I can understand a psyker being possessed accidentally, so to speak, by a daemon as result of a failed perils of the warp test but for a none daemon aligned faction to be able to summon one seems off.
Eldar or Dark Eldar summoning a Keeper of Secrets springs to mind
I guess it could make sense for the Inquisition or Grey Knights to be able to summon Daemons but to force possession?
I'm obviously looking at this from a fluff perspective rather than a rules one.
I hope that it was just to test the rules for summoning etc, and loyalists will not be able to do such things, as even GW isn't daft enough o ruin their fluff as they are quite fond of it, and rightly so.
However if it is true, makes for some interesting army lists, draigo wing with tzeentch anyone?
The only way I could see such a thing working game-wise is if doing that for a non-Chaos army limits you to a draw. Then it could at least serve as something of an equalizer if you were getting trounced and therefore a reason to keep playing against some horrible Unbound list.
Outside of that incredibly limited niche though, it seems like a daft idea and completely against the "rules" of the IP they've built over the last 25+ years. I'll hold off final judgement until more concrete information is available, but what I've heard so far of 7th has me completely unexcited.
In gratitude to GW and the rumors of their rules for breaking me, I now rock a new avatar for the levels of seething hatred I now harbor (for those who do not see it, it's an Angry Marine).
How did you get the rank to go with it? It is awesome!
KommissarKarl wrote: Codexes will always be release-printed. […] have omitted that most of what you are talking about is mini-dexes and data slates.
No.
Really, it is too bad that daemonology is only for psyker. Getting a Saint Celestine vs Asdrubael Vect fight suddenly transform into a duel between two keepers of secret would be mightily awesome. And so totally fluffy!
Ok I do feel stupid, had to re-read the phrase: "In one of our test games, all for the purpose of research of course."
This leads me to believe we wont see any of this foul heretical behaviour in the rules. Sorry GW, I apologise to you for that one.
Edit: I do actually really like demon summoning although would much prefer a random no-ally system unless of course chaos since demons would very much like to enter the material realm at any chance and destroy all in their wake.
I'll forge a narrative: Coteaz continues to grow older and worry about what his sector will become when he dies. Finally giving in to his desires, he summons a Daemon to extend his life indefinitely. Something goes horribly well, and he becomes a Bloodthirster who proceeds to turn on his own men and murder everyone in sight. Whoops.
Yeah I think demonology may be a new psychic discipline that has to be allowed, i.e. elder can take from the BRB or the codex etc, so it will be with Chaos Marines and maybe dark elder?
oni wrote: I've been reading the leaked WD at face value rather than trying to read between the lines and nowhere does it say or hint at that Unbound armies and Battle-Forged armies play each other. The allusion to in-game bonuses for Battle-Forged armies does not equal Unbound armies and Battle-Forged armies play each other.
I believe that the intent of the statement is to point out that playing games (you and your opponent) using Battle-Forged armies is still desirable as to take advantage of added game rules. Not necessarily that Battle-Forged armies get bonuses to aid their shortcomings vs. an Unbound army.
Panic party pooper.
If Battle Forged armies are not supposed to play against Unbound armies, then why would they have bonuses? If their only purpose would be to fight other Battle Forged armies then both would get the bonuses and would supposedly cancel each other out.
If the purpose of the bonuses would just be to "take advantage of added game rules" (and added game rules aren't an advantage, when they add nothing of value as this would be the case then they are a disadvantage because they just add unneeded complexity for complexities sake), then why wouldn't Unbound armies have them as well?
In gratitude to GW and the rumors of their rules for breaking me, I now rock a new avatar for the levels of seething hatred I now harbor (for those who do not see it, it's an Angry Marine).
How did you get the rank to go with it? It is awesome!
You can read about DCM perks in this link. Custom Title is one of them.
Assuming it is just testing with how it reads, however the ability to turn relatively cheap sorcerers into bloodthirsters or maybe any greater daemon could be a little broken, I assume it'll have a high chance for failure, or requires a large amount of the psychic pool to attempt, but I'm getting more worried with every little bit of information that appears.
If you think that Psykers being able to summon Daemons is "fluff-breaking," then you haven't been paying attention to the game's lore. Psykers are feared for a reason, beyond mere superstition. Now whether or not your Chief Librarian is willing to turn to the Ruinous Powers so that you can secure victory, that decision is yours. GW is just putting that choice into your hands, instead of hard-coding it into the rules.
Leggy wrote: As the psychic phase now uses a dice pool, is it safe to assume psychic tests aren't based on leadership anymore? I can't see how you'd want to roll MORE dice when keeping under 9-10.
However If it goes the way of Warhammer, and starts using target numbers, what will happen to all the psychic powers in the Codexes? That is a lot of renumbering needed in the FAQ's (and will really mess up the signature spell for Tzeentch daemons)
Man that'd suck. There goes one perk of playing Tzeentch daemons.
I wonder if Khorne will get a special section. I dont really want to have to introduce khornes most hated people into my army so I can summon khorne demons.
Perhaps like the old codex and you can chance sacrificing a champion only after they have caused a certain amount of unsaved wounds?
All I can hope is that unless you are playing Chaos, there is an overwhelming chance that your Deamon summoning results in a pissed off Bloodthirster replacing your idiot psyker that was dumb enough to sacrifice himself, who then proceeds to murder your entire squad, gather their skulls, and leave.
kronk wrote: I'm hoping that Ezikiel accidentally summoned a daemon. Not intentionally.
From the way the snippet in White Dwarf is worded, Malefic Daemonlogy is not something that would usually be available to Ezekiel and they tried it "in the name of research and playtesting".
Ezekiel has a pretty high Mastery level(3) so that might be why Ezekiel was used for it.
I'm hoping that it works along the lines of one buys the 'thirster ( or other daemon presumably ?) with the rest of your army and then have the option of falling to the darkside/whatever ... or not .... during the game.
Still think that is the sort of thing that works better in a specific scenario, but.. all depend upon exactly how it works.
kronk wrote: I'm hoping that Ezikiel accidentally summoned a daemon. Not intentionally.
From the way the snippet in White Dwarf is worded, Malefic Daemonlogy is not something that would usually be available to Ezekiel and they tried it "in the name of research and playtesting".
Ezekiel has a pretty high Mastery level(3) so that might be why Ezekiel was used for it.
It's also possible to interpret that remark as making light of the fact that most of the people reading that blurb would think it's bloody ludicrous to have a loyalist special character summoning daemonic entities to win games. Like if I were to go to the pub, and a friend were to offer me a new beer to try, which I found I rather liked, I might say; "I had better order a second, purely for research purposes you understand, to make sure I like it."
Considering they have already said there are two sides to the new Daemonic Summoning skill "Malefic" and "Sanctic". Now I know fake latin is fake, but I don't think it takes much to realize that "Good" armies will get "Santic" and "Evil" armies will get "Malefic".
Could be wrong though. I guess some armies (like IG/AM) could have access to both to allow for LatD or Fallen Guard type armies.
Accolade wrote: I wonder if Daemonology will have a disclaimer:
Use of this psychic discipline requires a copy of Codex: Chaos Daemons for play.
Probably. That or you use the profile in the rulebook but can't access any of the codex special rules (and only get the profile of the model in question and the Daemon special rule).
It's also possible to interpret that remark as making light of the fact that most of the people reading that blurb would think it's bloody ludicrous to have a loyalist special character summoning daemonic entities to win games. Like if I were to go to the pub, and a friend were to offer me a new beer to try, which I found I rather liked, I might say; "I had better order a second, purely for research purposes you understand, to make sure I like it."
That's pretty much how I interpret it as well, given the tone and writing of WD.
Plus when was the last time they told us about something they playtested that didn't make the rules? "We were going to give you this ability but..."
WD is and has been a huge advert, and that is all it has been.
WD has never, to my knowledge, shown and highlighted some part of playtesting that wasn't part of the allowed rules system.
I think this was playtsting Malefic Demonology, as allowed, under Unbound to see what could be accomplished. I think as the description for unbound states you can use all your models, people should take it at its face that you can use all your models.
The best way for GW to sell models via thier advert mag is to show GW using them with truely no limits.
If 7th is shown to break something as fundemental as the FOC chart to the historical rules of 40K, why would people think that something as recent as "allies" would not also be thrown out the window, given the companies desire to sell any and all models to anyone that wants to use one?
When a company starts promoting its newest edition by showing that it has broken rules, and has a history of non-restraint, why would people think they would show any kind of restraint? This rule set is all about unleashing the product line to -all- players.
kronk wrote: I'm hoping that Ezikiel accidentally summoned a daemon. Not intentionally.
From the way the snippet in White Dwarf is worded, Malefic Daemonlogy is not something that would usually be available to Ezekiel and they tried it "in the name of research and playtesting".
Ezekiel has a pretty high Mastery level(3) so that might be why Ezekiel was used for it.
Eh... I wouldn't say it quite implies that either. The statement is "the advent of Daemonology has caused many moral quandaries in the White Dwarf office, not least for our Adam Troke. A staunch Dark Angels collector, Adam found himself allowing none other than Grand Master Ezekiel himself to use Malefic Daemonology powers in one of our test games - all in the interests of research and playtesting, of course."
First of all, ha ha playtesting. Second of all, I wouldn't quite say anything like that. Why would it form moral quandaries? If the rules stated that the Imperium factions didn't get to use the malefic side, why would it give them moral questions? The only way it would, logically, cause such up in the air problems is if they had the rules to it. That's why I have a bad feeling about it.
streamdragon wrote: Is it possible that they designers allowed the Space Marine player to use something not normally available to them, just for the purposes of their test game?
Is it really a test game if they just ignore the rules anyway?
I'm assuming that by test game they mean the WD staff trying out the rules, not playtesting the rules.
streamdragon wrote: Considering they have already said there are two sides to the new Daemonic Summoning skill "Malefic" and "Sanctic". Now I know fake latin is fake, but I don't think it takes much to realize that "Good" armies will get "Santic" and "Evil" armies will get "Malefic".
Could be wrong though. I guess some armies (like IG/AM) could have access to both to allow for LatD or Fallen Guard type armies.
Oh please, these are the same individuals that randomly restrict psyker spells and didn't give Ahriman any divination (along with tzeentch csm in general) and instead made the seeker of knowledge specialized in shooting the hell out of people
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Personally, as a Sister player, I will add that they will never change our model either .
Ouch. That one hurt.
I was not even familiar with you previous avatar, and you already switched to a new one. By the time they release new Sister models, you will have gone through many thousands of avatars !
Shotgun wrote: WD has never, to my knowledge, shown and highlighted some part of playtesting that wasn't part of the allowed rules system.
They have shown off things we can't take before (like Heavy Flamer Tactical Marines).
And 5-women dominion squads with 4 special weapons, for the battle report that came with the WDex, even though the WDex did not allow that. The digidex does.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Personally, as a Sister player, I will add that they will never change our model either .
Ouch. That one hurt.
I was not even familiar with you previous avatar, and you already switched to a new one. By the time they release new Sister models, you will have gone through many thousands of avatars !
Darn it I too wasn't prepared! I just managed to get used to the glorious moustache man and it's already changed faster than the 6th to 7th edition!
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Personally, as a Sister player, I will add that they will never change our model either .
Ouch. That one hurt.
I was not even familiar with you previous avatar, and you already switched to a new one. By the time they release new Sister models, you will have gone through many thousands of avatars !
Nah. I just needed to change things up as I was feeling far too serious about the internet again and needed something lighthearted. I won't be changing again for a while.
Shotgun wrote: WD has never, to my knowledge, shown and highlighted some part of playtesting that wasn't part of the allowed rules system.
They have shown off things we can't take before (like Heavy Flamer Tactical Marines).
And 5-women dominion squads with 4 special weapons, for the battle report that came with the WDex, even though the WDex did not allow that. The digidex does.
That's a good example on the rules side of things for sure!
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Personally, as a Sister player, I will add that they will never change our model either .
Ouch. That one hurt.
I was not even familiar with you previous avatar, and you already switched to a new one. By the time they release new Sister models, you will have gone through many thousands of avatars !
Darn it I too wasn't prepared! I just managed to get used to the glorious moustache man and it's already changed faster than the 6th to 7th edition!
I apologize. I shouldn't be changing for a while if it's any consolation.
This may be in wrong bit, but as its not a rumour(WD official text) and its not news I wasn't sure, but move if needs be mods
A mate just showed me this picture on FB:
Read the red box text, second paragraph of text, basically Ezekial like the possession......hmmmm
...
Oh man... thank goodness I play Tyranids and won't have to wrestle with whether or not to pull this kind of stupidity in-game (since we don't have access to it). Ugh.
Shotgun wrote: WD has never, to my knowledge, shown and highlighted some part of playtesting that wasn't part of the allowed rules system.
They have shown off things we can't take before (like Heavy Flamer Tactical Marines).
And 5-women dominion squads with 4 special weapons, for the battle report that came with the WDex, even though the WDex did not allow that. The digidex does.
And don't forget Tyranids versus Riptide legion. I think that broke it. Also their imbalanced point matches and I could have sworn they've broken the rules multiple times. Although I still have a bad hunch malefic daemon summoning will be a thing simply because of their odd "moral questions" which it really wouldn't normally.
Shotgun wrote: WD has never, to my knowledge, shown and highlighted some part of playtesting that wasn't part of the allowed rules system.
They have shown off things we can't take before (like Heavy Flamer Tactical Marines).
And 5-women dominion squads with 4 special weapons, for the battle report that came with the WDex, even though the WDex did not allow that. The digidex does.
And don't forget Tyranids versus Riptide legion. I think that broke it. Also their imbalanced point matches and I could have sworn they've broken the rules multiple times. Although I still have a bad hunch malefic daemon summoning will be a thing simply because of their odd "moral questions" which it really wouldn't normally.
Or it could just be flowery writing...
It's too early to tell and people are reading way too much into a blurb.
Shotgun wrote: WD has never, to my knowledge, shown and highlighted some part of playtesting that wasn't part of the allowed rules system.
They have shown off things we can't take before (like Heavy Flamer Tactical Marines).
And 5-women dominion squads with 4 special weapons, for the battle report that came with the WDex, even though the WDex did not allow that. The digidex does.
And don't forget Tyranids versus Riptide legion. I think that broke it. Also their imbalanced point matches and I could have sworn they've broken the rules multiple times. Although I still have a bad hunch malefic daemon summoning will be a thing simply because of their odd "moral questions" which it really wouldn't normally.
Let's just assume that CSM are the only ones who WON'T get to summon Daemons just so we're ready for the worst.
Shotgun wrote: WD has never, to my knowledge, shown and highlighted some part of playtesting that wasn't part of the allowed rules system.
They have shown off things we can't take before (like Heavy Flamer Tactical Marines).
And 5-women dominion squads with 4 special weapons, for the battle report that came with the WDex, even though the WDex did not allow that. The digidex does.
And don't forget Tyranids versus Riptide legion. I think that broke it. Also their imbalanced point matches and I could have sworn they've broken the rules multiple times. Although I still have a bad hunch malefic daemon summoning will be a thing simply because of their odd "moral questions" which it really wouldn't normally.
