From GW's perspective, they don't appear to be if the rumored load out is correct. Frankly, I can even see their point of view.
The Raptors/Warp Talon duel kit comes with 1 Chaos Powersword arm, 1 Chaos Powerfist arm, 5 Chaos Chainsword arms, and 5 pairs of highly mutated claw arms. In their mind (and I'm sure the assembly instructions), the first 3 are for non/lightly-mutated Raptors (3 choices of melee weapon for the Champion) and the last is for the highly-mutated Warp Talons.
So given GW's elastic, but more and more consistent, only what's in the box (or designed to be shared) datasheets, I totally see why Raptor Champions don't have Warp Talon (lightning or whatever the call them in the new codex) Claws is completely consistent with their direction on these thinks.
I'm not saying it is the best way to go. I'm saying it makes sense given the way they are doing things. Bringing this up time and time again is like railing against the ocean thinking it will stop the tide.
Memnoch wrote: So tbis seems to have gotten messy and negative.
Is there anything exciting about the ciodex rumours so far to look forward to? (Other than getting Daemons back)
So far it's just a matter of waiting.
I spotted a picture of this month's White Dwarf. The last page says: "Next Issue: World Eaters update!"
This would be the update to allow people to take Khorne Berzerkers and such until they get their own Codex. That White Dwarf would be due out mid-June.
GW has put out a few White Dwarfs with rules ahead of codex releases (Craftworld: Altansar, ahead of the Aeldari Codex).
In other words, that puts the timeframe of the Codex release anywhere between the 28th of May at the earliest, to the end of June.
Considering that we've just gone an entire week without any "hype", I'd say it's likely to be later rather than sooner. Especially since all of the current hype is being directed at HH. CSM may be after HH after all.
Nah. HH is the long-build-up of a new edition of what they hope to be a core game. We're going to be getting hype every day for it until release, even through other things coming out, like the Sylvaneth vs Skaven box set, Chaos Marines, and the rest of the Ash Wastes stuff they revealed. I'd be surprised if 30k is out before end of June.
Gert wrote:Much as I am loathe to weigh in on this neverending misery, only one pair of the claws are mutated, the rest are just Chaos lightning claws.
Yup. Though I'd say it's two "mutated" sets (the ones with three fingers per claw) and three "un-mutated". But that really doesn't matter, because Raptors are known to suffer from mutation. Most of the Bleeding Eyes could barely talk or walk upright. And if anyone remembers the previous set of Raptor models? Well, tell me that those guys looked "pure". Yeah, that explanation doesn't hold water.
Memnoch wrote: So tbis seems to have gotten messy and negative.
Is there anything exciting about the ciodex rumours so far to look forward to? (Other than getting Daemons back)
So far it's just a matter of waiting.
I spotted a picture of this month's White Dwarf. The last page says: "Next Issue: World Eaters update!"
This would be the update to allow people to take Khorne Berzerkers and such until they get their own Codex. That White Dwarf would be due out mid-June.
GW has put out a few White Dwarfs with rules ahead of codex releases (Craftworld: Altansar, ahead of the Aeldari Codex).
In other words, that puts the timeframe of the Codex release anywhere between the 28th of May at the earliest, to the end of June.
Considering that we've just gone an entire week without any "hype", I'd say it's likely to be later rather than sooner. Especially since all of the current hype is being directed at HH. CSM may be after HH after all.
Nah. HH is the long-build-up of a new edition of what they hope to be a core game. We're going to be getting hype every day for it until release, even through other things coming out, like the Sylvaneth vs Skaven box set, Chaos Marines, and the rest of the Ash Wastes stuff they revealed. I'd be surprised if 30k is out before end of June.
Well, here's hoping that you're right, and I'm wrong.
Gert wrote:Much as I am loathe to weigh in on this neverending misery, only one pair of the claws are mutated, the rest are just Chaos lightning claws.
Yup. Though I'd say it's two "mutated" sets (the ones with three fingers per claw) and three "un-mutated". But that really doesn't matter, because Raptors are known to suffer from mutation. Most of the Bleeding Eyes could barely talk or walk upright. And if anyone remembers the previous set of Raptor models? Well, tell me that those guys looked "pure". Yeah, that explanation doesn't hold water.
I'll be honest I read the Bleeding Eyes as Raptors who were on the cusp of becoming Warp Talons.
Gert wrote:Much as I am loathe to weigh in on this neverending misery, only one pair of the claws are mutated, the rest are just Chaos lightning claws.
Yup. Though I'd say it's two "mutated" sets (the ones with three fingers per claw) and three "un-mutated". But that really doesn't matter, because Raptors are known to suffer from mutation. Most of the Bleeding Eyes could barely talk or walk upright. And if anyone remembers the previous set of Raptor models? Well, tell me that those guys looked "pure". Yeah, that explanation doesn't hold water.
I'll be honest I read the Bleeding Eyes as Raptors who were on the cusp of becoming Warp Talons.
That is an interpretation. But Blood Reaver (the book that introduced the Bleeding Eyes) was originally published in 2011, and we didn't get Warp Talons until the 6th edition codex, published in 2012. So maybe ADB was anticipating Warp Talons, or had foreknowledge of the new models? But, the illustration of the Bleeding Eyes on the cover of Blood Reaver matches the 3rd/4th edition Raptors, not the 6th edition Warp Talons. And those Raptors didn't look "pure". And the Aspiring Champion came with a pair of lightning claws.
ERJAK wrote: We're all very impressed by your ability to glue sand to insulation foam. Truly a master of the arts.
Also, genius, internet forums are a form social media.
I love how proud people are about buying incomplete kits back in the day. "I made my own lasplas, obviously because I'm so awesome and creative! I totally didn't just let GW trick me into keeping lascannon and plasma bits off the secondary market!"
*sigh*
Fine scale modelling pre-dated GW by several hundred years. Early wargamers brought skills from that community that helped the game to thrive and, for the time, were truly remarkable to see. Scratch built tanks, scenery, and even units were actively encouraged by GW. Old White Dwarfs used to include instructions.
The only thing I've seen that's more impressive is the thirst to eliminate that aspect of the hobby, and encourage modelers to indict each other in pursuit of that end. Sad.
Piglet Bro wrote: Comments like this do a lot keeping new players out of the hobby (speaking personally). A funny choice to make considering how already shockingly difficult it is to break into correctly. Is it really that hard to tone down the hate lol
I get that tone is sometimes harder to ascertain in a text-based format, but blood reaper was being sarcastic.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Only thing I'm looking forward to is the rumored Red Corsairs trait, and even then we don't even have the rumored rules for Huron.
