go down this road with the Void Dragon. Although it should only work with Imperial vehicles, becuase of the whole Machine Spirit thing.

If they do that they may not keep the imperial restriction for 2 reasons.
1) That would mean that GW would have to come out and say that the Mechanicus worhips a C'tan. Gw is usually too scared out of it's mind to have any real advance in plot, and avoids commitment to solving any story "conspiracies" just as much.

2) While it would make sense with the canon, a special ability that only works against particular opponents who happen to oblige you by taking what is particularly vulnerable to you usually isn't good game design. If it were extremely powerful than it may, MAY shift the metagame away from mech just like how everyone was taking psychic hoods last edition, but more likely it'll be an underpowered overpriced special ability that only works against 2/3rds of the armies you face and does nothing but waste points against the other 3rd, so noone will take it.

I'm thinking its most likely reason 1.

Talk about sucktastic. The Necrons already suffer from lacking vehicles/abundant anti-tank. Rather than adding the things they don't have, let's just tweak the stuff that's making them bad and make it worse for them! The Pariahs are interesting though, add +1 attack and they should be a lot better! Oh wait, their warscythes (which were awesome close combat weapons) are now just power weapons.

*sigh*

I wouldn't mind an option for Necrons to possess vehicles to be added, but I think I'd want it to be more of either a list building option (I.E. a "possessed vehicle" choice that could be a Leman Russ, Land Raider, or similar based off how it's equipped, but has some Necron-ish flavor) or just a 'stun' power (that should definitely work against anything classified as a vehicle by the rules).

The 'possessed vehicle' option is (as described) a bit flavorless, but I think it has potential. Both options could be implemented, with fluff branching that 'suitable hosts' may be taken with the stun power, purged of nasty organicness, and used as hosts for Necron intelligences.

The Dragon should awaken and make a beeline to earth. Upon arrival it storms the Golden Throne and heads straight to the corpse god. Just as the Dragon is about to strike the emperor, the emperor awakens and unleashes a massive psychic blast that causes the dragon to be badly injured and forced to flee terra. The emperor returns to his throne and becomes as he was before the event. Since the Dragon was so swift in its attack on terra (and assuming he ported in true necron forces), Mars was left relatively untouched, so the majority of the mechanicum was not lost/changed. Insert the inquisition stepping in to protect the truth if anyone is really concerned.

Basically it gives the necrons a big scary moment in the current timeline, makes the emperor a bad-ass again, but doesn't really change anything.

The OP seems like a wishlist with a few of the more likely rumors sprinkled in for truth.

Ignoring Invulnerable Saves is another of the things that make Necrons flavourful (along with teleporting, WBB, etc) I really hope they don't remove it.

If Pariahs lost their shooting attack I wouldn't be too bothered, I always felt like it was thrown in as an afterthought.
And C'tan (or whatever they will be changed into in the new book) should definately have the ability ignore Invulnerable Saves.

Ardensfax wrote:Oh yes, talking of Pariahs, they will be getting the 2+ Armour, 4+ invulnerable, and basically be the same stats as chaos terminators. Also, warscythes and C'tan will no longer ignore invulnerable saves. Better amend post 1...

Are you just making this up? What would the point of Warscythes be? They would just be power weapons. Pariahs will not have better armor than a basic warrior.

Giving possessed vehicles to Necrons after taking looted vehicles from Orks would make a great many players very upset.

I think taking possession of imperial vehicles mid-game would be flavorful for Necrons, specifically those who follow the Dragon. The Machine Spirit probably came from the Dragon after all, so it makes sense a Lord following the Dragon could give a Land Raider the reach around.

I am thinking about getting rid of my necrons. Maybe I should keep them and wait to see how the Codex turns out. I just wish I had more options with models...

I predict 12 different special character necron lords that change what you can take... A "resource gatherer" lord who can take scarabs/spyders as troops; a "harvester" lord who take pariahs as troops. A "teleport" lord who takes tons of immortals and so on and so forth.

Oh, and there will be veteran sergeant pariahs. Monoliths with have 20 shots each, there will be four different versions of it as well. One with lots of anti-tank but it can only teleport a few guys around. One with templates that can transport a bunch of guys.

Oh, and they'll have land speeders - er - destroyers that transport 5 man units of Flayed ones around... because "Necrons" really needed that.

No, seriously, I have nothing to contribute.

Scruffy, based on more recent fluff from Apoc and the 5th ed. rulebook, I expect Lords to behave almost exactly that way.

And I'm glad someone else mentioned my Pariah vet. sergeant/HQ choice idea. I've been promoting that on various forums for a couple years now.

Doesn't this belong in General Discussion now?

Pariahs getting the same stats as Chaos Termies? - Gaaaaah!!! again, we don't need more MEQs! :( Sure, Pariahs need to be fixed, but that's not the solution.

Re the 'possessed vehicles' thing, I think this is really fluffy, I love the idea of swarms of scarabs attacking vehicles not to destroy them but either to make them useless or actually turn them against their owners. This could be as simple as a special rule that allows only Stunned/Immobilised vehicle damaged results, or something whacky like a necron close combat equivalent of the the Slaanesh Lash (hopefully without all the controversy that created).