Let's just assume that CSM are the only ones who WON'T get to summon Daemons just so we're ready for the worst.
I'm sorry I'm too busy entertaining the possibility of a Greater Daemon exploding to summon a new Greater Daemon
*rolls Warp Tether* Daemon almost dies, DSes onto battlefield. Summons a LoC (because I think that'd be the most entertaining) with full health! Actually, just imagine daemons of Tzeentch. Everybody summon a MC! Behold my legion of MCs!
streamdragon wrote: Is it possible that they designers allowed the Space Marine player to use something not normally available to them, just for the purposes of their test game?
Is it really a test game if they just ignore the rules anyway?
I'm assuming that by test game they mean the WD staff trying out the rules, not playtesting the rules.
Knowing GW, they could be the same though.
The play test was probably for those specific rules, rather than the whole game in its entirety. Admittedly I am not a play tester (aside from beta testing some video games), but it would make sense to play test in small chunks to see which things work and which don't.
StarTrotter wrote: I'm sorry I'm too busy entertaining the possibility of a Greater Daemon exploding to summon a new Greater Daemon
Meanwhile at GW:
"I got it! We'll put a Daemon INSIDE OF ANOTHER DAEMON!" *beat* "BRILLIANT SIR! Absolutely brilliant!"
Yo dawg...
Seriously though, when you think about the fact that the article said all non-Tyranid psykers get access to the Daemonology discipline, and there are psyker greater daemons...
StarTrotter wrote: Second of all, I wouldn't quite say anything like that. Why would it form moral quandaries? If the rules stated that the Imperium factions didn't get to use the malefic side, why would it give them moral questions? The only way it would, logically, cause such up in the air problems is if they had the rules to it. That's why I have a bad feeling about it.
Don't you have a moral dilemma when you want to do something that isn't allowed, rather than when you want to do something permitted?
StarTrotter wrote: Second of all, I wouldn't quite say anything like that. Why would it form moral quandaries? If the rules stated that the Imperium factions didn't get to use the malefic side, why would it give them moral questions? The only way it would, logically, cause such up in the air problems is if they had the rules to it. That's why I have a bad feeling about it.
Don't you have a moral dilemma when you want to do something that isn't allowed, rather than when you want to do something permitted?
When it is something like Ahriman using divination? I suppose you are right. Besides that though, I'd never think to just let Ezekiel cast a daemon summoning spell.
StarTrotter wrote: I'm sorry I'm too busy entertaining the possibility of a Greater Daemon exploding to summon a new Greater Daemon
Meanwhile at GW:
"I got it! We'll put a Daemon INSIDE OF ANOTHER DAEMON!" *beat* "BRILLIANT SIR! Absolutely brilliant!"
Yo dawg...
Seriously though, when you think about the fact that the article said all non-Tyranid psykers get access to the Daemonology discipline, and there are psyker greater daemons...
I am saddened to know Tyranids can't. Imagine the possibilities if they had! Even your land lovers might be capable of sprouting wings!
StarTrotter wrote: Second of all, I wouldn't quite say anything like that. Why would it form moral quandaries? If the rules stated that the Imperium factions didn't get to use the malefic side, why would it give them moral questions? The only way it would, logically, cause such up in the air problems is if they had the rules to it. That's why I have a bad feeling about it.
Don't you have a moral dilemma when you want to do something that isn't allowed, rather than when you want to do something permitted?
I think that they mean moral in a fluff sense - from the POV of the marine, rather than moral against the rules.
StarTrotter wrote: Second of all, I wouldn't quite say anything like that. Why would it form moral quandaries? If the rules stated that the Imperium factions didn't get to use the malefic side, why would it give them moral questions? The only way it would, logically, cause such up in the air problems is if they had the rules to it. That's why I have a bad feeling about it.
Don't you have a moral dilemma when you want to do something that isn't allowed, rather than when you want to do something permitted?
I think the moral dilemma would be doing something that appears contradictory to the fluff: i.e. using a Loyalist Space Marine (of noted stalwart qualities in the fluff) to somehow be on buddy-buddy terms to call down a Bloodthirster.
I mean, Blood Pact psykers can't even do that! (to my knowledge).
Dear Khorne, I know I don't pray to you very often, but if you could, just this once, turn me into a Bloodthirster so I could destroy this alien menance, I would be sooooo thankful.
StarTrotter wrote: I'm sorry I'm too busy entertaining the possibility of a Greater Daemon exploding to summon a new Greater Daemon
Meanwhile at GW:
"I got it! We'll put a Daemon INSIDE OF ANOTHER DAEMON!" *beat* "BRILLIANT SIR! Absolutely brilliant!"
Yo dawg...
Seriously though, when you think about the fact that the article said all non-Tyranid psykers get access to the Daemonology discipline, and there are psyker greater daemons...
Didn't the overall article also say Daemons were the only ones who wouldn't have a penalty...
Actually let me look again.
Here we go:
Beware, however, if you're not a Daemonspawn yourself, the cost may be high...
So yeah, Daemons probably don't get exploding Psykers.
StarTrotter wrote: Second of all, I wouldn't quite say anything like that. Why would it form moral quandaries? If the rules stated that the Imperium factions didn't get to use the malefic side, why would it give them moral questions? The only way it would, logically, cause such up in the air problems is if they had the rules to it. That's why I have a bad feeling about it.
Don't you have a moral dilemma when you want to do something that isn't allowed, rather than when you want to do something permitted?
I think the moral dilemma would be doing something that appears contradictory to the fluff: i.e. using a Loyalist Space Marine (of noted stalwart qualities in the fluff) to somehow be on buddy-buddy terms to call down a Bloodthirster.
I mean, Blood Pact psykers can't even do that! (to my knowledge).
Dear Khorne, I know I don't pray to you very often, but if you could, just this once, turn me into a Bloodthirster so I could destroy this alien menance, I would be sooooo thankful.
And on that day ol' bloody Khorne the friendly blessed his faithful follower with the power of RAGE and awesomeness.
StarTrotter wrote: I'm sorry I'm too busy entertaining the possibility of a Greater Daemon exploding to summon a new Greater Daemon
Meanwhile at GW:
"I've got it! We'll put a Daemon INSIDE OF ANOTHER DAEMON!" *beat* "BRILLIANT SIR! Absolutely brilliant!"
And, of course, losing all Rewards. Your 305p LoC is now a stock Keeper of Secrets, with a Reward list as nude as (s)he.
Pssht you are thinking about it all wrong! The LoC gets to 1W left THEN he summons himself through a loophole. Sure, he sacrafices his buffs but he returns with the fury of a screaming bird of anger. Wait, oh no guys. LoC becoming Plagues and Keeper of Secrets becoming Khorne! And you are ignoring heralds becoming Lords of Change that then become more glorious Lords of Change!
Even to my chaotic nose I can smell the heresy fermenting.
I hope that example in white dwarf is just for "unbound" armies and not an actual option for all psykers to take. That story grabs both the rules and the fluff and turns them into an unwilling participant in a Tijuana donkey show if it is allowed in "normal" games.
Is it really a violation of the background to let 'good' psykers summon daemons?
I thought that one of the reasons the Imperium is so distrustful of psykers is the way that pretty much any one of them can serve as a gateway for daemons to enter the material world. So even if they don't do it very often for fairly obvious reasons, most psykers should have the option of summoning something when things get truly desperate.
It could also be the case that the Dark Angels get access to both types of power because they are meant to be the kind of guys who do collect forbidden lore, make dubious decisions in pursuit of their own agenda and just possibly might be corrupted by chaos. There's no reason to think that every Imperial psyker can use Malefic powers.
warboss wrote: I hope that example in white dwarf is just for "unbound" armies and not an actual option for all psykers to take. That story grabs both the rules and the fluff and turns them into an unwilling participant in a Tijuana donkey show if it is allowed in "normal" games.
I'm honestly a bit cautious about unbound armies getting this . Imagine a daemon army of Tzeentch summoning an extra daemon army of Tzeentch! Darn it, where are my renegade psykers for cultists!? The gods need plenty of sacrifice.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Perfect Organism wrote: Is it really a violation of the background to let 'good' psykers summon daemons?
I thought that one of the reasons the Imperium is so distrustful of psykers is the way that pretty much any one of them can serve as a gateway for daemons to enter the material world. So even if they don't do it very often for fairly obvious reasons, most psykers should have the option of summoning something when things get truly desperate.
It could also be the case that the Dark Angels get access to both types of power because they are meant to be the kind of guys who do collect forbidden lore, make dubious decisions in pursuit of their own agenda and just possibly might be corrupted by chaos. There's no reason to think that every Imperial psyker can use Malefic powers.
Nor is there a reason not to. Thing is, psykers activating it would work fluff wise if it was a perils of the warp thing.
For me its not so much the issue of a daemon bursting out of a space marine psyker as we all know, being psyker creates huge risks.
If this was set in stone for the fluff then it meant a Dark Angel veteran, a hero, a staunch defender of the imperium, who despises all enemies of the Emperor, created to vanquish evil, who value dying for the Emperor instead of living to save himself, gave up all that before death and willingly summoned the most hated creatures of the Imperium.
Perfect Organism wrote: Is it really a violation of the background to let 'good' psykers summon daemons?
I thought that one of the reasons the Imperium is so distrustful of psykers is the way that pretty much any one of them can serve as a gateway for daemons to enter the material world. So even if they don't do it very often for fairly obvious reasons, most psykers should have the option of summoning something when things get truly desperate.
It could also be the case that the Dark Angels get access to both types of power because they are meant to be the kind of guys who do collect forbidden lore, make dubious decisions in pursuit of their own agenda and just possibly might be corrupted by chaos. There's no reason to think that every Imperial psyker can use Malefic powers.
This.
Further, I have to say that it captures the essence of being a psyker really well and projects it onto the player; we all know you're not supposed to summon daemons because it's rather dangerous (to put it mildly), but if it could let you win the game? Can you resist the temptation?
unmercifulconker wrote: For me its not so much the issue of a daemon bursting out of a space marine psyker as we all know, being psyker creates huge risks.
If this was set in stone for the fluff then it meant a Dark Angel veteran, a hero, a staunch defender of the imperium, who despises all enemies of the Emperor, created to vanquish evil, who value dying for the Emperor instead of living to save himself, gave up all that before death and willingly summoned the most hated creatures of the Imperium.
Dark Angels being heroes? HA! That's funnier than them summoning Daemons!
unmercifulconker wrote: For me its not so much the issue of a daemon bursting out of a space marine psyker as we all know, being psyker creates huge risks.
If this was set in stone for the fluff then it meant a Dark Angel veteran, a hero, a staunch defender of the imperium, who despises all enemies of the Emperor, created to vanquish evil, who value dying for the Emperor instead of living to save himself, gave up all that before death and willingly summoned the most hated creatures of the Imperium.
Who instead promptly turned around to slaughter all of the remaining marines and led to a daemonic invasion bonus points for any other psykers going crazy
unmercifulconker wrote: For me its not so much the issue of a daemon bursting out of a space marine psyker as we all know, being psyker creates huge risks.
If this was set in stone for the fluff then it meant a Dark Angel veteran, a hero, a staunch defender of the imperium, who despises all enemies of the Emperor, created to vanquish evil, who value dying for the Emperor instead of living to save himself, gave up all that before death and willingly summoned the most hated creatures of the Imperium.
Dark Angels being heroes? HA! That's funnier than them summoning Daemons!
If it's something where players can choose to attempt to sacrifice their character, then I would imagine it would just result in people simply doing it all the time in a strategic manner. It would boost the value of those characters beyond their set point values if every time they got to one wound, the player would roll to see if they turn into a daemon, possibly get lucky, and then "boom," you now have a full-wound Greater Daemon mopping up the work your character couldn't.
It's all very up in the air, so I'm not too worried either way. The information on the Unbound vs. Battle-forged is much clearer right now, so I am legitimately worried about that.
Perfect Organism wrote: Is it really a violation of the background to let 'good' psykers summon daemons?
I thought that one of the reasons the Imperium is so distrustful of psykers is the way that pretty much any one of them can serve as a gateway for daemons to enter the material world. So even if they don't do it very often for fairly obvious reasons, most psykers should have the option of summoning something when things get truly desperate.
It could also be the case that the Dark Angels get access to both types of power because they are meant to be the kind of guys who do collect forbidden lore, make dubious decisions in pursuit of their own agenda and just possibly might be corrupted by chaos. There's no reason to think that every Imperial psyker can use Malefic powers.
This.
Further, I have to say that it captures the essence of being a psyker really well and projects it onto the player; we all know you're not supposed to summon daemons because it's rather dangerous (to put it mildly), but if it could let you win the game? Can you resist the temptation?
Isn't that also how Daemonhosts are done? Purposefully summoning a daemon and binging it into some poor schmuck?
Lobukia wrote: BTW, Faeit 212 reporting BA on the cover of the 7th "unbound" edition book.
So that means orks are on the cover... right?
Kind of a 2nd edition tribute then? They missed the 20th anniversary of 2nd edition by a year, but that seems plausible enough, and even fitting if we're getting a psychic phase back, etc.
StarTrotter wrote: I'm sorry I'm too busy entertaining the possibility of a Greater Daemon exploding to summon a new Greater Daemon
Meanwhile at GW:
"I got it! We'll put a Daemon INSIDE OF ANOTHER DAEMON!" *beat* "BRILLIANT SIR! Absolutely brilliant!"
Yo dawg...
Seriously though, when you think about the fact that the article said all non-Tyranid psykers get access to the Daemonology discipline, and there are psyker greater daemons...
I am saddened to know Tyranids can't. Imagine the possibilities if they had! Even your land lovers might be capable of sprouting wings!
Back in RT, you could have a daemon-possessed Genestealer Patriarch.
There are definitely creatures of the warp that aren't daemonic also, well, whether they are daemonic or not is a discussion for the background forum, but they aren't aligned with the big 4 chaos gods, they may not technically class as Chaos. Eldar and Ork gods exist within the warp, the big nasty you end up summoning could be from the ork gods if it is a weird boy using it, a Farseer may pull a manifestation of the laughing god out of the warp, a grey knight librarian may pull Draigo out of it... Whilst Chaos is indeed the most referred to faction within the warp, they are not the warp entirely.
Agent_Tremolo wrote: At this point, it's obvious that Deamons are GW's less popular line.
Had it been Tau, you would be able to accidentally summon Riptides.
I dunno man. It seems like a tough fight with DE and with Daemons being how beastly they were in the previous edition of Fantasy and how they are in current 40k I'm going to lean on DE being the smallest.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: There are definitely creatures of the warp that aren't daemonic also, well, whether they are daemonic or not is a discussion for the background forum, but they aren't aligned with the big 4 chaos gods, they may not technically class as Chaos. Eldar and Ork gods exist within the warp, the big nasty you end up summoning could be from the ork gods if it is a weird boy using it, a Farseer may pull a manifestation of the laughing god out of the warp, a grey knight librarian may pull Draigo out of it... Whilst Chaos is indeed the most referred to faction within the warp, they are not the warp entirely.