Uhhh.....just had a thought (yes, it hurt ). The leaked Terminators instruction sheet had a power fist and a chainfist, which are supposed to be separate from "Accursed Weapons", and a power sword, which we all assumed was the "Accursed Weapons" with the +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Now, the Raptors instructions had a power fist (separate from Accursed Weapons) and a power sword, with a +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Is it possible that all Aspiring Champions just get the option for Accursed Weapons? So it doesn't matter if it's a sword, axe, maul, or claws? Or anything else?
Piglet Bro wrote: Comments like this do a lot keeping new players out of the hobby (speaking personally). A funny choice to make considering how already shockingly difficult it is to break into correctly. Is it really that hard to tone down the hate lol
I get that tone is sometimes harder to ascertain in a text-based format, but blood reaper was being sarcastic.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Only thing I'm looking forward to is the rumored Red Corsairs trait, and even then we don't even have the rumored rules for Huron.
I fully expect Advance/Charge to be removed.
Eh, White Scars kept it and I can't imagine Red Corsairs with anything else.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Uhhh.....just had a thought (yes, it hurt ). The leaked Terminators instruction sheet had a power fist and a chainfist, which are supposed to be separate from "Accursed Weapons", and a power sword, which we all assumed was the "Accursed Weapons" with the +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Now, the Raptors instructions had a power fist (separate from Accursed Weapons) and a power sword, with a +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Is it possible that all Aspiring Champions just get the option for Accursed Weapons? So it doesn't matter if it's a sword, axe, maul, or claws? Or anything else?
It's possible. It'd open up conversion opportunities at the cost of strategic variety
But at the end of the day, being able to give my guys anything that's not a fist and say 'accursed weapon' would save a whole heck of a lot of time.
Gert wrote:Much as I am loathe to weigh in on this neverending misery, only one pair of the claws are mutated, the rest are just Chaos lightning claws.
Yup. Though I'd say it's two "mutated" sets (the ones with three fingers per claw) and three "un-mutated". But that really doesn't matter, because Raptors are known to suffer from mutation. Most of the Bleeding Eyes could barely talk or walk upright. And if anyone remembers the previous set of Raptor models? Well, tell me that those guys looked "pure". Yeah, that explanation doesn't hold water.
I'll be honest I read the Bleeding Eyes as Raptors who were on the cusp of becoming Warp Talons.
That is an interpretation. But Blood Reaver (the book that introduced the Bleeding Eyes) was originally published in 2011, and we didn't get Warp Talons until the 6th edition codex, published in 2012. So maybe ADB was anticipating Warp Talons, or had foreknowledge of the new models? But, the illustration of the Bleeding Eyes on the cover of Blood Reaver matches the 3rd/4th edition Raptors, not the 6th edition Warp Talons. And those Raptors didn't look "pure". And the Aspiring Champion came with a pair of lightning claws.
I mean Chaos is never a straight line but rather a sliding scale and I went into the series with 2022 understanding, not a 2011 one so that's just how I read it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Uhhh.....just had a thought (yes, it hurt ). The leaked Terminators instruction sheet had a power fist and a chainfist, which are supposed to be separate from "Accursed Weapons", and a power sword, which we all assumed was the "Accursed Weapons" with the +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Now, the Raptors instructions had a power fist (separate from Accursed Weapons) and a power sword, with a +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Is it possible that all Aspiring Champions just get the option for Accursed Weapons? So it doesn't matter if it's a sword, axe, maul, or claws? Or anything else?
I asked about that on B&C and only Chosen/Terminators have it specifically on their datasheet as far as Clockworkchris knows (as in they didn't see the datasheets themselves just have info given which may be incomplete and if I recall correctly was play testing based), but no word on access to a Melee Weapons list that could have additional options.
1.) I actually like most of the leaked rules. With standartised rules chosen might be good without being a one-trick-pony for the first time (ever)! Not a fan of all the doctrine-legion-stratagem BS. But then that is a 9th.Ed issue. Certainly looking forward to throwing my cultist hordes onto the table. "Just kill them. That is their purpose." Now with extra mutations
Sure, maybe something something in my Army might get invalidated. But guess what: i have been in the Hobby 20+ years and this happens all the time. Often enough it turns out to be good for the game. I have yet to meet a player who does not accept "this is illegal now so i play it as x, which i find is the closest to wysiwyg". ( Pretending one legal option is another legal one is another thing. Big No-Go).
2.) Usually i am not a fan of the "wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change" attitude. Love it or leave it.
But man, this is so Chaos!
The (GW) Emperor has betrayed us! He is evil. We deserve better!
So after years of lurking i had to make an account just to point this out
Gert wrote:Much as I am loathe to weigh in on this neverending misery, only one pair of the claws are mutated, the rest are just Chaos lightning claws.
Yup. Though I'd say it's two "mutated" sets (the ones with three fingers per claw) and three "un-mutated". But that really doesn't matter, because Raptors are known to suffer from mutation. Most of the Bleeding Eyes could barely talk or walk upright. And if anyone remembers the previous set of Raptor models? Well, tell me that those guys looked "pure". Yeah, that explanation doesn't hold water.
I'll be honest I read the Bleeding Eyes as Raptors who were on the cusp of becoming Warp Talons.
That is an interpretation. But Blood Reaver (the book that introduced the Bleeding Eyes) was originally published in 2011, and we didn't get Warp Talons until the 6th edition codex, published in 2012. So maybe ADB was anticipating Warp Talons, or had foreknowledge of the new models? But, the illustration of the Bleeding Eyes on the cover of Blood Reaver matches the 3rd/4th edition Raptors, not the 6th edition Warp Talons. And those Raptors didn't look "pure". And the Aspiring Champion came with a pair of lightning claws.
I mean Chaos is never a straight line but rather a sliding scale and I went into the series with 2022 understanding, not a 2011 one so that's just how I read it.
I wasn't trying to bust your chops, just pointing out some things. I originally read Blood Reaver in 2011, and they were Raptors then, as I had never heard of Warp Talons. But since Warp Talons became a thing, I see them as an "evolution" that many Raptors eventually go through, if they advance further enough into the Raptor Cult (or too far, depending on the individual Raptor's POV).