To be honest, I've only fought necrons a few times. WBB was never that hard for us to figure out. Then again, if people think it needs clarity have at it I guess. :: shrugs ::

I like Necrons for the most part, what keeps me from picking them is the shear lack of costumization. If they could make them more diverse and hook 'em up with more models I'd be happy. It might actually be enough to make me really look into making an army of them.

Phase Out isn't necessarily a bad rule, it is just kind of stupid. It doesn't take int account that even if you hit 25% of your army left your enemy could have 5% which necrons would not phase out for. It just doesn't make sense. That is really the only true flaw I see in the rule.

On topic- Still waiting for new info.

Off top (slightly)- I'll follow the herd and pitch in with my wishes.
I hope that the necron redesign team are movie fans that have been paying attention to recent trends. Trends like zombies and robots are now agile and can run(I Robot, Terminator and Dawn of the Dead). These trends would translate into the following:

1)Necrons become fleet

2)At least Initiative 3(4 for Pariahs)

3)Go ahead and switch to FNP from WBB

4)New WBB/mass production rule for tomb spyders that allows for casualties to be brought back from the "graveyard" on a roll of a six or that they give scarabs the without number rule.

5)Res orb as someone stated earlier allows for FNP even with power weapon or when no save allowed when within 12".

6)Tomb Spyders are the new light vehicle/scarab transport. They get new larger model.

7)Replace C'Tan with Avatars that aren't game breakingly overpowered

8)Change living metal rule to where it makes more sense. Self repair on a roll of 5+ and/or a 5+ invulnerable

9)Make pariahs a troop choice, keep warscyhtes to where they ignore invulnerables

10) A new ultra robotic unit that is a fast attack and counts as beasts in their movement.


There ya go. Remember, these are just ideas but feel free to rip into 'em.

There is no WAY these rules are even close to legit. I can see the WBB being turned into FNP. That seems to be the brand new puppy for GW, so sure that makes sence. EVERYTHING ELSE seems like a load of crap. Seriously why would GW make an army like Necrons and make them that terrible? I think your red shirt was trying to get you scared and want to buy more SM garbage. Dropping guass? Thats just beyond slowed. War scythes not ignoring INV saves? So they are just a PW now? thats almost as dumb as loosing the Guass rule FOR GUASS WEAPONS!

Pariahs *are* MEQs - they're Necrons...

Scarabs rolling to stun / immobilize is a good idea.

As one of my first games was against Necrons, I agree WBB is the most annoying and complicated rule in 40k. If you have two Newbs (like my friend and I were), it can cause confusion. For instance, he was using downed models to block assaults and limit how many models I could get base-to-base. I now know he was cheating, but it was not intentional or out of malice. It just was not clarified until the FAQ. Other craziness also helped cement it our group's mind that Necrons were cheap (Mind you, this was right after they came out.)

Most armies you can play with just the BBB and the codex; necrons HAD to have a FAQ for everything to be fair. I'm glad that they are streamlining it.

NO!

They cannot bring in the Void Dragon.

Not only would it destroy the mechanicum, it would destroy Mars (where it is imprisioned)

And if it were let go, St. George is currently crapping into a bag on a chair. So the Imperium would go bye bye.

I just wish scarabs would get their armor eating special rule from 2nd edition back. Then I would have a reason to field them once again.

St. George was a vampire. He allied with humans to bring down Vlad, who was killing way too many humans. History remembers him fondly and made hime a saint.

This is falling into something we have talked about already:

NECRONS

And I'm all for the scarabs attaching and blowing up. That was fun.

If we loose WBB i am leaveing Necrons and starting some other army
and if we loose good Ctan that just makes me seem to hate the new dex even more
give us long time Necron players a boost not a whole new codex with new rules made for younglings who just want to get the models that look like the people in the one terminator movie
WBB or i wont be back

Battle Brother Loken wrote:If we loose WBB i am leaveing Necrons and starting some other army

Oh? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya...

I think it's fair to say that other Codices will have lost far more than what Necrons will "lose" in going from WBB to FNP.

"The OP seems like a wishlist with a few of the more likely rumors sprinkled in for truth."

"Are you just making this up? What would the point of Warscythes be? They would just be power weapons. Pariahs will not have better armor than a basic warrior."

Whoa, everyone. Why the sudden hostility against me?
I'm repeating what was told me by a Games Workshop store manager. So I am not making anything up, cheers.

It's not hostility toward you. It's hostility toward the rumors you've passed on, LOL. The reason is because everyone's heard all this before here and on other forums, which is where your store manager likely read them. There's a good chance that GW hasn't started working on Necrons yet in any meaningful way, based on how the rumored schedule is shaping up.

They better not change any rules and just make necrons better. space marines are too powerful.


DAMN THE IMPERIUM

p.s guardsmen suck

Seriously? A TWO YEAR OLD thread?

bboxer98 wrote:They better not change any rules and just make necrons better. space marines are too powerful.

Yes make necrons better by NOT changing their rules. How can that possibly not work

nosferatu1001 wrote:Seriously? A TWO YEAR OLD thread?

Apparently it rolled 4+.

Thread is being locked due to thread necromancy.