Except that they are probably summoning daemons, Maleific, Daemonology (which I doubt Orks or Eldars call their gods). Daemons have always had the problem of not really representing even all of the possible daemons (look at any of the books and you'll find obvious daemons that really are chaos but not in the books. That and for an army that's supposed to be shifting and diverse the models are very standard without much diversity and restricted.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: There are definitely creatures of the warp that aren't daemonic also, well, whether they are daemonic or not is a discussion for the background forum, but they aren't aligned with the big 4 chaos gods, they may not technically class as Chaos. Eldar and Ork gods exist within the warp, the big nasty you end up summoning could be from the ork gods if it is a weird boy using it, a Farseer may pull a manifestation of the laughing god out of the warp, a grey knight librarian may pull Draigo out of it... Whilst Chaos is indeed the most referred to faction within the warp, they are not the warp entirely.
Except that they are probably summoning daemons, Maleific, Daemonology (which I doubt Orks or Eldars call their gods). Daemons have always had the problem of not really representing even all of the possible daemons (look at any of the books and you'll find obvious daemons that really are chaos but not in the books. That and for an army that's supposed to be shifting and diverse the models are very standard without much diversity and restricted.
Squidbot wrote: 7th comes as a collection of pages you need to stitch together yourself.
Buy Citadel FINEBOUND books today!
Citadel Finebound Bookbinding Kit with Citadel Binding glue and Resin covers!
Don't forget the cards!
I doubt Dark Eldar would do it since they surpress their natural psychic abilities, and I doubt Craftworld Eldar would either since it may attract attention from Slaanesh.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: There are definitely creatures of the warp that aren't daemonic also, well, whether they are daemonic or not is a discussion for the background forum, but they aren't aligned with the big 4 chaos gods, they may not technically class as Chaos. Eldar and Ork gods exist within the warp, the big nasty you end up summoning could be from the ork gods if it is a weird boy using it, a Farseer may pull a manifestation of the laughing god out of the warp, a grey knight librarian may pull Draigo out of it... Whilst Chaos is indeed the most referred to faction within the warp, they are not the warp entirely.
Except that they are probably summoning daemons, Maleific, Daemonology (which I doubt Orks or Eldars call their gods). Daemons have always had the problem of not really representing even all of the possible daemons (look at any of the books and you'll find obvious daemons that really are chaos but not in the books. That and for an army that's supposed to be shifting and diverse the models are very standard without much diversity and restricted.
Squidbot wrote: 7th comes as a collection of pages you need to stitch together yourself.
Buy Citadel FINEBOUND books today!
Citadel Finebound Bookbinding Kit with Citadel Binding glue and Resin covers!
Don't forget the cards!
I doubt Dark Eldar would do it since they surpress their natural psychic abilities, and I doubt Craftworld Eldar would either since it may attract attention from Slaanesh.
Wait when did I say anything to do with that? It's no more nonsensical than Ezekiel sacrificing himself to become a Bloothirster to save the Impeirum from Xenos
endlesswaltz123 wrote: There are definitely creatures of the warp that aren't daemonic also, well, whether they are daemonic or not is a discussion for the background forum, but they aren't aligned with the big 4 chaos gods, they may not technically class as Chaos. Eldar and Ork gods exist within the warp, the big nasty you end up summoning could be from the ork gods if it is a weird boy using it, a Farseer may pull a manifestation of the laughing god out of the warp, a grey knight librarian may pull Draigo out of it... Whilst Chaos is indeed the most referred to faction within the warp, they are not the warp entirely.
Except that they are probably summoning daemons, Maleific, Daemonology (which I doubt Orks or Eldars call their gods). Daemons have always had the problem of not really representing even all of the possible daemons (look at any of the books and you'll find obvious daemons that really are chaos but not in the books. That and for an army that's supposed to be shifting and diverse the models are very standard without much diversity and restricted.
Squidbot wrote: 7th comes as a collection of pages you need to stitch together yourself.
Buy Citadel FINEBOUND books today!
Citadel Finebound Bookbinding Kit with Citadel Binding glue and Resin covers!
Don't forget the cards!
I doubt Dark Eldar would do it since they surpress their natural psychic abilities, and I doubt Craftworld Eldar would either since it may attract attention from Slaanesh.
Wait when did I say anything to do with that? It's no more nonsensical than Ezekiel sacrificing himself to become a Bloothirster to save the Impeirum from Xenos
Besides, DE don't even have psykers.
Several times in the DE Codex they summon and/or have pacts to have Daemon armies for their civil wars...................usually ends badly for the summoner/s.
Perfect Organism wrote: Is it really a violation of the background to let 'good' psykers summon daemons?
I thought that one of the reasons the Imperium is so distrustful of psykers is the way that pretty much any one of them can serve as a gateway for daemons to enter the material world. So even if they don't do it very often for fairly obvious reasons, most psykers should have the option of summoning something when things get truly desperate.
Most do, but that's why they are dead. The only psykers in any Imperial army except Radical Inquisition are the ones that aren't like that.
I just thought it took an exceedingly high amount of skill and power to summon any daemons you would want. Chaos gods aren't really in the business of answering mortal's requests the way they would like.
Now, I'm sure GW will address this by giving Daemonology a D6 table of daemons you can summon, but still I'm not entirely positive that the mechanism (being whatever it is) will fit the fluff. Especially considering any of these psykers summoning daemons are on their first (and only) try doing so.
angelofvengeance wrote: I doubt Dark Eldar would do it since they surpress their natural psychic abilities, and I doubt Craftworld Eldar would either since it may attract attention from Slaanesh.
Actually, with how Daemons can be summoned through Sorcery I would actually argue that this would be the only power that any model should be able to buy, Psyker or not.
Accolade wrote: I just thought it took an exceedingly high amount of skill and power to summon any daemons you would want. Chaos gods aren't really in the business of answering mortal's requests the way they would like.
Now, I'm sure GW will address this by giving Daemonology a D6 table of daemons you can summon, but still I'm not entirely positive that the mechanism (being whatever it is) will fit the fluff. Especially considering any of these psykers summoning daemons are on their first (and only) try doing so.
Hopefully a 2-12 or 4-24 table that ranges from turning into a pile of bubbling goo to becoming Skarbrand.
It's also funny that unless they include the rules for all these Daemons we will supposedly be able to summon in the rulebook itself, pretty much everyone wanting to do this will have to buy a Daemon dex.
Accolade wrote: I just thought it took an exceedingly high amount of skill and power to summon any daemons you would want. Chaos gods aren't really in the business of answering mortal's requests the way they would like.
Now, I'm sure GW will address this by giving Daemonology a D6 table of daemons you can summon, but still I'm not entirely positive that the mechanism (being whatever it is) will fit the fluff. Especially considering any of these psykers summoning daemons are on their first (and only) try doing so.
Hopefully a 2-12 or 4-24 table that ranges from turning into a pile of bubbling goo to becoming Skarbrand.
It's also funny that unless they include the rules for all these Daemons we will supposedly be able to summon in the rulebook itself, pretty much everyone wanting to do this will have to buy a Daemon dex.
Perhaps THAT is the price you pay if you're not already playing Daemons?
Even if I have the option to summons demons, I’ll pass.
If there is a chance, even a small one, that I can accidentally summon one (such as from the misscast table) I will leave my librarians on the shelf. If you don’t have the mastery of your mind to prevent chaos from emerging on the battlefield, you have no place being there.
And if it get to be too commonplace, I’ll pick up some BT a/o SoB allies. Because they will be right, and someone will need to be purged.
Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Hey, cool, you didn't have time to read the thread but you did have enough time to make a sweeping generalization that everyone is raging and losing their minds!
Leggy wrote: As the psychic phase now uses a dice pool, is it safe to assume psychic tests aren't based on leadership anymore? I can't see how you'd want to roll MORE dice when keeping under 9-10.
However If it goes the way of Warhammer, and starts using target numbers, what will happen to all the psychic powers in the Codexes? That is a lot of renumbering needed in the FAQ's (and will really mess up the signature spell for Tzeentch daemons)
Unless its roll as many dice as you feel you need and take the 2 lowest and compare against the model/unit's LD.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Hey, cool, you didn't have time to read the thread but you did have enough time to make a sweeping generalization that everyone is raging and losing their minds!
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.
Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian uses his last Wound to summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian uses his last Wound to summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER.
That's some narrative forging right there.
The last 5 pages have been on this topic, primarily.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.
You've seen the new rulebook in its entirety too then? What else is in it?
Everyone seems so worried about the riptide spam :/ sheesh.. how many new horribly broekn counters are there for that now? a spam list will play like rock paper scissors.
He takes all riptides.. Im going to take all Lascannon devstators... Its not rocket science. Guaranteed 10 easy cheesy counters for every cheesy list going in 6th.
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
That's some narrative forging right there.
Didnt you read that part where it said "during playtesting". Even the WD team admits this is grossly messing with the fluff, so it wont be in the final game
Also I hardly doubt it really happened on the tabletop...its just some underpaid WD intern being "creative". Wouldnt have suited the senior editor well if he admitted the real librarian rolled a double 1 and turned into a pile of goo (place D6 wide puddle of difficult terrain)
Sir Arun wrote: Didnt you read that part where it said "during playtesting". Even the WD team admits this is grossly messing with the fluff, so it wont be in the final game
Hopefully, anyways. But this is GW I wouldn't put it past them to allow this.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby. In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game! Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.
You've seen the new rulebook in its entirety too then? What else is in it?
I know you think you're being clever, but it's a new rules book coming out, not a time traveling device. Most of the people here are pretty familiar with how GW does things, what certain major rule changes will entail, and how it will affect their local communities. It's not something new with unforseeable consequences.
Unbalanced craziness can be disregarded if you're playing with a small group of mates who all have the same outlook on 40k, but if you're mainly playing pick-up games, or you're in a larger group with fluffy and competitive players, balance issues will just further segregate the community between the fluffy and competitive, and everyone will be left with a smaller pool of potential opponents and a much smaller selection of units to take that will still allow for an enjoyable game.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby. In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game! Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Try reading the last 10 pages then as the reasons have been explained already. Maybe in your neck of the woods gamers get together for tea and sing kumbaya around the campfire while exchanging friendship bracelets and sharing their inner most hopes and dreams for the grimdark future games about to be played but in other places you simply meet a stranger and agree to a game in one sentence. That stranger could have vastly different expectations of what that game will entail (or not entail) and a "buy everything" permissive as standard ruleset exacerbates that.
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
That's some narrative forging right there.
Leaving out the whole bit about it being playtesting and for research purposes just to try and stir up things? Nice....as if this thread actually needed more fuel!
If it's something where players can choose to attempt to sacrifice their character, then I would imagine it would just result in people simply doing it all the time in a strategic manner. It would boost the value of those characters beyond their set point values if every time they got to one wound, the player would roll to see if they turn into a daemon, possibly get lucky, and then "boom," you now have a full-wound Greater Daemon mopping up the work your character couldn't.
I imagine it's a 2d6 random chart that provides random effects, with being the Bloodthirster summoned DoW style.
will result in summoning Lord Kaldor Draigo, in your opponent's control.
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
That's some narrative forging right there.
Leaving out the whole bit about it being playtesting and for research purposes just to try and stir up things? Nice....as if this thread actually needed more fuel!
The thing is, we don't know if this was just for playtesting, and if this is actually possible in the game.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Hey, cool, you didn't have time to read the thread but you did have enough time to make a sweeping generalization that everyone is raging and losing their minds!
He's not wrong
And for every post of some screaming "this is the end!" and going on about selling all of their models, there is a second post of someone smugly proclaiming that everyone is being foolish, for they themselves obviously know what GW is doing with this release.
I mean, they must, because they are essentially saying that all concerns are invalid, yes?
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I was not even familiar with you previous avatar, and you already switched to a new one. By the time they release new Sister models, you will have gone through many thousands of avatars !
Nah. I just needed to change things up as I was feeling far too serious about the internet again and needed something lighthearted. I won't be changing again for a while.
A while ? So just a mere dozen thousands of avatars then .
StarTrotter wrote: *rolls Warp Tether* Daemon almost dies, DSes onto battlefield. Summons a LoC (because I think that'd be the most entertaining) with full health! Actually, just imagine daemons of Tzeentch. Everybody summon a MC! Behold my legion of MCs!
Blue horrors used to summon pink horrors (or the other way around). Now, they summon Lord of Change. What a promotion .
Actually, the blurb say that daemonspawn can do that without paying the high price other armies need, so I say when you sacrifice your greater daemon to summon another greater daemon, the old greater daemon stays inside the new greater daemon, piloting it. After the marine in terminator armor strapped to the giant robot like a baby, after the marines wearing a centurion armor over their power armor, you will get greater daemons wearing greater daemons, and it will be glorious !
Now we need someone to do an illustration/model of that!
I know you think you're being clever, but it's a new rules book coming out, not a time traveling device. Most of the people here are pretty familiar with how GW does things, what certain major rule changes will entail, and how it will affect their local communities. It's not something new with unforseeable consequences.
Unbalanced craziness can be disregarded if you're playing with a small group of mates who all have the same outlook on 40k, but if you're mainly playing pick-up games, or you're in a larger group with fluffy and competitive players, balance issues will just further segregate the community between the fluffy and competitive, and everyone will be left with a smaller pool of potential opponents and a much smaller selection of units to take that will still allow for an enjoyable game.
Again, you also know exactly how Unbound and Battle-Forged rules are going to be? Escalation is technically 'in the rules' as well, but i dont see many pug esclation games, or escalation games in general.
And for every post of some screaming "this is the end!" and going on about selling all of their models, there is a second post of someone smugly proclaiming that everyone is being foolish, for they themselves obviously know what GW is doing with this release.
I mean, they must, because they are essentially saying that all concerns are invalid, yes?
Funny most of the posts that claim "This is the end!" are also the ones that are claiming that they obviously know what GW is doing.
Less than 20 days to release and still 0 rumors about any core game mechanics getting changed. Will tanks become more survivable? Will Escalation and Stronghold Assault really get rolled in? I wouldnt bet on the latter because those rumors are so old they came from a time where this was "just going to be 6.5th edition"
All we have are 2 White Dwarf scans. Why didnt the goober that took the photos include a couple more pages?
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
That's some narrative forging right there.
Leaving out the whole bit about it being playtesting and for research purposes just to try and stir up things? Nice....as if this thread actually needed more fuel!
They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
That's some narrative forging right there.
Leaving out the whole bit about it being playtesting and for research purposes just to try and stir up things? Nice....as if this thread actually needed more fuel!
They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
I had heard a rumor in 2006 before the old Eldar codex was released about them making Shuriken Cannons rending back then already, but the concept was dropped due to it being overpowered (back in 4th ed rending meant, if you got a 6 to-hit you auto-wounded with AP2 instead of this being a 6 to wound)
Sir Arun wrote: Less than 20 days to release and still 0 rumors about any core game mechanics getting changed. Will tanks become more survivable? Will Escalation and Stronghold Assault really get rolled in? I wouldnt bet on the latter because those rumors are so old they came from a time where this was "just going to be 6.5th edition"
All we have are 2 White Dwarf scans. Why didnt the goober that took the photos include a couple more pages?