Spoiler:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Uhhh.....just had a thought (yes, it hurt ). The leaked Terminators instruction sheet had a power fist and a chainfist, which are supposed to be separate from "Accursed Weapons", and a power sword, which we all assumed was the "Accursed Weapons" with the +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Now, the Raptors instructions had a power fist (separate from Accursed Weapons) and a power sword, with a +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Is it possible that all Aspiring Champions just get the option for Accursed Weapons? So it doesn't matter if it's a sword, axe, maul, or claws? Or anything else?
I asked about that on B&C and only Chosen/Terminators have it specifically on their datasheet as far as Clockworkchris knows (as in they didn't see the datasheets themselves just have info given which may be incomplete and if I recall correctly was play testing based), but no word on access to a Melee Weapons list that could have additional options.
Yeah, Clockworkchris' source is leaking from what they themselves describe as "very old" playtest rules, and only giving out information piecemeal. Remember, when the leaks started, everything got Legion traits. Then it became everything except Cultists. So things could have changed since those playtest rules were written. But does any 9th edition codex have a separate "Weapons list"? I thought everything was on the datasheets in 9th edition codexes. That's why I thought maybe Aspiring Champions just get Accursed Weapons like Chosen and Terminators.
CoALabaer wrote: 1.) I actually like most of the leaked rules. With standartised rules chosen might be good without being a one-trick-pony for the first time (ever)!
Instead of being useful in one role, they won't be useful in any roles! How fantastic is that!
There is something immensely funny to me in using the phrase 'Love it or leave it' as a response to criticism, because it was the phrase the Brazilian Military Dictatorship, who argued if you didn't like how things were run, you had to leave.
There is something immensely ghoulish in this "You WILL like things! You WILL NOT complain! You WILL enjoy things!" A real cult of grinning martyrs and ultimate consoomer, sunk cost mindset. You can see it all throughout the thread - people trying to find the most desperate of excuses to defend the lapsing state of the game.
I am reminded of an entertaining quote from Thomas Ligotti's Conspiracy against the Human Race,
Thomas Ligotti wrote:"If you do not feel good enough for long enough, you should act as if you do and even think as if you do... So start pretending that you feel good enough for long enough, stop your complaining, and get back in line."
A daily reminder; anyone who complains about the complainers is 100% subject to an optimism bias and dislikes being challenged or having to realise things aren't going well.
Gert wrote:Much as I am loathe to weigh in on this neverending misery, only one pair of the claws are mutated, the rest are just Chaos lightning claws.
Yup. Though I'd say it's two "mutated" sets (the ones with three fingers per claw) and three "un-mutated". But that really doesn't matter, because Raptors are known to suffer from mutation. Most of the Bleeding Eyes could barely talk or walk upright. And if anyone remembers the previous set of Raptor models? Well, tell me that those guys looked "pure". Yeah, that explanation doesn't hold water.
I'll be honest I read the Bleeding Eyes as Raptors who were on the cusp of becoming Warp Talons.
That is an interpretation. But Blood Reaver (the book that introduced the Bleeding Eyes) was originally published in 2011, and we didn't get Warp Talons until the 6th edition codex, published in 2012. So maybe ADB was anticipating Warp Talons, or had foreknowledge of the new models? But, the illustration of the Bleeding Eyes on the cover of Blood Reaver matches the 3rd/4th edition Raptors, not the 6th edition Warp Talons. And those Raptors didn't look "pure". And the Aspiring Champion came with a pair of lightning claws.
I mean Chaos is never a straight line but rather a sliding scale and I went into the series with 2022 understanding, not a 2011 one so that's just how I read it.
I wasn't trying to bust your chops, just pointing out some things. I originally read Blood Reaver in 2011, and they were Raptors then, as I had never heard of Warp Talons. But since Warp Talons became a thing, I see them as an "evolution" that many Raptors eventually go through, if they advance further enough into the Raptor Cult (or too far, depending on the individual Raptor's POV).
Spoiler:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Uhhh.....just had a thought (yes, it hurt ). The leaked Terminators instruction sheet had a power fist and a chainfist, which are supposed to be separate from "Accursed Weapons", and a power sword, which we all assumed was the "Accursed Weapons" with the +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Now, the Raptors instructions had a power fist (separate from Accursed Weapons) and a power sword, with a +1S, AP-3, D1 profile. Is it possible that all Aspiring Champions just get the option for Accursed Weapons? So it doesn't matter if it's a sword, axe, maul, or claws? Or anything else?
I asked about that on B&C and only Chosen/Terminators have it specifically on their datasheet as far as Clockworkchris knows (as in they didn't see the datasheets themselves just have info given which may be incomplete and if I recall correctly was play testing based), but no word on access to a Melee Weapons list that could have additional options.
Yeah, Clockworkchris' source is leaking from what they themselves describe as "very old" playtest rules, and only giving out information piecemeal. Remember, when the leaks started, everything got Legion traits. Then it became everything except Cultists. So things could have changed since those playtest rules were written. But does any 9th edition codex have a separate "Weapons list"? I thought everything was on the datasheets in 9th edition codexes. That's why I thought maybe Aspiring Champions just get Accursed Weapons like Chosen and Terminators.
Sisters codex has a weapons list. I think others do too. Even if Accursed Weapons aren't on it there remains a chance that Lightning Claws might.
Yes, there are weapon lists. Some factions just have too many options for there not to be.
Mind you, not every datasheet uses them, even in books when they do exist and their weapons overlap. Because datasheets are just terrible and sometimes what they show is based on what fits on the page, not what's useful to know.
Voss wrote: Yes, there are weapon lists. Some factions just have too many options for there not to be.
Mind you, not every datasheet uses them, even in books when they do exist and their weapons overlap. Because datasheets are just terrible and sometimes what they show is based on what fits on the page, not what's useful to know.
Yeah, the one 9th edition datasheet source that I have, the Imperial Armour Compendium, is pretty egregious about that. In some instances, the weapons that units are/can be armed with are listed, but no actual stats are given, even though there's a half a page or more left blank. The comparison between the loyalist Contemptor and Chaos Contemptor is particularly odd, as the loyalist datasheet only lists the stats of a few of the available weapons, while the Chaos datasheet lists everything, and both units have identical rules (infuriatingly), and both have a full page to themselves. Weird.
Voss wrote: Yes, there are weapon lists. Some factions just have too many options for there not to be.
Mind you, not every datasheet uses them, even in books when they do exist and their weapons overlap. Because datasheets are just terrible and sometimes what they show is based on what fits on the page, not what's useful to know.
Yeah, the one 9th edition datasheet source that I have, the Imperial Armour Compendium, is pretty egregious about that. In some instances, the weapons that units are/can be armed with are listed, but no actual stats are given, even though there's a half a page or more left blank. The comparison between the loyalist Contemptor and Chaos Contemptor is particularly odd, as the loyalist datasheet only lists the stats of a few of the available weapons, while the Chaos datasheet lists everything, and both units have identical rules (infuriatingly), and both have a full page to themselves. Weird.
Yes, the TS codex has a bunch of that. And, personally, it infuriates me. It stinks of page layout errors never fixed in editing.
Yeah, Chaos Knights book kinda has that problem, datasheets will show some weapon stats but not others, even though theres empty space on the page, even though there isn't another unit in the book that uses those weapons (Knight Tyrant and Knight Despoiler are the most infuriatingly obvious example), etc. Then theres the War Dogs - the Executioner shows stats for the meltagun and heavy stubber in addition to its main weapons, the Huntsmen shows stats for its main weapons and the meltagun, but not the heavy stubber - even though most of the page is empty.
That does sound like some poor decisions were made - I wonder if whoever was laying out the datasheets was told there'd be art or photos in the gap, so there was a limit to what they could include?
Gadzilla666 wrote: Sooooo.......World Eaters update in June issue of WD, slated for June 17th. So, codex release sometime around then?
World Eaters Codex isn't coming this edition even, i bet, given they barely have any models to show off, and those get finished a few years before relase. And the WD update is supposed to give the players some kind of an update so they don't have to wait actual years for any attention.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Sooooo.......World Eaters update in June issue of WD, slated for June 17th. So, codex release sometime around then?
World Eaters Codex isn't coming this edition even, i bet, given they barely have any models to show off, and those get finished a few years before relase. And the WD update is supposed to give the players some kind of an update so they don't have to wait actual years for any attention.
I meant the CSM codex. Sorry for assuming that everyone could work that out. Obviously they're not going to release a World Eaters update for a World Eaters Codex.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Sooooo.......World Eaters update in June issue of WD, slated for June 17th. So, codex release sometime around then?
World Eaters Codex isn't coming this edition even, i bet, given they barely have any models to show off, and those get finished a few years before relase. And the WD update is supposed to give the players some kind of an update so they don't have to wait actual years for any attention.
You're arguing that absence of evidence means they don't have models. Rather than that they chose not to show any off (possibly because the preview show was pretty packed with marines and marine related things, and chaos and chaos related things. And people have a tendency to complain when too many marine things happen. They still are, but this way they can pretend for a little while that we aren't seeing anything else until Squats come out (except in AoS and side games)
Meanwhile, the preview article on world eaters says this:
We’ll be bringing you more updates on Codex: World Eaters and these murderous new miniatures over the next few months on Warhammer Community – so you can follow the Eightfold Path right up to release.
They aren't coming right away, but that says to me that they're coming by December at the latest.
---
@Gadzilla- yeah. Between the combat patrol and the WD article, I'd assume that by mid-June, CSM codex is out. Busy month, really. I suspect by the end of this month, so they don't water down the HH release in June.
Voss wrote: @Gadzilla- yeah. Between the combat patrol and the WD article, I'd assume that by mid-June, CSM codex is out. Busy month, really. I suspect by the end of this month, so they don't water down the HH release in June.
They wouldn't have much time to hype up the codex if it's up for pre-order by the end of the month. They'd really have to pack those articles in. Either way, I bet they'll start them next week. Finally, something concrete (or at least as concrete as anything Warcom ever puts out is).
Voss wrote: @Gadzilla- yeah. Between the combat patrol and the WD article, I'd assume that by mid-June, CSM codex is out. Busy month, really. I suspect by the end of this month, so they don't water down the HH release in June.
They wouldn't have much time to hype up the codex if it's up for pre-order by the end of the month. They'd really have to pack those articles in. Either way, I bet they'll start them next week. Finally, something concrete (or at least as concrete as anything Warcom ever puts out is).
Eh? I mean, we're at the preorder for DoK and NH, and the amount of 'hype articles' they've got up is... a grand total of six (seven? one is a reference to a battle report somewhere else) between them since April 21st. And a nice derail for the Skaven vs Trees battlebox (independent of the preview show coverage of other armies).
I don't think the hype articles are really framing/guiding release dates anymore. They're just kind of happen as they shovel stuff on to trucks.
Besides (and I'm fairly serious here): what else have they got in the wings to release?
Voss wrote: @Gadzilla- yeah. Between the combat patrol and the WD article, I'd assume that by mid-June, CSM codex is out. Busy month, really. I suspect by the end of this month, so they don't water down the HH release in June.
They wouldn't have much time to hype up the codex if it's up for pre-order by the end of the month. They'd really have to pack those articles in. Either way, I bet they'll start them next week. Finally, something concrete (or at least as concrete as anything Warcom ever puts out is).
Eh? I mean, we're at the preorder for DoK and NH, and the amount of 'hype articles' they've got up is... a grand total of six (seven? one is a reference to a battle report somewhere else) between them since April 21st. And a nice derail for the Skaven vs Trees battlebox (independent of the preview show coverage of other armies).
I don't think the hype articles are really framing/guiding release dates anymore. They're just kind of happen as they shovel stuff on to trucks.
Besides (and I'm fairly serious here): what else have they got in the wings to release?
Hmm....not a lot, actually. I guess I was just thinking that finally releasing the CSM codex after all of this time would warrant a little fanfare. But, the quicker the better. I think we've had enough time to "wait and see", by now.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Sooooo.......World Eaters update in June issue of WD, slated for June 17th. So, codex release sometime around then?
World Eaters Codex isn't coming this edition even, i bet, given they barely have any models to show off, and those get finished a few years before relase. And the WD update is supposed to give the players some kind of an update so they don't have to wait actual years for any attention.
I think they are pulling a League of Voltan with the WE codex. Which is to say, they have a bunch of stuff ready but they bidding their time to drum up hype.
Voss wrote: @Gadzilla- yeah. Between the combat patrol and the WD article, I'd assume that by mid-June, CSM codex is out. Busy month, really. I suspect by the end of this month, so they don't water down the HH release in June.
They wouldn't have much time to hype up the codex if it's up for pre-order by the end of the month. They'd really have to pack those articles in. Either way, I bet they'll start them next week. Finally, something concrete (or at least as concrete as anything Warcom ever puts out is).