Probably the only pages that refer to the new 40k edition, this WD was mainly a wood elves issue right?
HairySticks wrote: Everyone seems so worried about the riptide spam :/ sheesh.. how many new horribly broekn counters are there for that now? a spam list will play like rock paper scissors.
The riptide example is brought up because a game designer apparently didn't realize that he already could bring all his riptides under the current ruleset (reminds me of the knight batrep "oh wait super-heavies explode?")...and it's not really a good thing that he can. Also, because it's a classic example of a list that requires tailoring; tailoring that will make your list useless against 125 henchmen squads (which is also an option). And no one really likes list tailoring.
"A psyker play a dangerous game with the warp. A psyker having XXX rule may call upon actual daemons to fight for him in his place. roll 2 d6 and consult the table below (table containing 12 different daemons from nurglings to blood thirster). on the roll XY remove the psyker from play and replace him with daemon number XY. if the daemon model is not purchased from GW, just remove your psyker, chaos is a fickle"
you gain one
1. Nurgling
2. Daemonette
3. Bloodletter
4. Fiend
.
.
.
10. Keeper of secrets
11. Lord of change
12. Blood thirster
No you have to buy at least one of each (GW will start selling only bundles of 3 nurgle units, 3 daemonette units, 3 blood thirsters and so on, for regular price)
well when people are concerned about being forced to play againt "everything" when there is literally 0 chance of that...
unbound is meant to make all the people who have been frothing about not using all the models they bought,
battle hardened is for all the competitive tournament types who care more about leveling the playing feild.
you will never, ever, have to play against unbound if you dont want to, and its basically just the apoc crowd who will use it.
Also the BRB you bought will still be valid, youll just need a veritable pant load of FAQ/erratas to take into accounting.
also,
unverified rumour (not that any are verified)
but version 6.5 will be the first step in the "living" rule book model that GW is hoping to adopt, and should see periodic updates and such in conjunction with the weekly WD's
endlesswaltz123 wrote: There are definitely creatures of the warp that aren't daemonic also, well, whether they are daemonic or not is a discussion for the background forum, but they aren't aligned with the big 4 chaos gods, they may not technically class as Chaos. Eldar and Ork gods exist within the warp, the big nasty you end up summoning could be from the ork gods if it is a weird boy using it, a Farseer may pull a manifestation of the laughing god out of the warp, a grey knight librarian may pull Draigo out of it... Whilst Chaos is indeed the most referred to faction within the warp, they are not the warp entirely.
Except that they are probably summoning daemons, Maleific, Daemonology (which I doubt Orks or Eldars call their gods). Daemons have always had the problem of not really representing even all of the possible daemons (look at any of the books and you'll find obvious daemons that really are chaos but not in the books. That and for an army that's supposed to be shifting and diverse the models are very standard without much diversity and restricted.
Squidbot wrote: 7th comes as a collection of pages you need to stitch together yourself.
Buy Citadel FINEBOUND books today!
Citadel Finebound Bookbinding Kit with Citadel Binding glue and Resin covers!
Don't forget the cards!
I doubt Dark Eldar would do it since they surpress their natural psychic abilities, and I doubt Craftworld Eldar would either since it may attract attention from Slaanesh.
Wait when did I say anything to do with that? It's no more nonsensical than Ezekiel sacrificing himself to become a Bloothirster to save the Impeirum from Xenos
Besides, DE don't even have psykers.
Several times in the DE Codex they summon and/or have pacts to have Daemon armies for their civil wars...................usually ends badly for the summoner/s.
Yeah I know that but the rules explicitly mention psykers. DE summonings and pacts are much akin to a chaos lord or, more often, dark apostle whom, fluffwise would be capable of it but the rules won't represent anything but the psyker casting it.
WayneTheGame wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.
Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
That's some narrative forging right there.
Sooo..... you're not making even the most token attempt to see what's happening in the thread... go away
Leaving out the whole bit about it being playtesting and for research purposes just to try and stir up things? Nice....as if this thread actually needed more fuel!
"A psyker play a dangerous game with the warp. A psyker having XXX rule may call upon actual daemons to fight for him in his place. roll 2 d6 and consult the table below (table containing 12 different daemons from nurglings to blood thirster). on the roll XY remove the psyker from play and replace him with daemon number XY. if the daemon model is not purchased from GW, just remove your psyker, chaos is a fickle"
you gain one
1. Nurgling
2. Daemonette
3. Bloodletter
4. Fiend
.
.
.
10. Keeper of secrets
11. Lord of change
12. Blood thirster
Just FYI, a 2d6 table begins with "2" not "1"
I'd be surprised at even GW making it random model... most likely just buy it as an addition to your force, and use the psyker to bring it into play (just like previous Chaos Daemon/Marine books did anyway).
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Try reading the last 10 pages then as the reasons have been explained already. Maybe in your neck of the woods gamers get together for tea and sing kumbaya around the campfire while exchanging friendship bracelets and sharing their inner most hopes and dreams for the grimdark future games about to be played but in other places you simply meet a stranger and agree to a game in one sentence. That stranger could have vastly different expectations of what that game will entail (or not entail) and a "buy everything" permissive as standard ruleset exacerbates that.
Eh, he just doesn't understand how the vast majority of 40k games are played at local game stores against an endless line of unreasonable strangers with whom every conversation becomes something akin to a nuclear arms treaty negotiation.
I mean, I can *barely* even agree to a points value with these unbending mystery men without creating ugly scenes in stores and fistfights in the alley.
There are reasons why I have a custom Battlefoam tray with slots for brass knuckles and pepper spray.
angelofvengeance wrote: I doubt Dark Eldar would do it since they surpress their natural psychic abilities, and I doubt Craftworld Eldar would either since it may attract attention from Slaanesh.
Actually, with how Daemons can be summoned through Sorcery I would actually argue that this would be the only power that any model should be able to buy, Psyker or not.
Theoretically I concur with you. Although logically only a limited number of individuals would actually do so. Still, if this were possible... I'd be so happy. I'd have priests summoning daemons, guardsman commanders becoming vessels for daemons.... I could play something slightly like the lost and the damned! (I really miss them)
PhantomViper wrote: They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
You do know play testing can determine if you need to exclude things from the rules or not, right?
Accolade wrote: I just thought it took an exceedingly high amount of skill and power to summon any daemons you would want. Chaos gods aren't really in the business of answering mortal's requests the way they would like.
Now, I'm sure GW will address this by giving Daemonology a D6 table of daemons you can summon, but still I'm not entirely positive that the mechanism (being whatever it is) will fit the fluff. Especially considering any of these psykers summoning daemons are on their first (and only) try doing so.
Hopefully a 2-12 or 4-24 table that ranges from turning into a pile of bubbling goo to becoming Skarbrand.
It's also funny that unless they include the rules for all these Daemons we will supposedly be able to summon in the rulebook itself, pretty much everyone wanting to do this will have to buy a Daemon dex.
Perhaps THAT is the price you pay if you're not already playing Daemons?
Psssht. It'll probably be something like roll a d6! Primaris is troops, 1 is heavy, 2 is elite, 3 is heavy, and, if you roll multiple dice aboce what you normally should, thus increasing the risks, you get a HQ option. On top of that, you must roll 2d6. On 1-3 it is Slaanesh, 4-6 is nurgle, 7-9 is khorne, and 9-12 is Tzeentch because as soon as they think of Chaos they can't help but wet themselves on the idea of extra random tables.
"A psyker play a dangerous game with the warp. A psyker having XXX rule may call upon actual daemons to fight for him in his place. roll 2 d6 and consult the table below (table containing 12 different daemons from nurglings to blood thirster). on the roll XY remove the psyker from play and replace him with daemon number XY. if the daemon model is not purchased from GW, just remove your psyker, chaos is a fickle"
you gain one
1. Nurgling
2. Daemonette
3. Bloodletter
4. Fiend
.
.
.
10. Keeper of secrets
11. Lord of change
12. Blood thirster
No you have to buy at least one of each (GW will start selling only bundles of 3 nurgle units, 3 daemonette units, 3 blood thirsters and so on, for regular price)
Heck, I'll take a 1 in 4 chance of turning into a Greater Daemon!
If it turns out to be anything like this, I'm sure it will be 2D6 on a 12 you roll on a further table that is like 1-3 nothing, 4 KoS, 5 LoC, 6 Thirster.
Alas, we have no fething clue how any of this will work, but we can dream!
PhantomViper wrote: They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
You do know play testing can determine if you need to exclude things from the rules or not, right?
Not if that exclusion is based solely of historical fluff reasons and not game balance ones, because that is the only practical difference here.
Oh well maybe we'll finally get a plastic Greater or two to help hype things.
So this means that Daemons are either the second most or most capable of allying? Darn. Also imagine the amount of psyker rolls you'd need for this. You'd need to summon a daemon then roll for their spells. I wonder how it works with the allies chart.
Also in the daemonhunters codex there were rules for any opponent to bring/summon daemon packs and greater daemons with random statlines, or you could just just daemons from codex: chaos space marines (before there was a daemon codex).
Accolade wrote: I just thought it took an exceedingly high amount of skill and power to summon any daemons you would want. Chaos gods aren't really in the business of answering mortal's requests the way they would like.
Now, I'm sure GW will address this by giving Daemonology a D6 table of daemons you can summon, but still I'm not entirely positive that the mechanism (being whatever it is) will fit the fluff. Especially considering any of these psykers summoning daemons are on their first (and only) try doing so.
Hopefully a 2-12 or 4-24 table that ranges from turning into a pile of bubbling goo to becoming Skarbrand.
It's also funny that unless they include the rules for all these Daemons we will supposedly be able to summon in the rulebook itself, pretty much everyone wanting to do this will have to buy a Daemon dex.
Perhaps THAT is the price you pay if you're not already playing Daemons?
Psssht. It'll probably be something like roll a d6! Primaris is troops, 1 is heavy, 2 is elite, 3 is heavy, and, if you roll multiple dice aboce what you normally should, thus increasing the risks, you get a HQ option. On top of that, you must roll 2d6. On 1-3 it is Slaanesh, 4-6 is nurgle, 7-9 is khorne, and 9-12 is Tzeentch because as soon as they think of Chaos they can't help but wet themselves on the idea of extra random tables.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby. In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game! Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Try reading the last 10 pages then as the reasons have been explained already. Maybe in your neck of the woods gamers get together for tea and sing kumbaya around the campfire while exchanging friendship bracelets and sharing their inner most hopes and dreams for the grimdark future games about to be played but in other places you simply meet a stranger and agree to a game in one sentence. That stranger could have vastly different expectations of what that game will entail (or not entail) and a "buy everything" permissive as standard ruleset exacerbates that.
Eh, he just doesn't understand how the vast majority of 40k games are played at local game stores against an endless line of unreasonable strangers with whom every conversation becomes something akin to a nuclear arms treaty negotiation.
I mean, I can *barely* even agree to a points value with these unbending mystery men without creating ugly scenes in stores and fistfights in the alley.
I think this is deflecting the issue a bit.
Obviously, the problem won't be in deal with unreasonable TFGs trying to make your gaming experience hell, they *still* won't get games in. The issues will be in the shades-of-grey areas when people come in with Unbound lists you feel are cheesy but they feel are not. I am worried about increasing levels of disagreement between players on the games they want to play that will lead to higher levels of dissatisfaction in the 40k gaming population.
EDIT: geez I'm slow, the comment I was responding to is already a page behind!
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I was not even familiar with you previous avatar, and you already switched to a new one. By the time they release new Sister models, you will have gone through many thousands of avatars !
Nah. I just needed to change things up as I was feeling far too serious about the internet again and needed something lighthearted. I won't be changing again for a while.
A while ? So just a mere dozen thousands of avatars then .
StarTrotter wrote: *rolls Warp Tether* Daemon almost dies, DSes onto battlefield. Summons a LoC (because I think that'd be the most entertaining) with full health! Actually, just imagine daemons of Tzeentch. Everybody summon a MC! Behold my legion of MCs!
Blue horrors used to summon pink horrors (or the other way around). Now, they summon Lord of Change. What a promotion .
Actually, the blurb say that daemonspawn can do that without paying the high price other armies need, so I say when you sacrifice your greater daemon to summon another greater daemon, the old greater daemon stays inside the new greater daemon, piloting it. After the marine in terminator armor strapped to the giant robot like a baby, after the marines wearing a centurion armor over their power armor, you will get greater daemons wearing greater daemons, and it will be glorious !
Now we need someone to do an illustration/model of that!
Dreadknights are psykers right? If so, I want to put a lord of change trying to fit in one. If that doesn't work (or doesn't look good) I'll just put a Tzeentchian herald in there! See I'm already having a glorious plot. As mentioned, I'm building "The Loophole Effect". What? It was that or circlejerk. All the Lords of Change? Same exact one. Pink horrors? Previous incarnations. I shall be glorious!
It would be pretty fantastic if all of these Daemon shenanigans meant that they released some new plastic GDs. I've been for Fateweaver for too long already and I'm not paying double price to some schmo on eBay who didn't shave off any mold lines and assembled it horribly...
I would expect only certain codexs could summon them safely, they stated there would be a 'high price' if you were summoning a demon but not the daemon summoning type
Accolade wrote: I just thought it took an exceedingly high amount of skill and power to summon any daemons you would want. Chaos gods aren't really in the business of answering mortal's requests the way they would like.
Now, I'm sure GW will address this by giving Daemonology a D6 table of daemons you can summon, but still I'm not entirely positive that the mechanism (being whatever it is) will fit the fluff. Especially considering any of these psykers summoning daemons are on their first (and only) try doing so.
Hopefully a 2-12 or 4-24 table that ranges from turning into a pile of bubbling goo to becoming Skarbrand.
It's also funny that unless they include the rules for all these Daemons we will supposedly be able to summon in the rulebook itself, pretty much everyone wanting to do this will have to buy a Daemon dex.
Perhaps THAT is the price you pay if you're not already playing Daemons?
Psssht. It'll probably be something like roll a d6! Primaris is troops, 1 is heavy, 2 is elite, 3 is heavy, and, if you roll multiple dice aboce what you normally should, thus increasing the risks, you get a HQ option. On top of that, you must roll 2d6. On 1-3 it is Slaanesh, 4-6 is nurgle, 7-9 is khorne, and 9-12 is Tzeentch because as soon as they think of Chaos they can't help but wet themselves on the idea of extra random tables.
But Phil Kelly isn't writing rules right now.
Nonsense. Phil Kelly will go out of the way just to ensure the "spirit of chaos" remains strong
Automatically Appended Next Post:
haroon wrote: Its probably pretty easy to summon greater demons, I mean that would sell a lot more so its the obvious choice for GW.
It'll be easy to summon. Just not always what you want
Automatically Appended Next Post:
rabidguineapig wrote: It would be pretty fantastic if all of these Daemon shenanigans meant that they released some new plastic GDs. I've been for Fateweaver for too long already and I'm not paying double price to some schmo on eBay who didn't shave off any mold lines and assembled it horribly...