Eh? I mean, we're at the preorder for DoK and NH, and the amount of 'hype articles' they've got up is... a grand total of six (seven? one is a reference to a battle report somewhere else) between them since April 21st. And a nice derail for the Skaven vs Trees battlebox (independent of the preview show coverage of other armies).
I don't think the hype articles are really framing/guiding release dates anymore. They're just kind of happen as they shovel stuff on to trucks.
Besides (and I'm fairly serious here): what else have they got in the wings to release?
Hmm....not a lot, actually. I guess I was just thinking that finally releasing the CSM codex after all of this time would warrant a little fanfare. But, the quicker the better. I think we've had enough time to "wait and see", by now.
I think what we will see is the 2 weeks before the release, we will have many more articles.
Here's what I see them releasing before Chaos Marines:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Sylvaneth vs Skaven Box set
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Reboxing of Imperial Knights (announced that Castellan and Valiant would be merged to one box and Armiger types would be merged to one box)
Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
That could easily be 4-5 weeks of stuff, getting us right into June. I would then expect Preorder on the 11th or the 18th. Expect the hype to start taking off much higher at the start of June.
It is rather up in the air whether or not 30k will happen before this. If 30k is out end of May, then we could see Chaos Marines pushed to end of June.
EviscerationPlague wrote: I just wanted to point out that Haarkan is on the cover of Warzone Nachmund but it apparently doesn't have rules for him. Talk about a headscratcher.
If they put his rules in the codex CSM, why put it in the warzone?
EviscerationPlague wrote: I just wanted to point out that Haarkan is on the cover of Warzone Nachmund but it apparently doesn't have rules for him. Talk about a headscratcher.
If they put his rules in the codex CSM, why put it in the warzone?
I'd like to have an updated profile where he isn't using just a D1 Lightning Claw, I dunno...
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'd like it if he could use his spear in melee...
We shouldn't complain though: Soon he'll be the only Jump Pack Lord we can get.
Unfortunately nothing surprises me anymore, but white Knights will lick it up.
Ride on black knight, I'm sure the windmills are threatening the maidens again.
More seriously, without pictures of the codex leaking I'm withholding judgement on things like what they're doing with Raptor wargear options because all we have are some playtest tidbits that could have changed or the information could be incomplete. I'm sure someone will come to scream "I told you so" if it turns out we're losing a bunch of options but I'd rather wait for a complete picture than be some reactionary like I'm running a Youtube channel.
Still finding it amusing that we can't get images of the CSM book yet but chunks of the Slaves to Darkness book leaked and that isn't out until the end of the year.
Voss wrote: @Gadzilla- yeah. Between the combat patrol and the WD article, I'd assume that by mid-June, CSM codex is out. Busy month, really. I suspect by the end of this month, so they don't water down the HH release in June.
They wouldn't have much time to hype up the codex if it's up for pre-order by the end of the month. They'd really have to pack those articles in. Either way, I bet they'll start them next week. Finally, something concrete (or at least as concrete as anything Warcom ever puts out is).
Eh? I mean, we're at the preorder for DoK and NH, and the amount of 'hype articles' they've got up is... a grand total of six (seven? one is a reference to a battle report somewhere else) between them since April 21st. And a nice derail for the Skaven vs Trees battlebox (independent of the preview show coverage of other armies).
I don't think the hype articles are really framing/guiding release dates anymore. They're just kind of happen as they shovel stuff on to trucks.
Besides (and I'm fairly serious here): what else have they got in the wings to release?
Hmm....not a lot, actually. I guess I was just thinking that finally releasing the CSM codex after all of this time would warrant a little fanfare. But, the quicker the better. I think we've had enough time to "wait and see", by now.
I think what we will see is the 2 weeks before the release, we will have many more articles.
Here's what I see them releasing before Chaos Marines:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Sylvaneth vs Skaven Box set
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Reboxing of Imperial Knights (announced that Castellan and Valiant would be merged to one box and Armiger types would be merged to one box)
Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
That could easily be 4-5 weeks of stuff, getting us right into June. I would then expect Preorder on the 11th or the 18th. Expect the hype to start taking off much higher at the start of June.
Meh. Half of that could come on one day. Reboxes don't need a release slot, and a skirmish game book and squad is usually an 'and also...' kind of release. (See pretty much everything Middle Earth up for preorder today alongside the AoS books and Vanguards)
I'm not sure that's true about BB or Underworlds either. A lot of people don't pay attention to those releases, but they're still usually announced. Chaos Knights separately seems way too early.
And again on the articles- DoK and NH got about 3 each over the last three weeks. It isn't a priority, nor are releases contingent on them.
It is rather up in the air whether or not 30k will happen before this. If 30k is out end of May, then we could see Chaos Marines pushed to end of June.
HH box is very definitely June, barring some sort of utter disaster (maybe a last weekend preorder with 'real release' in July). And will be followed by a long tail of kits (already announced and otherwise), which is part of the reason I suspect Chaos is before. That and they already axed the start collecting and announced the combat patrol. I doubt either would have happened without a Soon release. Tomorrow will tell us a lot.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Sooooo.......World Eaters update in June issue of WD, slated for June 17th. So, codex release sometime around then?
World Eaters Codex isn't coming this edition even, i bet, given they barely have any models to show off, and those get finished a few years before relase. And the WD update is supposed to give the players some kind of an update so they don't have to wait actual years for any attention.
I meant the CSM codex. Sorry for assuming that everyone could work that out. Obviously they're not going to release a World Eaters update for a World Eaters Codex.
Think about it this way though; people say things as dumb if not more so, unironically, with some regularity. Someone believing that the WE codex was hitting alongside a White Dwarf update isn't implausible, unfortunately.
Voss wrote: @Gadzilla- yeah. Between the combat patrol and the WD article, I'd assume that by mid-June, CSM codex is out. Busy month, really. I suspect by the end of this month, so they don't water down the HH release in June.
They wouldn't have much time to hype up the codex if it's up for pre-order by the end of the month. They'd really have to pack those articles in. Either way, I bet they'll start them next week. Finally, something concrete (or at least as concrete as anything Warcom ever puts out is).
Eh? I mean, we're at the preorder for DoK and NH, and the amount of 'hype articles' they've got up is... a grand total of six (seven? one is a reference to a battle report somewhere else) between them since April 21st. And a nice derail for the Skaven vs Trees battlebox (independent of the preview show coverage of other armies).
I don't think the hype articles are really framing/guiding release dates anymore. They're just kind of happen as they shovel stuff on to trucks.
Besides (and I'm fairly serious here): what else have they got in the wings to release?
Hmm....not a lot, actually. I guess I was just thinking that finally releasing the CSM codex after all of this time would warrant a little fanfare. But, the quicker the better. I think we've had enough time to "wait and see", by now.
I think what we will see is the 2 weeks before the release, we will have many more articles.
Here's what I see them releasing before Chaos Marines:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Sylvaneth vs Skaven Box set
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Reboxing of Imperial Knights (announced that Castellan and Valiant would be merged to one box and Armiger types would be merged to one box)
Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
That could easily be 4-5 weeks of stuff, getting us right into June. I would then expect Preorder on the 11th or the 18th. Expect the hype to start taking off much higher at the start of June.
Meh. Half of that could come on one day. Reboxes don't need a release slot, and a skirmish game book and squad is usually an 'and also...' kind of release. (See pretty much everything Middle Earth up for preorder today alongside the AoS books and Vanguards)
I'm not sure that's true about BB or Underworlds either. A lot of people don't pay attention to those releases, but they're still usually announced. Chaos Knights separately seems way too early.
And again on the articles- DoK and NH got about 3 each over the last three weeks. It isn't a priority, nor are releases contingent on them.
It is rather up in the air whether or not 30k will happen before this. If 30k is out end of May, then we could see Chaos Marines pushed to end of June.
HH box is very definitely June, barring some sort of utter disaster (maybe a last weekend preorder with 'real release' in July). And will be followed by a long tail of kits (already announced and otherwise), which is part of the reason I suspect Chaos is before. That and they already axed the start collecting and announced the combat patrol. I doubt either would have happened without a Soon release. Tomorrow will tell us a lot.
It is true! Tomorrow should tell us quite a bit. That said, watch GW make a big deal out of releasing each of those things individually on different weeks to stretch out the time until we get some of the later stuff.
It's exactly the sort of thing that's happened in the past and could happen again.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'd like it if he could use his spear in melee...
We shouldn't complain though: Soon he'll be the only Jump Pack Lord we can get.
Unfortunately nothing surprises me anymore, but white Knights will lick it up.
Ride on black knight, I'm sure the windmills are threatening the maidens again.
More seriously, without pictures of the codex leaking I'm withholding judgement on things like what they're doing with Raptor wargear options because all we have are some playtest tidbits that could have changed or the information could be incomplete. I'm sure someone will come to scream "I told you so" if it turns out we're losing a bunch of options but I'd rather wait for a complete picture than be some reactionary like I'm running a Youtube channel.
Still finding it amusing that we can't get images of the CSM book yet but chunks of the Slaves to Darkness book leaked and that isn't out until the end of the year.
You DID see the various unit entries this edition, right?
drbored wrote: Here's what I see them releasing before Chaos Marines:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Sylvaneth vs Skaven Box set
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Reboxing of Imperial Knights (announced that Castellan and Valiant would be merged to one box and Armiger types would be merged to one box) Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
Just to touch on the one in bold - that's already happened, I think they went on general sale yesterday, alongside the launch of the Codex.
drbored wrote: Here's what I see them releasing before Chaos Marines:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Sylvaneth vs Skaven Box set
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Reboxing of Imperial Knights (announced that Castellan and Valiant would be merged to one box and Armiger types would be merged to one box) Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
Just to touch on the one in bold - that's already happened, I think they went on general sale yesterday, alongside the launch of the Codex.
They also mentioned the chaos knights won't be for either a few weeks or months I forget.
I could see them dropping the chaos knight codex and kits alongside individual releases of the warpsmith and chosen. Would be thematic and a way to get all the box locked models out together before the csm book and cultist stuff.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'd like it if he could use his spear in melee...
We shouldn't complain though: Soon he'll be the only Jump Pack Lord we can get.
Unfortunately nothing surprises me anymore, but white Knights will lick it up.
Ride on black knight, I'm sure the windmills are threatening the maidens again.
More seriously, without pictures of the codex leaking I'm withholding judgement on things like what they're doing with Raptor wargear options because all we have are some playtest tidbits that could have changed or the information could be incomplete. I'm sure someone will come to scream "I told you so" if it turns out we're losing a bunch of options but I'd rather wait for a complete picture than be some reactionary like I'm running a Youtube channel.
Still finding it amusing that we can't get images of the CSM book yet but chunks of the Slaves to Darkness book leaked and that isn't out until the end of the year.
You DID see the various unit entries this edition, right?
You mean the two ruleless instruction sheets? Yes. But those aren't codex entries. And if GW did leave off traditional options like lightning claws out of a melee weapons wargear list that's not on the datasheet then raising a stink about it is something the community should do just like Eldar players did with the Autarch. I just don't light my torch and grab a pitchfork until I know I'm not jumping to conclusions based on incomplete playtester info.
Voss wrote: HH box is very definitely June, barring some sort of utter disaster (maybe a last weekend preorder with 'real release' in July). And will be followed by a long tail of kits (already announced and otherwise), which is part of the reason I suspect Chaos is before. That and they already axed the start collecting and announced the combat patrol. I doubt either would have happened without a Soon release. Tomorrow will tell us a lot.
I have also the feeling we get Codex Chaos Space Marine before Horus Heresy....
H.B.M.C. wrote: The fact that it didn't show individual profiles for the various weapon types is pretty telling that they don't exist anymore.
I was thinking more about lightning claw access for Chaos Lords or Aspring Champions personally.
Accrused Weapon access would be a good second options even if it's not on the datasheet (could be Chosen and Terminators pay different points for them for example than everyone else if it is split).
I'll save my strongly worded, but polite emails to GW for when I can see the actual book though so I can know what is or isn't there and go from there.
H.B.M.C and EviscerationPlague were discussing the supposed unavailability of jump packs for Chaos Lords, not lighting claws. The leaks say that Chaos Lords can have "any melee weapons" besides the base loadout of hammer + plasma pistol, but not jump packs. Which I'm still putting down to these leaks being based off of old playtest rules, as those options don't even conform to GW's moronic "you get what's in the box" paradigm. The BSF Chaos Lord that the hammer + plasma pistol loadout is based on only comes with those two weapons, and converting him to anything else, or any other Legion besides Black Legion would require more conversion than just simple kitbashing. You'd need to break out the knife and files. But doing the same with Haarken would only require a kitbash. It just doesn't make sense.