Especially the Bloodthirster. The others I can live with but gosh that thing... I take a balrog instead.
I think they are not… yet. I am not completely sure, though. Anyway, do not let that limit your imagination : just go unbound, man! Rule of cool trumps everything else, especially balance!
I think they are not… yet. I am not completely sure, though. Anyway, do not let that limit your imagination : just go unbound, man! Rule of cool trumps everything else, especially balance!
Oh gosh. Guys this is a tough one. Do I go for the GK of chaos or should I toss the rules aside as GW wishes, build an army of Nid psykers and make them all become deamons (hopefully LoC or Thirsters) and explain it as their dream being that they could fly and at last... at last they can!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
easysauce wrote: I have also heard, and bear with, since its a rumour:
The summoned daemons can(will?) attack your own forces if you are not chaos/demons
Considering the drawbacks, probably. Although that does somewhat sadden my dreams of make a Lost and the Damned list.
easysauce wrote: I have also heard, and bear with, since its a rumour:
The summoned daemons can(will?) attack your own forces if you are not chaos/demons
That'd explain a lot, although it's still fluff butchery of the highest magnitude
I'd actually like to see that. You could pull the same tactic that Hordes players used to be able to do with their ballistic war beasts - give a psyker or three some method of fast movement, send him right into the thick of the opponent's army, and then pop the daemon summon and watch the opponent be forced to decide between attacking your approaching army or dealing with the daemon.
I think they are not… yet. I am not completely sure, though. Anyway, do not let that limit your imagination : just go unbound, man! Rule of cool trumps everything else, especially balance!
easysauce wrote: I have also heard, and bear with, since its a rumour:
The summoned daemons can(will?) attack your own forces if you are not chaos/demons
That'd explain a lot, although it's still fluff butchery of the highest magnitude
not really, its pretty fluffy IMO, as plenty of good guys have turned to chaos, simply because they wanted to use the evil powers for "good" out of desparation
easysauce wrote: I have also heard, and bear with, since its a rumour:
The summoned daemons can(will?) attack your own forces if you are not chaos/demons
That'd explain a lot, although it's still fluff butchery of the highest magnitude
not really, its pretty fluffy IMO, as plenty of good guys have turned to chaos, simply because they wanted to use the evil powers for "good" out of desparation
Such as GK casting it, Eldar summoning Slaaneshi daemons or becoming it themself, and Tigurius dying for good and becoming a daemon that then kills chaos forces for the Imperium! I get what you mean (it works great with radical inquisitors in particular) but it still has holes.
I think they are not… yet. I am not completely sure, though. Anyway, do not let that limit your imagination : just go unbound, man! Rule of cool trumps everything else, especially balance!
They are, all GK units are psykers
Thanks. Couldn't remember if they worked like the airplane (where they count as being a psyker) or if they were a true psyker.
PhantomViper wrote: They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
You do know play testing can determine if you need to exclude things from the rules or not, right?
I'd be willing to bet that the magazine writing staff does not playtest the rules before they go to print. They were trying out actual stuff from the rulebook. Nor are they going to tell you about things that are not in the game when they're promoting the product.
Or it could be a representation of a real perils of the warp. I.e. Ezekiel tried to draw more power than he can handle to defeat his enemy and ends up failing.
StarTrotter wrote: Oh gosh. Guys this is a tough one. Do I go for the GK of chaos or should I toss the rules aside as GW wishes, build an army of Nid psykers and make them all become deamons (hopefully LoC or Thirsters) and explain it as their dream being that they could fly and at last... at last they can!
You do not need daemons for that.
- Take any tyranid model
- Add wings
- Declare it is now a jump-pack-beast-flying MC - UNBOUND !
- ???
- Narrative forged
- Profit
easysauce wrote: I have also heard, and bear with, since its a rumour:
The summoned daemons can(will?) attack your own forces if you are not chaos/demons
That'd explain a lot, although it's still fluff butchery of the highest magnitude
I'd actually like to see that. You could pull the same tactic that Hordes players used to be able to do with their ballistic war beasts - give a psyker or three some method of fast movement, send him right into the thick of the opponent's army, and then pop the daemon summon and watch the opponent be forced to decide between attacking your approaching army or dealing with the daemon.
If only the gates were still easy to get. WAIT! Unbound army... Grab Tiggy, ally with IG bring all the psykers you can. Shove them in a unit, activate gates, teleport to the enemy, proceed to activate daemon godhood. Cackle manically.
PhantomViper wrote: They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
You do know play testing can determine if you need to exclude things from the rules or not, right?
Not if that exclusion is based solely of historical fluff reasons and not game balance ones, because that is the only practical difference here.
You are making the assumption that GW's playtesting is rigid and organized. They were playtesting a general rule, so did it really matter if the army using the rule was actually going to be eligible for it or not in the final write up? I sort of imagine it went this way:
Developer #1: Hey, I came up with this new psychic domain, lets go grab somebody from the White Dwarf studio in the basement and have them test it in whatever game they got going on!
Developer #2: Great idea! Then we can sod off and grab a pint and just have them tell us their results! One more playtest down WOOHOO!
30 minutes later:
Developer #1: Hey you, the funny lookin' guy with the glasses, here are some test rules for a new psychic power, go ahead and give it to whatever psycher you have in your army. What? You're playing Dark Angels and they would never use daemonology? DO YOU NOT KNOW WHO I AM??? Now do what I say and sod off! UNBELIEVABLE!
Developer #2: Yeah, you'd think these White Dwarf gits would jump at the chance to actually be involved in something important instead of takin' pretty pictures and printing press junkets!
Developer #1 (to the WDer): And yes, you can put it in your little article, now go on, play your game, and you can thank us later.
StarTrotter wrote: Oh gosh. Guys this is a tough one. Do I go for the GK of chaos or should I toss the rules aside as GW wishes, build an army of Nid psykers and make them all become deamons (hopefully LoC or Thirsters) and explain it as their dream being that they could fly and at last... at last they can!
You do not need daemons for that.
- Take any tyranid model
- Add wings
- Declare it is now a jump-pack-beast-flying MC - UNBOUND !
- ???
- Narrative forged
- Profit
Genius! If I ever take over GW I shall be asking if you wish for a job.
yeah for sure, GK and such I fully expect to be disallowed from summoning, but INQ would be allowed (havnt heard this as rumour, but I suspect it will be true nonetheless)
I have been told that the aim is to make it a last ditch/risky thing to do as opposed to somethign reliable you can spam.
Also, apparently its the OTHER new psychic trees that apparently are going to be more important.... not that im getting any solid hints as to what they are...
PhantomViper wrote: They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
You do know play testing can determine if you need to exclude things from the rules or not, right?
I'd be willing to bet that the magazine writing staff does not playtest the rules before they go to print. They were trying out actual stuff from the rulebook. Nor are they going to tell you about things that are not in the game when they're promoting the product.
The WD staff gets stuff wrong regularly and shows rules that are different from the final product on a regular basis, so don't count it as being written in stone.
pretre wrote: Or it could be a representation of a real perils of the warp. I.e. Ezekiel tried to draw more power than he can handle to defeat his enemy and ends up failing.
And by failing winning. Naw, seems like it was a specific spell to summon daemons. He was using malific spells after all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
easysauce wrote: yeah for sure, GK and such I fully expect to be disallowed from summoning, but INQ would be allowed (havnt heard this as rumour, but I suspect it will be true nonetheless)
I have been told that the aim is to make it a last ditch/risky thing to do as opposed to somethign reliable you can spam.
Also, apparently its the OTHER new psychic trees that apparently are going to be more important.... not that im getting any solid hints as to what they are...
That'd be very odd considering how played up this psyker tree has been. I'm kind of afraid of the psyker phase now from all of this
pretre wrote: Or it could be a representation of a real perils of the warp. I.e. Ezekiel tried to draw more power than he can handle to defeat his enemy and ends up failing.
And by failing winning. Naw, seems like it was a specific spell to summon daemons. He was using malific spells after all.
No, I get that. I mean the fluff reasoning for why Ezekiel would summon a BT is that he wouldn't intentionally. The player might, but Ezekiel wouldn't.
easysauce wrote: yeah for sure, GK and such I fully expect to be disallowed from summoning, but INQ would be allowed (havnt heard this as rumour, but I suspect it will be true nonetheless)
I have been told that the aim is to make it a last ditch/risky thing to do as opposed to somethign reliable you can spam.
Also, apparently its the OTHER new psychic trees that apparently are going to be more important.... not that im getting any solid hints as to what they are...
Hmm, I'm wondering if that will backfire though, as it seems like something the player on the losing side would do every time towards the end of the game (provided he had psykers lying around).
GW doesn't have interest in balance (this isn't mean disparagingly) so it makes sense, but I feel like it might create a feeling of being cheated if you're firmly beating an opponent and a lucky roll on his side provides a unit that turns the game around entirely.
But again, maybe this is just what they want. /shrug
pretre wrote: Or it could be a representation of a real perils of the warp. I.e. Ezekiel tried to draw more power than he can handle to defeat his enemy and ends up failing.
And by failing winning. Naw, seems like it was a specific spell to summon daemons. He was using malific spells after all.
No, I get that. I mean the fluff reasoning for why Ezekiel would summon a BT is that he wouldn't intentionally. The player might, but Ezekiel wouldn't.
Ah I understand you there. Personally I wouldn't mind that much it being one of the biggest Perils (I can imagine a unihnged psyker either readical or chaos purposefully maxing the warp in hope to summon it)
Obviously, the problem won't be in deal with unreasonable TFGs trying to make your gaming experience hell, they *still* won't get games in. The issues will be in the shades-of-grey areas when people come in with Unbound lists you feel are cheesy but they feel are not. I am worried about increasing levels of disagreement between players on the games they want to play that will lead to higher levels of dissatisfaction in the 40k gaming population.
EDIT: geez I'm slow, the comment I was responding to is already a page behind!
Well said.
I used to be of the camp, rules be damned, just figure out a way to make it work. However, over time, my views have changed fairly substantially. There are three major issues that arise from shoddy rules, even among friends and relatively friendly gaming shops (Excluding TFG).
1. There is a slight arms race that starts and slowly escalates. As newer flashier models come out, hobbyists would like to collect and play them. Then the opposing player takes a counter 'strong' unit, etc. Even close friends have different views on what is broken and what is not.
2. Pick up games become close to impossible to enjoy. Between grey areas in the rules, broken spam if you didn't bring the correct counter, difference of opinion on what's broken or not...it just doesn't work.
3. Time. When I get free time after working the week, the last thing I would like to do is spend what free time I have figuring out how the heck a game works...or fixing their mistakes. I just want to play and have a good time.
They need to clean up their game. Make consistent rules, that it doesn't matter if you play in New York or Kansas City...everyone knows how the game works and the units are balanced enough that players do not need to spend 30 minutes trying to figure out each others expectations. From the rumors (and of course they are just rumors), it appears as though they are instead shifting to the other side of the continuum. I can only assume this is driven by the suits, whereas the more players can take whatever models they want in their armies, the more they would (will) potentially purchase. Of course, this would just be a short term solution...as players become more and more disgruntled with their gaming experience.
I mean, if this is Games Workshops direction, let's follow this logic to its final stupidity. Here is a big book with all of the rules for every unit in the game, along with a suggested point cost. Take whatever you want and figure it out yourself. Well, thanks but no thanks, I'll move on.
Squidbot wrote: I think the first paragraph is very important, specifically the word "allowing".
Considering how it might be possible to field anything together I really can't say how they will go . On a fun note, All star imperial anybody? Grabbing a Canoness Superior, Chapter Master, Inquisitor, a lord commissar, and putting them inside a team of terminators. Imperial All Stars a-gogo!
Squidbot wrote: I think the first paragraph is very important, specifically the word "allowing".
Considering how it might be possible to field anything together I really can't say how they will go . On a fun note, All star imperial anybody? Grabbing a Canoness Superior, Chapter Master, Inquisitor, a lord commissar, and putting them inside a team of terminators. Imperial All Stars a-gogo!
Even Unbound armies have to abide by the (new) Allies matrix.
Apocalypse already lets you field whatever the heck you want.
Neither of these are any issues for straight up 7e.
Squidbot wrote: I think the first paragraph is very important, specifically the word "allowing".
Considering how it might be possible to field anything together I really can't say how they will go . On a fun note, All star imperial anybody? Grabbing a Canoness Superior, Chapter Master, Inquisitor, a lord commissar, and putting them inside a team of terminators. Imperial All Stars a-gogo!
Even Unbound armies have to abide by the (new) Allies matrix.
Apocalypse already lets you field whatever the heck you want.
Neither of these are any issues for straight up 7e.
Darn it why ya' gotta stomp on my dreams? You do remind me of the possible change to allies. Wonder how significant it will be. I was more using the current BB rules (and the inquisitor to fit the canoness in)
Squidbot wrote: I think the first paragraph is very important, specifically the word "allowing".
Considering how it might be possible to field anything together I really can't say how they will go . On a fun note, All star imperial anybody? Grabbing a Canoness Superior, Chapter Master, Inquisitor, a lord commissar, and putting them inside a team of terminators. Imperial All Stars a-gogo!
Even Unbound armies have to abide by the (new) Allies matrix.
Apocalypse already lets you field whatever the heck you want.
Neither of these are any issues for straight up 7e.
Darn it why ya' gotta stomp on my dreams? You do remind me of the possible change to allies. Wonder how significant it will be. I was more using the current BB rules (and the inquisitor to fit the canoness in)
Only because my own dreams were crushed. I'm personally hoping the bonuses of BB tones down, while the matrix itself becomes a lot more lenient in terms of alliances. CSM/IG to represent LatD, for instance. Heck, Tyranids getting any sort of ally or bonus for not having allies at all would be really nice.
PhantomViper wrote: They mentioned that that happened during a playtesting game, but they never said that that option was not going to be in the final rules.
And if GW wastes playtest time testing things that are not going to be in the rules, then that explains a little bit of why their final product is such a load of garbage...
You do know play testing can determine if you need to exclude things from the rules or not, right?
Not if that exclusion is based solely of historical fluff reasons and not game balance ones, because that is the only practical difference here.
You are making the assumption that GW's playtesting is rigid and organized. They were playtesting a general rule, so did it really matter if the army using the rule was actually going to be eligible for it or not in the final write up? I sort of imagine it went this way:
Developer #1: Hey, I came up with this new psychic domain, lets go grab somebody from the White Dwarf studio in the basement and have them test it in whatever game they got going on!
Developer #2: Great idea! Then we can sod off and grab a pint and just have them tell us their results! One more playtest down WOOHOO!
30 minutes later:
Developer #1: Hey you, the funny lookin' guy with the glasses, here are some test rules for a new psychic power, go ahead and give it to whatever psycher you have in your army. What? You're playing Dark Angels and they would never use daemonology? DO YOU NOT KNOW WHO I AM??? Now do what I say and sod off! UNBELIEVABLE!
Developer #2: Yeah, you'd think these White Dwarf gits would jump at the chance to actually be involved in something important instead of takin' pretty pictures and printing press junkets!