On the AoS side, we've seen leaks of Alarielle's new warscroll. In previous versions, she couldn't use her spear in melee. She will be able to with the new version.
I know it's a different system with a different team, but it still brings a bit of hope.
Rihgu wrote: Regarding Haarken and using his spear in melee...
On the AoS side, we've seen leaks of Alarielle's new warscroll. In previous versions, she couldn't use her spear in melee. She will be able to with the new version.
I know it's a different system with a different team, but it still brings a bit of hope.
This is Dakka Dakka. Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Rihgu wrote: Regarding Haarken and using his spear in melee...
On the AoS side, we've seen leaks of Alarielle's new warscroll. In previous versions, she couldn't use her spear in melee. She will be able to with the new version.
I know it's a different system with a different team, but it still brings a bit of hope.
This is Dakka Dakka. Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
I thought this was GW, where hope is the first step on the road to disappointment?
Alrighty, there's the confirmation of Skaven vs Sylvaneth box coming up for pre-order next week. If we knock out the other things that I missed in various releases, the list now looks like:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
drbored wrote: Alrighty, there's the confirmation of Skaven vs Sylvaneth box coming up for pre-order next week. If we knock out the other things that I missed in various releases, the list now looks like:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
There was that Adepticon Q&A session where a gw representative said that it was "possible" that CSM would come after the CK box set but before the release of the standalone Knights codexes (which would most likely be when they'd release the new CK models separately).
drbored wrote: Alrighty, there's the confirmation of Skaven vs Sylvaneth box coming up for pre-order next week. If we knock out the other things that I missed in various releases, the list now looks like:
Ash Wastes rulebook + Squats
Random out-of-nowhere specialist game release (Blood Bowl and Underworlds are notorious for popping up with no fanfare, just suddenly out)
Chaos Knights Codex, Knight Abominant kit, and Wardog kit. (The box set is out, but individual units are not, yet)
Kill Team Moroch (Traitor Guard vs Space Marines)
There was that Adepticon Q&A session where a gw representative said that it was "possible" that CSM would come after the CK box set but before the release of the standalone Knights codexes (which would most likely be when they'd release the new CK models separately).
I bet that plan has changed since the IK codex came out with the CK boxset. I am really hoping it won't be that long between the releases here.
With the Sylvaneth v Skaven boxset up, I think this really shows that CSM should be in early June now.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
Interesting, care to share or point me in the right direction?
Unless they go full AOS on us, I can't imagine them changing 40K enough to push us back to the Index phase. Not that the game couldn't uses a serious and comprehensive update on comparative weapon effectiveness.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
Interesting, care to share or point me in the right direction?
Was in a 40k discord channel.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
alextroy wrote: Unless they go full AOS on us, I can't imagine them changing 40K enough to push us back to the Index phase. Not that the game couldn't uses a serious and comprehensive update on comparative weapon effectiveness.
If GW acknowledge to themselves that 40k has become too complicated because of excess stratagems and layered rules, then they have a few ways they could go about it.
A. They could release a huge weapon datasheet that changes every faction's weapon profiles to lower overall AP and damage across the board while also adjusting points values across the board. This would be a massive undertaking and hella confusing for players.
B. They keep 9th edition codexes but find a way to strip out 10th edition codexes of complexity, which would be seen by many as a 'nerfing' of options, especially if they reduce the number of stratagems you get access to, or the over-layered rules are reduced. This also creates a similar situation that we've had all through 8th and 9th, where you have armies that have their codexes being clearly different than armies that don't. This problem still exists if they return to indexes.
C. They reduce all the new codexes, including those they just released at the end of 9th (astra militarum, chaos marines, chaos daemons, leagues of votann, world eaters, all still yet to come out that will likely get under a year of actual playtime) to indexes. The disadvantage is that it strips armies down to some very base levels. The advantage is they can make sweeping changes to the stratagem system, command point system, points, weapon profiles, and all of the other details of all of the armies to a base level without unintentionally breaking a 9th edition codex in 10th edition. In my mind, if they do A, they may as well just do C, since a lot of work would already be done in shifting weapon profiles.
D. They just keep doing what they're doing and continue this crapshoot system, continuing to scare people away from their top selling game.
B + A is the best answer really, they've shown via the sigmar roll out you can pull factions up with monthly WD updates while the books are done, plus they removed a whole swathe of core army building options in the process without it looking unnatural imo.
Dudeface wrote: B + A is the best answer really, they've shown via the sigmar roll out you can pull factions up with monthly WD updates while the books are done, plus they removed a whole swathe of core army building options in the process without it looking unnatural imo.
This is true. Plus, finally giving us points updates for free is a big step in the right direction.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
I highly doubt they are going to do such a radical change. 8th and 9th were such huge successes I feel like taking that kind of risk would be pretty nuts.
drbored wrote: B. They keep 9th edition codexes but find a way to strip out 10th edition codexes of complexity, which would be seen by many as a 'nerfing' of options, especially if they reduce the number of stratagems you get access to, or the over-layered rules are reduced. This also creates a similar situation that we've had all through 8th and 9th, where you have armies that have their codexes being clearly different than armies that don't. This problem still exists if they return to indexes.
At least for stratagems, they could just release a book similar to nachtmund where every army has 6 stratagems or something and then tell everyone that these are all the stratagems you can use for that season.
Shaving of the 8-10 layers of rules packed on some armies is indeed a bit more tricky, especially since some of those were added to address specific problems. I guess an index-style publication would be the only way to handle that fairly.
I think World Eaters will be sooner than 10th, they were on the B&C leak list that is still spot on, and that one was based on seeing models rather than rules from what people have been saying.
Tastyfish wrote: I think World Eaters will be sooner than 10th, they were on the B&C leak list that is still spot on, and that one was based on seeing models rather than rules from what people have been saying.
Yes very likely. 10th would be summer of 2023. World Eaters were originally rumored to be end of year 2022.
Yeah I don't think people are going to fork out for a full book every 6 months to get the 6 new Strats that they are allowed to use, especially people who only play one or two armies.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
What's interesting to me is that the new Horus Heresy has me much more excited than the prospect of what no doubt will be yet another mediocre book for Chaos. If by chance there is some abuseable over powered thing in the book like what we have seen with the last few books, that will still be rather sad.
Starting up some Iron Warriors for the 31st Millennium just seem so much more exciting!