Developer #1 (to the WDer): And yes, you can put it in your little article, now go on, play your game, and you can thank us later.
Hence my second statement that if GW's playtest process is anything even remotely like that then that partially explains why their finished product is garbage.
Playtesting a set of rules isn't just playing a game, it is indeed very far from it, it involves a whole lot of resetting pieces and trying out slightly different variations of rules, stats and even the players decisions themselves during the same testing session.
Squidbot wrote: I think the first paragraph is very important, specifically the word "allowing".
Considering how it might be possible to field anything together I really can't say how they will go . On a fun note, All star imperial anybody? Grabbing a Canoness Superior, Chapter Master, Inquisitor, a lord commissar, and putting them inside a team of terminators. Imperial All Stars a-gogo!
Even Unbound armies have to abide by the (new) Allies matrix.
Apocalypse already lets you field whatever the heck you want.
Neither of these are any issues for straight up 7e.
Darn it why ya' gotta stomp on my dreams? You do remind me of the possible change to allies. Wonder how significant it will be. I was more using the current BB rules (and the inquisitor to fit the canoness in)
Only because my own dreams were crushed. I'm personally hoping the bonuses of BB tones down, while the matrix itself becomes a lot more lenient in terms of alliances. CSM/IG to represent LatD, for instance. Heck, Tyranids getting any sort of ally or bonus for not having allies at all would be really nice.
I know it's not really how they used to work but I'd like at least desperate allies with IG for Nids. Justify it as the 6" being the chow zone.
Don't punch me in the feels there man... I once missed them so much I almost tried to make an updated LatD rulebook (group is just friends that like narrative games). Man I miss them...
Squidbot wrote: I think the first paragraph is very important, specifically the word "allowing".
Considering how it might be possible to field anything together I really can't say how they will go . On a fun note, All star imperial anybody? Grabbing a Canoness Superior, Chapter Master, Inquisitor, a lord commissar, and putting them inside a team of terminators. Imperial All Stars a-gogo!
Even Unbound armies have to abide by the (new) Allies matrix.
Apocalypse already lets you field whatever the heck you want.
Neither of these are any issues for straight up 7e.
Darn it why ya' gotta stomp on my dreams? You do remind me of the possible change to allies. Wonder how significant it will be. I was more using the current BB rules (and the inquisitor to fit the canoness in)
Only because my own dreams were crushed. I'm personally hoping the bonuses of BB tones down, while the matrix itself becomes a lot more lenient in terms of alliances. CSM/IG to represent LatD, for instance. Heck, Tyranids getting any sort of ally or bonus for not having allies at all would be really nice.
I know it's not really how they used to work but I'd like at least desperate allies with IG for Nids. Justify it as the 6" being the chow zone.
Don't punch me in the feels there man... I once missed them so much I almost tried to make an updated LatD rulebook (group is just friends that like narrative games). Man I miss them...
I know that feel, given that Genestealer Cult was my dreams being crushed :(
Obviously, the problem won't be in deal with unreasonable TFGs trying to make your gaming experience hell, they *still* won't get games in. The issues will be in the shades-of-grey areas when people come in with Unbound lists you feel are cheesy but they feel are not. I am worried about increasing levels of disagreement between players on the games they want to play that will lead to higher levels of dissatisfaction in the 40k gaming population.
+1
One reason for FOCs is that they limit taking cheesy TFG lists. You could clearly say, 'no, that's not legal' if they try to bring something weird to the table. Now, with Unbound, you have to army-lawyer every time you feel like not playing against someone, about why you feel your lists are not equally-enough matched
Anyways, lets see. 7th might be good, or it might be crap. Although, it should be the first priority of WD article to highlight that 'awesome newfound competitive balance' in their '7th highlights' article, if there was any..
I too suffered when genestealer cults got lost... so many models and conversions out the window... and its such an awesome list rules wize/fluff wize...
still have that nid codex too...
thank you for reminding me, I will now go cry in a corner.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.
You've seen the new rulebook in its entirety too then? What else is in it?
No, I am talking about the Unbound rules, which is the topic of the conversation you supposedly are joining.
On a positive note, with the new rules for a Psychic phase, plus the new daemonology powers, my Thousand Sons may have just become more interesting.
It would be a welcome change to see those aspiring sorcerers finally doing something useful ( or dying horribly to perils, but hey, better them than an actually important character.)
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.
You've seen the new rulebook in its entirety too then? What else is in it?
No, I am talking about the Unbound rules, which is the topic of the conversation you supposedly are joining.
Ive been in the thread since the WD was posted, I'm aware the conversation was about the Unbound rules, which havent been released in its entirety yet as far as I'm aware.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Try reading the last 10 pages then as the reasons have been explained already. Maybe in your neck of the woods gamers get together for tea and sing kumbaya around the campfire while exchanging friendship bracelets and sharing their inner most hopes and dreams for the grimdark future games about to be played but in other places you simply meet a stranger and agree to a game in one sentence. That stranger could have vastly different expectations of what that game will entail (or not entail) and a "buy everything" permissive as standard ruleset exacerbates that.
Eh, he just doesn't understand how the vast majority of 40k games are played at local game stores against an endless line of unreasonable strangers with whom every conversation becomes something akin to a nuclear arms treaty negotiation.
I mean, I can *barely* even agree to a points value with these unbending mystery men without creating ugly scenes in stores and fistfights in the alley.
I think this is deflecting the issue a bit.
Obviously, the problem won't be in deal with unreasonable TFGs trying to make your gaming experience hell, they *still* won't get games in. The issues will be in the shades-of-grey areas when people come in with Unbound lists you feel are cheesy but they feel are not. I am worried about increasing levels of disagreement between players on the games they want to play that will lead to higher levels of dissatisfaction in the 40k gaming population.
EDIT: geez I'm slow, the comment I was responding to is already a page behind!
Honestly, I read that and see nothing but air. Based on vague information, there may be a certain effect on the game, possibly leading to certain feelings, which may create other feelings and emotions in others...
That's what's worth complaining about for pages and pages?
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Try reading the last 10 pages then as the reasons have been explained already. Maybe in your neck of the woods gamers get together for tea and sing kumbaya around the campfire while exchanging friendship bracelets and sharing their inner most hopes and dreams for the grimdark future games about to be played but in other places you simply meet a stranger and agree to a game in one sentence. That stranger could have vastly different expectations of what that game will entail (or not entail) and a "buy everything" permissive as standard ruleset exacerbates that.
Eh, he just doesn't understand how the vast majority of 40k games are played at local game stores against an endless line of unreasonable strangers with whom every conversation becomes something akin to a nuclear arms treaty negotiation.
I mean, I can *barely* even agree to a points value with these unbending mystery men without creating ugly scenes in stores and fistfights in the alley.
I think this is deflecting the issue a bit.
Obviously, the problem won't be in deal with unreasonable TFGs trying to make your gaming experience hell, they *still* won't get games in. The issues will be in the shades-of-grey areas when people come in with Unbound lists you feel are cheesy but they feel are not. I am worried about increasing levels of disagreement between players on the games they want to play that will lead to higher levels of dissatisfaction in the 40k gaming population.
EDIT: geez I'm slow, the comment I was responding to is already a page behind!
Honestly, I read that and see nothing but air. Based on vague information, there may be a certain effect on the game, possibly leading to certain feelings, which may create other feelings and emotions in others...
That's what's worth complaining about for pages and pages?
Well yea, if we had all the information there might not be anything to complain about, best let them get it out of their system now so we can have nice conversations once the book actually comes out
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.
You've seen the new rulebook in its entirety too then? What else is in it?
No, I am talking about the Unbound rules, which is the topic of the conversation you supposedly are joining.
Ive been in the thread since the WD was posted, I'm aware the conversation was about the Unbound rules, which havent been released in its entirety yet as far as I'm aware.
Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.
I might not be a Nid player... but this is beautiful even if it is only made by fans. Thank you fr this, my Nid friend shall receive this glorious craft.
tarnish wrote: Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby. In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game! Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?
Try reading the last 10 pages then as the reasons have been explained already. Maybe in your neck of the woods gamers get together for tea and sing kumbaya around the campfire while exchanging friendship bracelets and sharing their inner most hopes and dreams for the grimdark future games about to be played but in other places you simply meet a stranger and agree to a game in one sentence. That stranger could have vastly different expectations of what that game will entail (or not entail) and a "buy everything" permissive as standard ruleset exacerbates that.
Eh, he just doesn't understand how the vast majority of 40k games are played at local game stores against an endless line of unreasonable strangers with whom every conversation becomes something akin to a nuclear arms treaty negotiation.
I mean, I can *barely* even agree to a points value with these unbending mystery men without creating ugly scenes in stores and fistfights in the alley.
I think this is deflecting the issue a bit.
Obviously, the problem won't be in deal with unreasonable TFGs trying to make your gaming experience hell, they *still* won't get games in. The issues will be in the shades-of-grey areas when people come in with Unbound lists you feel are cheesy but they feel are not. I am worried about increasing levels of disagreement between players on the games they want to play that will lead to higher levels of dissatisfaction in the 40k gaming population.
EDIT: geez I'm slow, the comment I was responding to is already a page behind!
Honestly, I read that and see nothing but air. Based on vague information, there may be a certain effect on the game, possibly leading to certain feelings, which may create other feelings and emotions in others...
That's what's worth complaining about for pages and pages?
Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.
Yes I've been on the internet before, I'm well aware at its capacity to grossly overreact to even the smallest bit of information for any given topic a loud vocal minority/majority is passionate about
Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.
Yes I've been on the internet before, I'm well aware at its capacity to grossly overreact to even the smallest bit of information for any given topic a loud vocal minority/majority is passionate about
Just like how the opposite side is grossly exaggerating other's complaints into some sort mindless rage?
Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.
Yes I've been on the internet before, I'm well aware at its capacity to grossly overreact to even the smallest bit of information for any given topic a loud vocal minority/majority is passionate about
Just like how the opposite side is grossly exaggerating other's complaints into some sort mindless rage?
Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.
Yes I've been on the internet before, I'm well aware at its capacity to grossly overreact to even the smallest bit of information for any given topic a loud vocal minority/majority is passionate about
Just like how the opposite side is grossly exaggerating other's complaints into some sort mindless rage?
Clearly neither side is getting anywhere in this.
No, neither side is.
How about them summoned daemons?
Come now. Some brilliant ideas came out of it such as GK becoming Lords of Change and Bloodthirsters
Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.
Yes I've been on the internet before, I'm well aware at its capacity to grossly overreact to even the smallest bit of information for any given topic a loud vocal minority/majority is passionate about
Just like how the opposite side is grossly exaggerating other's complaints into some sort mindless rage?
Clearly neither side is getting anywhere in this.
No, neither side is.
How about them summoned daemons?
I do think those could be cool. The whole Daemonology could prove to be an interesting discipline depending on how it is implemented. I do hope that if summoning daemons is added, that the rules for them will be included in the book, it'd be a pain to have to get the codex just for that.
I just wish DE could summon daemons Perhaps that may change by the time 7th comes out!
1. Didn't we all just pay $60 for a new rule book just last summer?
2. Are they releasing 7th before Orks which is still technically (by a month) a 4th edition Codex?
3. Unbound may still require Troops to hold objective even with the 36 new objectives. Still may need them for something
4. If not, I'd better get started on my dream army: nothing but Ork Kannonz: Str 8 AP 3 T7 4W, you can get 100 in a 2000 point list.
1. two years ago.
2. yes, sadly. i wanted orks to get a 6th ed dex
3. why bother with objectives if you can table your enemy?
4. pretty much, but like your example, i think monetary issues will prevent people coming with such broken armies that everyone fears unbound will yield.
One of the things that people seem to forget is that there are many times where GW includes rules just for the sake of having a framework.
How many official linked buildings are there? We have assault rules for that. Buildings other than the bastion? We have rules for that. Mysterious X has ALWAYS been optional, but if someone wanted to use it then they provided a framework. GW in general seems to be about giving you more OPTIONS in what you can do and providing a framework to do so.
I think of it as taking a little bit of a D and D unearthed Arcana angle. Here the alternate OPTIONS if you decide to use them we are providing rules to help make them work.
So now we know that there is an extra two daemon based lores. What if that is just providing the OPTION to work it into something you are doing. Instead of having to try and agree on how the rules should work they are removing that part from the process and just letting you play.
Same with unbound. Alright I want to just throw models on the table, how should we go about making this work? Well now GW is providing a framework of rules that you both have access to just get to playing instead of having to come up with it yourself.
It is better to give people more options and they can choose to restrict themselves rather than not have the options in the first place. I think for some people we are running into the issue of to many options and it is causing problems but never the less I think more freedom is better, even if not optimal, than less.
Sir Arun wrote: i think monetary issues will prevent people coming with such broken armies that everyone fears unbound will yield.
this is a very important point, in my view. Barring proxies, who would buy 100 ork kannonz? Or 10 riptides? 10 Heldrakes? Hundreds of Eldar jetbikes? very few people will, and you can simply say 'no' to them. From my part, I find unbound to be a very interesting addition.
Sir Arun wrote: i think monetary issues will prevent people coming with such broken armies that everyone fears unbound will yield.
this is a very important point, in my view. Barring proxies, who would buy 100 ork kannonz? Or 10 riptides? 10 Heldrakes? Hundreds of Eldar jetbikes? very few people will, and you can simply say 'no' to them. From my part, I find unbound to be a very interesting addition.
I can think of a half a dozen people off the top of my head in my area. There are people who have multiple armies that they paid over $2k JUST to have painted. It WILL happen.
I quite like the sound of Daemonology lores. Sure, some of the time it seems weird but often it could fit the fiction quite well. All depends on who ends up getting access to them, which we don't know yet.
Though I do have a sneaking suspicion it's all a scheme to sell more Daemon models and maybe the Codex...
I can absolutely believe GW is trying to make this edition one that requires lots of purchases to "keep up". Mandatory $100 rulebook, super-heavy rules and unbound rules to encourage everyone to buy the expensive kits and super-cool new Daemonology disciplines that require mass-purchases of Daemon models to use.
After reading the news bit...it seems that they are doing Warahmmer Fantasy.....IN SPAAACE.
Really, I'd jsut play Warhammer Fantasy is I want % armies, magic phase, all movement in one phase and the like..
also..anyone can call daemons?...so what's the point of having a Chaos army if my guard can pop a Daemon without even forcing that much? Or my Marines? Or sisters? Or Orks, or Tau, or Eldar?
Sir Arun wrote: i think monetary issues will prevent people coming with such broken armies that everyone fears unbound will yield.
this is a very important point, in my view. Barring proxies, who would buy 100 ork kannonz? Or 10 riptides? 10 Heldrakes? Hundreds of Eldar jetbikes? very few people will, and you can simply say 'no' to them. From my part, I find unbound to be a very interesting addition.
Wizards of The Coast believed the same thing when they printed Black Lotus, Time Walk, and the Moxen - that their rarity and cost to acquire would prevent people from abusing them.
Spoiler:
It didn't work.
I respect your right to play unbound games or 40k games however you like with your friends. Personally, unless it's a pre-planned game with a friend, I'll be saying no to any unbound game for the same reasons I say no to anyone who suggests we just fly toys around the table making pew pew noises and knocking models over randomly for 2 hours (except my nephew - he gets a pass).
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Inquisitor Jex wrote: After reading the news bit...it seems that they are doing Warahmmer Fantasy.....IN SPAAACE.
Really, I'd jsut play Warhammer Fantasy is I want % armies, magic phase, all movement in one phase and the like..
also..anyone can call daemons?...so what's the point of having a Chaos army if my guard can pop a Daemon without even forcing that much? Or my Marines? Or sisters? Or Orks, or Tau, or Eldar?
40k has always been Fantasy in space.
Also, none of the other stuff you're worried about has been confirmed, other than the Psychic Phase, which really doesn't sound that bad and previous editions of 40k have had one.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Or if the rules change, or if the new objectives are different, or if these cards have a lot of OTT ones that can be maximized by gamers. There are a lot of what ifs. Heck, we don't even know what allies will be.
Inquisitor Jex wrote: After reading the news bit...it seems that they are doing Warahmmer Fantasy.....IN SPAAACE.
Really, I'd jsut play Warhammer Fantasy is I want % armies, magic phase, all movement in one phase and the like..
also..anyone can call daemons?...so what's the point of having a Chaos army if my guard can pop a Daemon without even forcing that much? Or my Marines? Or sisters? Or Orks, or Tau, or Eldar?
40k has always been Fantasy in space.
Also, none of the other stuff you're worried about has been confirmed, other than the Psychic Phase, which really doesn't sound that bad and previous editions of 40k have had one.
Sure, Fantasy in space, but the system now and for a few edtions was different enough to NOT be a copy/paste
Well, in the new pciture, with the side line text, if a Dark angel char can call forth a Daemon of khorne (seemingly willingly) then 'pretty sure it's soemthing alot of armies ('least the marine ones) can take...
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Except if they table you.
Absolutely no difference then right now when Beaststar or Jetstar or Centstar, etc... can table you.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Except if they table you.
Absolutely no difference then right now when Beaststar or Jetstar or Centstar, etc... can table you.
Ah so the answer is to break things even more than they already are. *nods head* I like where we are going. Also, I am ashamed. No seerstar or screamerstar? Come on lad!
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Or if the rules change, or if the new objectives are different, or if these cards have a lot of OTT ones that can be maximized by gamers. There are a lot of what ifs. Heck, we don't even know what allies will be.
Or if the rules change and playing Battle forge armies means +2 to sieze, auto-extending the game, or not losing if you don't have anything on the table. There are lots of what ifs. See how easy it is to play the hypothetical game without knowing the rules.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
This is a really, REALLY, weird argument that just keeps getting repeated in this thread. I'd really like it if people elaborated more on what they mean.
Let me try and answer your question with a question:
What's the difference between getting shot in the face with a pistol and the current small pocket knife that is stabbing you in the leg right now?
One is very annoying and a lot of people would like it to stop - and the response is much, much worse.
DarthDiggler wrote: Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Do you really believe that they won't have ways to win a game? Even if that were true, people will, instead of taking an army completely full of broken madness will just take an army *almost* completely full of broken madness + whatever the best cheapest scoring unit is.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Except if they table you.
Absolutely no difference then right now when Beaststar or Jetstar or Centstar, etc... can table you.
Ah so the answer is to break things even more than they already are. *nods head* I like where we are going. Also, I am ashamed. No seerstar or screamerstar? Come on lad!
How do you know things will be more broken? You are letting the fear in your imagination get the better of you. There are lots of people who think the game is plenty broken right now.
gardeth wrote: I can think of a half a dozen people off the top of my head in my area. There are people who have multiple armies that they paid over $2k JUST to have painted. It WILL happen.
But buying dozens/hundreds of the same MODEL (non-squad)? To the point of covering the table with them? I don't think the majority of players will do that. Some will do, of course. Are the number of players with this disposable cash (US$ 2k for painting) so big?
Cryptek of Awesome wrote: Wizards of The Coast believed the same thing when they printed Black Lotus, Time Walk, and the Moxen - that their rarity and cost to acquire would prevent people from abusing them.
Spoiler:
It didn't work.
I respect your right to play unbound games or 40k games however you like with your friends. Personally, unless it's a pre-planned game with a friend, I'll be saying no to any unbound game for the same reasons I say no to anyone who suggests we just fly toys around the table making pew pew noises and knocking models over randomly for 2 hours (except my nephew - he gets a pass).
But cards are much more easy to come by - be it logistics, price and tourneys (Magic is bigger than 40k, isn't it?). It's harder to grab 10 of the same elite model, paint it and come all fancy smiles trying to get a game.
Well, as you said, I too respect your right to play anyway you wish. I just think this doomsaying about unbound armies being the end of 40k is a bit silly, when we didn't even see the rules yet.
Cryptek of Awesome wrote: Let me try and answer your question with a question:
What's the difference between getting shot in the face with a pistol and the current small pocket knife that is stabbing you in the leg right now?
I think a better comparison would be “What is the difference between getting shot in the face with a bazooka or with a flamethrower?”. It is totally different!
We don't know many many things. All we know at the moment is that there is the possibility to play armies in at least some games without the FoC at some cost and that there is a power that means you end up with a daemon on the board. There may be a high chance that the daemon goes crazy and attacks your own force, or a 5/6 chance that the psyker just dies with no deamon.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Except if they table you.
Absolutely no difference then right now when Beaststar or Jetstar or Centstar, etc... can table you.
Ah so the answer is to break things even more than they already are. *nods head* I like where we are going. Also, I am ashamed. No seerstar or screamerstar? Come on lad!
How do you know things will be more broken? You are letting the fear in your imagination get the better of you. There are lots of people who think the game is plenty broken right now.
Because it is plenty broken and knowing GW's balancing methods, it can only get worse.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
This is a really, REALLY, weird argument that just keeps getting repeated in this thread. I'd really like it if people elaborated more on what they mean.
Let me try and answer your question with a question:
What's the difference between getting shot in the face with a pistol and the current small pocket knife that is stabbing you in the leg right now?
One is very annoying and a lot of people would like it to stop - and the response is much, much worse.
DarthDiggler wrote: Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Do you really believe that they won't have ways to win a game? Even if that were true, people will, instead of taking an army completely full of broken madness will just take an army *almost* completely full of broken madness + whatever the best cheapest scoring unit is.
You are assuming unbound becomes a pistol shot in the face. You have no proof of that at all. You are taking a snippet of a part of a 7th edition rule and applying it to the full context of 6th edition rules. That's crazy. Go take a loof at some of the Apoc special rules an army can get for playing down in points. Battle forged armies are getting some stuff to. Look there.
An unbound army the way it is portrayed in this thread will have NO CHANCE of winning. I haven't seen a hypothetical unbound list with scoring units yet presented. Take a few of those Riptides away and put in some kroot. The Blood Angels can, RIGHT NOW, put together a legal FOC lists with zero scoring units. That's right now in this game right here. So yes GW can easily make it so 10 Riptides have no chance of winning the game.
Tabling is not winning. Every major tourney requires an army to complete the mission even if a tabling occurs.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Except if they table you.
Assuming you don't get something like destroyed units enter Ongoing Reserves requiring them to have to table an entire army in a single turn to win.
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
This is a really, REALLY, weird argument that just keeps getting repeated in this thread. I'd really like it if people elaborated more on what they mean.
Let me try and answer your question with a question:
What's the difference between getting shot in the face with a pistol and the current small pocket knife that is stabbing you in the leg right now?
One is very annoying and a lot of people would like it to stop - and the response is much, much worse.
DarthDiggler wrote: Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Do you really believe that they won't have ways to win a game? Even if that were true, people will, instead of taking an army completely full of broken madness will just take an army *almost* completely full of broken madness + whatever the best cheapest scoring unit is.
You are assuming unbound becomes a pistol shot in the face. You have no proof of that at all. You are taking a snippet of a part of a 7th edition rule and applying it to the full context of 6th edition rules. That's crazy. Go take a loof at some of the Apoc special rules an army can get for playing down in points. Battle forged armies are getting some stuff to. Look there.
An unbound army the way it is portrayed in this thread will have NO CHANCE of winning. I haven't seen a hypothetical unbound list with scoring units yet presented. Take a few of those Riptides away and put in some kroot. The Blood Angels can, RIGHT NOW, put together a legal FOC lists with zero scoring units. That's right now in this game right here. So yes GW can easily make it so 10 Riptides have no chance of winning the game.
Tabling is not winning. Every major tourney requires an army to complete the mission even if a tabling occurs.
How does one complete a mission if one is tabled and how would this work for pick-up games?
Besides that, I've seen some list ideas with scoring troops. One prime example is MSU spam. Besides that, now you are leaping to definitives which is just as flawed as any others here.
"An unbound army the way it is portrayed in this thread will have NO CHANCE of winning." Go on how you know this for sure? Especially when you just went on about how, "You have no proof of that at all." (granted Crypt had the same problem but two wrongs makes no rights and yada yada)
DarthDiggler wrote: What's the difference between unbound armies wrecking face and the current small list of uber-deathstar armies wrecking face right now?
Oh yeah the Unbound armies don't have any scoring units and can't win a game.
Except if they table you.
Assuming you don't get something like destroyed units enter Ongoing Reserves requiring them to have to table an entire army in a single turn to win.
Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!
On a side note, if I ever meet somebody that is spamming MSU (even if it isn't for victory), I'm not playing them. My daemon army isn't something you want to have to roll a d6 for every unit
StarTrotter wrote: Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!
Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.
Ya know, I keep thinking that GW really needs some PR people to help out here. Then I look at 99 pages of discussion regarding mostly rumors of a new version of the game and I realize that they don't need them.
I guess that maybe GW believes that bad publicity is better than no publicity.
StarTrotter wrote: Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!
Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.
Ah whoops. Still, I guess it could be a partial solution to Nid problems with leadership and might even make Tervigons a bit more worth it to boot!
DarthDiggler wrote: You are assuming unbound becomes a pistol shot in the face. You have no proof of that at all. You are taking a snippet of a part of a 7th edition rule and applying it to the full context of 6th edition rules. That's crazy. Go take a loof at some of the Apoc special rules an army can get for playing down in points. Battle forged armies are getting some stuff to. Look there.
An unbound army the way it is portrayed in this thread will have NO CHANCE of winning. I haven't seen a hypothetical unbound list with scoring units yet presented. Take a few of those Riptides away and put in some kroot. The Blood Angels can, RIGHT NOW, put together a legal FOC lists with zero scoring units. That's right now in this game right here. So yes GW can easily make it so 10 Riptides have no chance of winning the game.
Tabling is not winning. Every major tourney requires an army to complete the mission even if a tabling occurs.
Have we seen anything that indicates what, exactly, a "scoring unit" is?
It's not that long ago that pretty much everything could claim objectives (any squad above half it's starting size, undamaged vehicles, etc.).
StarTrotter wrote: Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!
Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.
Ah whoops. Still, I guess it could be a partial solution to Nid problems with leadership and might even make Tervigons a bit more worth it to boot!
The other thing I could think of is Battle-Forged armies would get free USRs (like the veteran things in Kill Teams) so you could designate, say 1 unit for every 1k to have a free rule like Monster Hunters or Tank Hunters or something along those lines.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Saldiven wrote: Have we seen anything that indicates what, exactly, a "scoring unit" is?
It's not that long ago that pretty much everything could claim objectives (any squad above half it's starting size, undamaged vehicles, etc.).
I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.
streamdragon wrote: I know that feel, given that Genestealer Cult was my dreams being crushed :(
There are other ways of doing it, you know. I've run mine as Orks. Sixth edition brought new possibilities, such as IG-Orks and IG-Daemons. The former does a good job repping the Patriarch (warboss) and hybrids (boyz), while the latter works well for the Purestrains (daemonettes). I tweaked mine to run as Orks-IG, but right now I really like the IG-Daemon combo and might re-orient them around that.
StarTrotter wrote: Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!
Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.
Ah whoops. Still, I guess it could be a partial solution to Nid problems with leadership and might even make Tervigons a bit more worth it to boot!
The other thing I could think of is Battle-Forged armies would get free USRs (like the veteran things in Kill Teams) so you could designate, say 1 unit for every 1k to have a free rule like Monster Hunters or Tank Hunters or something along those lines.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Saldiven wrote: Have we seen anything that indicates what, exactly, a "scoring unit" is?
It's not that long ago that pretty much everything could claim objectives (any squad above half it's starting size, undamaged vehicles, etc.).
I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.
I dunno, all this new stuff makes me want to flip open a Fantasy Battle rulebook, the 3.5 edition codex, and the 2nd edition 40k rulebook as that seems to be where many of their ideas are returning from.
So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?
So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?
Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.
So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?
Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.
Dropping FOC has nothing to do with missions though.
The old set of missions remains; presumably scoring units for those missions will be unchanged. (Troops only; FA and HS in their respective missions)
The new set of missions uses objective cards; we don't know whether troops will be the only units capable of completing these missions. Entirely possible they focus on the general, not the unit, and so Unbound armies can still complete these missions.
So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?
Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.
Dropping FOC has nothing to do with missions though.
The old set of missions remains; presumably scoring units for those missions will be unchanged. (Troops only; FA and HS in their respective missions)
The new set of missions uses objective cards; we don't know whether troops will be the only units capable of completing these missions. Entirely possible they focus on the general, not the unit, and so Unbound armies can still complete these missions.
That being my entire point. My original post was that the assertion that Unbound armies couldn't win because they didn't have scoring units was silly because we don't know what scoring units are going to be. Then the response came in that this particulay person didn't think scoring units would change. My sarcastic response indicated that with all the other changes, why shouldn't scoring units change, too?
So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?
Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.
Dropping FOC has nothing to do with missions though.
The old set of missions remains; presumably scoring units for those missions will be unchanged. (Troops only; FA and HS in their respective missions)
The new set of missions uses objective cards; we don't know whether troops will be the only units capable of completing these missions. Entirely possible they focus on the general, not the unit, and so Unbound armies can still complete these missions.
That being my entire point. My original post was that the assertion that Unbound armies couldn't win because they didn't have scoring units was silly because we don't know what scoring units are going to be. Then the response came in that this particulay person didn't think scoring units would change. My sarcastic response indicated that with all the other changes, why shouldn't scoring units change, too?
I was agreeing with you!
My suspicion is that the new missions won't be scored using the same "whoever holds the most at the end" method we see in the current missions. From the sound of "drawing new cards as you complete missions" and being able to "discard missions you don't want/like", it sounds like you build points as you go, rather than things being "all-or-nothing" like current objectives/relics.
So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
I could be wrong but the only new development is a passage in the WD describing Ezekiel of the DA summoning a Bloodthirster to win a close game at the end.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
The only real new thing is the part mentioning daemons on the right corner was revealed (it's on the op now) describing how they decided to play a game where Ezekiel became a Bloodthirster and slaughtered a Hive Tyrant.
Given the what the new card-based objective system sounds like at the moment, it wouldn't be hard to make any unit a scoring unit & ensure Unbound can win without relying on tabling.
Card 1: Troops choice holds an objective. 1 VP.
Card 2: Destroy any enemy FA choice. 1 VP.
Card 3: Use a HS unit to destroy an enemy HS unit. 1 VP.
etc.
If you can discard duff choices, shouldn't be too hard to let an Unbound army gather VPs when there are 36 objectives to choose from.
Preemptive disclaimer: not saying the above is how it will work, just how it could.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
The only real new thing is the part mentioning daemons on the right corner was revealed (it's on the op now) describing how they decided to play a game where Ezekiel became a Bloodthirster and slaughtered a Hive Tyrant.
A Dark Angel Master Librarian choosing to summon a Greater Daemon of Khorne. So Chaos is literally becoming an accessory to other armies in order to sell new models. Great, just great.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
If you read the sidebar that was posted about Ezekiel you might have noticed that they were saying that supposedly this edition was play tested. However, the real question then is: does "play tested" mean the same thing to them as it does most of the rest of the gaming world? Only time will tell.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
The only real new thing is the part mentioning daemons on the right corner was revealed (it's on the op now) describing how they decided to play a game where Ezekiel became a Bloodthirster and slaughtered a Hive Tyrant.
A Dark Angel Master Librarian choosing to summon a Greater Daemon of Khorne. So Chaos is literally becoming an accessory to other armies in order to sell new models. Great, just great.
It's not confirmed that everybody will get to summon. As others have mentioned, WD isn't exactly known for being loyal. I do have my hunch that they weren't breaking rules for this though but until it's confirmed... And to be realistic Chaos has always been an accessory. Chaos guard, CSM, chaos orks. Heck, there used to be chaos genestealers.
1. Didn't we all just pay $60 for a new rule book just last summer?
2. Are they releasing 7th before Orks which is still technically (by a month) a 4th edition Codex?
3. Unbound may still require Troops to hold objective even with the 36 new objectives. Still may need them for something
4. If not, I'd better get started on my dream army: nothing but Ork Kannonz: Str 8 AP 3 T7 4W, you can get 100 in a 2000 point list.
1. two years ago.
2. yes, sadly. i wanted orks to get a 6th ed dex
3. why bother with objectives if you can table your enemy?
4. pretty much, but like your example, i think monetary issues will prevent people coming with such broken armies that everyone fears unbound will yield.
2 summers ago, you're right, I was training a lot that summer/fall so I didn't get to play much :(
As far as the 100 Kannonz go, Orks have a loooooong tradition of kustom built models and I'd go the 51% GW model route.
As for the 200 grots, I admit I'd have to buy/proxy some of them, don't quite have that many
So many Kannonz! Hell, throw some Lobbas and Zzap guns around just for flavor.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
If you read the sidebar that was posted about Ezekiel you might have noticed that they were saying that supposedly this edition was play tested. However, the real question then is: does "play tested" mean the same thing to them as it does most of the rest of the gaming world? Only time will tell.
I pretty sure playtesting in this context was a joke. What I got out of that snippet was "The Dark Angels would never summon demons to win, so of course Ezekiel would only do it for 'Research Purposes and Playtesting'" *wink* *wink*
So prepare your bodies for loyalists summoning greater demons.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
If you read the sidebar that was posted about Ezekiel you might have noticed that they were saying that supposedly this edition was play tested. However, the real question then is: does "play tested" mean the same thing to them as it does most of the rest of the gaming world? Only time will tell.
I pretty sure playtesting in this context was a joke. What I got out of that snippet was "The Dark Angels would never summon demons to win, so of course Ezekiel would only do it for 'Research Purposes and Playtesting'" *wink* *wink*
So prepare your bodies for loyalists summoning greater demons.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
If you read the sidebar that was posted about Ezekiel you might have noticed that they were saying that supposedly this edition was play tested. However, the real question then is: does "play tested" mean the same thing to them as it does most of the rest of the gaming world? Only time will tell.
I pretty sure playtesting in this context was a joke. What I got out of that snippet was "The Dark Angels would never summon demons to win, so of course Ezekiel would only do it for 'Research Purposes and Playtesting'" *wink* *wink*
So prepare your bodies for loyalists summoning greater demons.
Ulcis wrote: Given the what the new card-based objective system sounds like at the moment, it wouldn't be hard to make any unit a scoring unit & ensure Unbound can win without relying on tabling.
Card 1: Troops choice holds an objective. 1 VP.
Card 2: Destroy any enemy FA choice. 1 VP.
Card 3: Use a HS unit to destroy an enemy HS unit. 1 VP.
etc.
If you can discard duff choices, shouldn't be too hard to let an Unbound army gather VPs when there are 36 objectives to choose from.
Preemptive disclaimer: not saying the above is how it will work, just how it could.
From the wording in the WD I think you draw a card then draw another when you complete the objective in your hand. Just more randomness in the game is all but at least I won't have to roll more darn dice heh
HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?
I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.
Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.
Grunt_For_Christ wrote: So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?
On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.
How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.
If you read the sidebar that was posted about Ezekiel you might have noticed that they were saying that supposedly this edition was play tested. However, the real question then is: does "play tested" mean the same thing to them as it does most of the rest of the gaming world? Only time will tell.
I pretty sure playtesting in this context was a joke. What I got out of that snippet was "The Dark Angels would never summon demons to win, so of course Ezekiel would only do it for 'Research Purposes and Playtesting'" *wink* *wink*
So prepare your bodies for loyalists summoning greater demons.
Honestly, the more I think about Unbound lists, the more apparent it is to me this is a way to boost sales. I know personally, when it comes time for me to buy something new, or I get an itch to spend money, I ask myself "Self, do you really need a 4th unit of that type? You can only ever play with three in a standard FOC." At which point I realize that I probably don't need a fourth A-barge for my necrons or squad of deathmarks or something else.
Now with unbound lists, I can theoretically buy more stuff I didn't need before because I was limited. Now there is no pesky FOC to hold us back. I can finally not feel guilty taking a monolith that I modeled to light up with LEDs because of my compulsory three A-barges that the monolith would prevent.
GW is only helping people with good impulse control to relax their wallets and spend that hard-earned money on models they didn't need but can now suddenly use.
Idolator wrote: HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?
I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.
Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.
Why don't you just play the edition that you prefer?
Seems like in a group of friends you could just stick with the ruleset that brought you together.
Idolator wrote: HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?
I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.
Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.
Why don't you just play the edition that you prefer?
Seems like in a group of friends you could just stick with the ruleset that brought you together.
easysauce wrote: why do people think battle forged and unbound are meant to play against each other...
they are not, and wont, its like normal 40k vs apoc, it will never happen unless you and your opponent want it to happen.
to the guy claiming no tournament lets you win via tabling:
WTF.... everysingle tournament I have seen lets you do this.. every.
single.
one.
If they are not meant to be played against one another, then why is there a bonus for taking battle forged? So both players playing battle forged armies can have a bonus against each other? That makes zero sense.
Idolator wrote: HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?
I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.
Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.
Why don't you just play the edition that you prefer?
Seems like in a group of friends you could just stick with the ruleset that brought you together.
That works for a while, but when new codicies and units come out you either have to retrofit them to work with the older edition you are playing, make up entirely new rules, or ignore the new stuff all together. At a certain point that becomes work and the "game" you are playing starts to look less like a leisure activity and more like a chore.
Why don't you just play the edition that you prefer?
Seems like in a group of friends you could just stick with the ruleset that brought you together.
You sir deserve and EXALT! My group will more then likely stay at 6th edition, our codecs match it and we have all we need to continue in a not so awful edition when compared to the snippets we've seen from 7th....
Idolator wrote: HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?
I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.
Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.
Why don't you just play the edition that you prefer?
Seems like in a group of friends you could just stick with the ruleset that brought you together.
That works for a while, but when new codicies and units come out you either have to retrofit them to work with the older edition you are playing, make up entirely new rules, or ignore the new stuff all together. At a certain point that becomes work and the "game" you are playing starts to look less like a leisure activity and more like a chore.
Idolator wrote: HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?
I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.
Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.
I'm sure there are other games you'll find, might I offer a suggestion:
Spoiler:
Seriously though. You've had a discussion over a few scanned WD pages without seeing hide nor hair of actual implementation. It's one thing when you have full or partial rules leaks, but we don't even have that. We have a few designer notes with no real foundation or context to it.
itsNot2ndEd wrote: Am i really the only one able to read into that white dwarf section was saying, and see that they were clearly just having fun?
They weren't implying that DA had access to Malefic.
They simply wanted to try out Malefic and so he used the models he was currently playing, a DA dude.
Rocket Science ?
Now then, the reason I have doubts to your claims being so is.... why would Malific be claimed to "change the future of war altogether - it enables psykers to summon he fell denizens of the Warp to do their bidding on the battlefield! Beware, however, for if you are not Daemonspawn yourself, the cost may be high..." Now then I ask, what would the point of this statement be if the only factions allowed to use it were CSM and Chaos Daemons? How would this "change the future of war altogether" especially since it it were just CSM and Chaos Daemons, it's just codices of chaos before 4th edition came. Why overstate a measly two codices within a game of over a dozen? Along with that, why go on about how it enables psykers to summon daemons if the only ones that would be capable of it would be the heralds, greater daemons, and DP of all CD along with one sorcerer? That's not really that many psykers really and the only ones that would suffer negative repercussions of the spell "the cost may be high..." is... the chaos sorcerer and Ahriman. Beware the single army that must suffer additional negative repercussions ooooo!
The only realy answer is that it's not just them. IG and the Inquisition maybe? Yet that still isn't that much. That's why I have a feeling it's not that simple. The only armies that have psykers are SM armies, CSM, IG, the Inquisition, Eldar, and CD. Tau, DE, Necrons, and SoB all lack them whilst Tyranids are not permitted to use the spells at all.
I'm not saying it's definitive... it's really just pulling ideas out of... places unmentioned and theorycrafting but it is very odd nonetheless.
Why don't you just play the edition that you prefer?
Seems like in a group of friends you could just stick with the ruleset that brought you together.
You sir deserve and EXALT! My group will more then likely stay at 6th edition, our codecs match it and we have all we need to continue in a not so awful edition when compared to the snippets we've seen from 7th....
Cheers
I'm likely sticking with 6th. Some of the concepts from the 7th rumors sound interesting, but not $100 interesting...
streamdragon wrote: Seriously though. You've had a discussion over a few scanned WD pages without seeing hide nor hair of actual implementation. It's one thing when you have full or partial rules leaks, but we don't even have that. We have a few designer notes with no real foundation or context to it.
This is where I stand on this too. Without the full spread of data I am loathe to draw conclusions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
StarTrotter wrote: Now then, the reason I have doubts to your claims being so is.... why would Malific be claimed to "change the future of war altogether - it enables psykers to summon he fell denizens of the Warp to do their bidding on the battlefield! Beware, however, for if you are not Daemonspawn yourself, the cost may be high..." Now then I ask, what would the point of this statement be if the only factions allowed to use it were CSM and Chaos Daemons?
Inquisition perhaps? Tools so you can play a Renegade chapter? Hell they could give the options to everyone intending it to be used one way only for the player base to run off and do the exact opposite (as we tend to do).
streamdragon wrote: Seriously though. You've had a discussion over a few scanned WD pages without seeing hide nor hair of actual implementation. It's one thing when you have full or partial rules leaks, but we don't even have that. We have a few designer notes with no real foundation or context to it.
This is where I stand on this too. Without the full spread of data I am loathe to draw conclusions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
StarTrotter wrote: Now then, the reason I have doubts to your claims being so is.... why would Malific be claimed to "change the future of war altogether - it enables psykers to summon he fell denizens of the Warp to do their bidding on the battlefield! Beware, however, for if you are not Daemonspawn yourself, the cost may be high..." Now then I ask, what would the point of this statement be if the only factions allowed to use it were CSM and Chaos Daemons?
Inquisition perhaps? Tools so you can play a Renegade chapter? Hell they could give the options to everyone intending it to be used one way only for the player base to run off and do the exact opposite (as we tend to do).
Actually edited the Inquisition in. As per Renegade chapters. Nonsense! When you become Chaos you are required to become weaker and give up your grav guns, thunder hammers, land raider variants, and more at the door! It's the first tep to becoming a renegade
I'm leaning on them probably just handing it to almost all psykers bar Eldar. Plus I'd be sad if the only faction that had to suffer drawbacks to summoning to be CSM and that armies could just say yo I got psykers time to wreck yo' army.
StarTrotter wrote: Actually edited the Inquisition in. As per Renegade chapters. Nonsense! When you become Chaos you are required to become weaker and give up your grav guns, thunder hammers, land raider variants, and more at the door! It's the first tep to becoming a renegade
Tell that to the guy who made the WD Daily a few years ago with the Skyrar's Dark Wolves who used the Space Wolves codex.
StarTrotter wrote: Actually edited the Inquisition in. As per Renegade chapters. Nonsense! When you become Chaos you are required to become weaker and give up your grav guns, thunder hammers, land raider variants, and more at the door! It's the first tep to becoming a renegade
Tell that to the guy who made the WD Daily a few years ago with the Skyrar's Dark Wolves who used the Space Wolves codex.
Weeeeell at least he picked a rather Khornate army
StarTrotter wrote: Actually edited the Inquisition in. As per Renegade chapters. Nonsense! When you become Chaos you are required to become weaker and give up your grav guns, thunder hammers, land raider variants, and more at the door! It's the first tep to becoming a renegade
Tell that to the guy who made the WD Daily a few years ago with the Skyrar's Dark Wolves who used the Space Wolves codex.
Weeeeell at least he picked a rather Khornate army
And the people who do Thousand Sons (typically the Pre-Heresy Variant) using the Grey Knights book?
My main armies are Orks and Khorne Daemons, and I have a bunch of Orks riding bloodcrushers etc. The idea of allowing the former to summon the latter sounds hilarious
StarTrotter wrote: Actually edited the Inquisition in. As per Renegade chapters. Nonsense! When you become Chaos you are required to become weaker and give up your grav guns, thunder hammers, land raider variants, and more at the door! It's the first tep to becoming a renegade
Tell that to the guy who made the WD Daily a few years ago with the Skyrar's Dark Wolves who used the Space Wolves codex.
Weeeeell at least he picked a rather Khornate army
And the people who do Thousand Sons (typically the Pre-Heresy Variant) using the Grey Knights book?
I-I've never t-thought of d-doing that u-until I have enough money and FW releases them in a r-rulebook... n-nope
Back when I started playing I had to wait for the first army list to be written. You could take anything you wanted and they gave you rules for making up your own vehicles, characters and robots. Rogue Trader was broken, and you simply had to house rule stuff. I still have fun with it now.
Dakkamite wrote: My main armies are Orks and Khorne Daemons, and I have a bunch of Orks riding bloodcrushers etc. The idea of allowing the former to summon the latter sounds hilarious
You next need Bloodletters riding either orks or squigs
All Edition.
I'm personally hoping the bonuses of BB tones down, while the matrix itself becomes a lot more lenient in terms of alliances. 