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
What's interesting to me is that the new Horus Heresy has me much more excited than the prospect of what no doubt will be yet another mediocre book for Chaos. If by chance there is some abuseable over powered thing in the book like what we have seen with the last few books, that will still be rather sad.
Starting up some Iron Warriors for the 31st Millennium just seem so much more exciting!
I definitely understand this sentiment. I prefer the 40k Chaos models quite a lot, and I'm always excited about the potential of more Chaos Space Marine models.
But, I am indeed excited for 30k. The chance to play a big army game that isn't updated every 3 years that might actually be relatively balanced and more friendly for narrative players has me pretty thrilled.
But Sisters of Battle and Chaos Space Marines are my 2 favorite 40k factions. So, I hope they just get treated well, if not from a rules standpoint, then at least from a model standpoint, and so far that aspect has been pretty spot on for me. Just a handful of things I want updated.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
What's interesting to me is that the new Horus Heresy has me much more excited than the prospect of what no doubt will be yet another mediocre book for Chaos. If by chance there is some abuseable over powered thing in the book like what we have seen with the last few books, that will still be rather sad.
Starting up some Iron Warriors for the 31st Millennium just seem so much more exciting!
I definitely understand this sentiment. I prefer the 40k Chaos models quite a lot, and I'm always excited about the potential of more Chaos Space Marine models.
But, I am indeed excited for 30k. The chance to play a big army game that isn't updated every 3 years that might actually be relatively balanced and more friendly for narrative players has me pretty thrilled.
But Sisters of Battle and Chaos Space Marines are my 2 favorite 40k factions. So, I hope they just get treated well, if not from a rules standpoint, then at least from a model standpoint, and so far that aspect has been pretty spot on for me. Just a handful of things I want updated.
I've been playing Chaos for three editions now and they just never seem to ever be right. I would love for them to be treated well, but from what I've been told they haven't been treated well since their fourth edition book, which is widely considered to be perfect.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
What's interesting to me is that the new Horus Heresy has me much more excited than the prospect of what no doubt will be yet another mediocre book for Chaos. If by chance there is some abuseable over powered thing in the book like what we have seen with the last few books, that will still be rather sad.
Starting up some Iron Warriors for the 31st Millennium just seem so much more exciting!
I definitely understand this sentiment. I prefer the 40k Chaos models quite a lot, and I'm always excited about the potential of more Chaos Space Marine models.
But, I am indeed excited for 30k. The chance to play a big army game that isn't updated every 3 years that might actually be relatively balanced and more friendly for narrative players has me pretty thrilled.
But Sisters of Battle and Chaos Space Marines are my 2 favorite 40k factions. So, I hope they just get treated well, if not from a rules standpoint, then at least from a model standpoint, and so far that aspect has been pretty spot on for me. Just a handful of things I want updated.
I've been playing Chaos for three editions now and they just never seem to ever be right. I would love for them to be treated well, but from what I've been told they haven't been treated well since their fourth edition book, which is widely considered to be perfect.
I'll admit that some of it is nostalgia-goggles. 3.5 had so many options, but it was also a very broken Codex. Ever since then, we've been punished for it.
But, a big part of that is that Chaos Space Marines is something different to every fan.
To one fan, Chaos Marines is a faction where you can take a handful of marines and swarms of cultists to throw at enemy lines like fodder.
To another, Chaos Marines is spikey marines with relics from the Horus Heresy now dedicated to the dark gods.
And another, Chaos Marines is a warpsmith daemonprince that leads an army of siege engines.
If you compare that to factions like Tau, Necron, Sisters of Battle, Custodes, or Imperial/Chaos Knights, you can see that many of these factions have a very straightforward theme. Yes, there are different army builds in each of these factions, but if you asked a fan what they expect out of the Necron, they'll say 'robots with green lightning weapons', and every kit that they've gotten has fit perfectly that theme.
When you look at Chaos Marines, one fan will want more daemon engines, another will want cultists, another will want more options for traitor guard, and still another will want nothing more than new rules for the Vindicator for their Iron Warriors. Any one kit that GW puts out is likely to disappoint more Chaos players than it pleases.
Combine that with the fact that many chaos units have lost more options than they've gained, and you end up with plenty of grumpy people, even if they've only been with the faction since 7th edition.
3.5 was far from perfect, but it is something Chaos players have been paying for for 15+ years now.
And as drbored said, Chaos is a vast concept that covers so many different things, and for everything GW adds, we lose two more things (this time around it's tons of HQ options and all our fething Cult Troops ).
ClockworkZion wrote: I still expect The Old World as a possible launch next year so they can go 40k-AoS-HH-OW in a cycle so they don't double tap on any crowds.
Then again that might just be what the plan was before Covid happened.
With 40k 10th (unofficially) slated for next year, I don't see how it *could* be TOW. A big launch like I would expect for TOW is a once per year release slot, I don't see how TOW and 10th can happen in the same year, so either TOW is delayed or 10th is delayed or next year works out to be expensive.
ClockworkZion wrote: I still expect The Old World as a possible launch next year so they can go 40k-AoS-HH-OW in a cycle so they don't double tap on any crowds.
Then again that might just be what the plan was before Covid happened.
With 40k 10th (unofficially) slated for next year, I don't see how it *could* be TOW. A big launch like I would expect for TOW is a once per year release slot, I don't see how TOW and 10th can happen in the same year, so either TOW is delayed or 10th is delayed or next year works out to be expensive.
I'm saying I expect TOW instead of 10th. I know the community expects 10th because it's the end of the 3 year cycle, but I'm hoping by putting a 4th major game in the mix all the games end up on 4 year cycles instead.
ClockworkZion wrote: I still expect The Old World as a possible launch next year so they can go 40k-AoS-HH-OW in a cycle so they don't double tap on any crowds.
Then again that might just be what the plan was before Covid happened.
With 40k 10th (unofficially) slated for next year, I don't see how it *could* be TOW. A big launch like I would expect for TOW is a once per year release slot, I don't see how TOW and 10th can happen in the same year, so either TOW is delayed or 10th is delayed or next year works out to be expensive.
I'm saying I expect TOW instead of 10th. I know the community expects 10th because it's the end of the 3 year cycle, but I'm hoping by putting a 4th major game in the mix all the games end up on 4 year cycles instead.
I've got mixed feelings on this sort of thing. On the one hand: it gives 9th a longer lifespan, but there are some really key issues with 9th. On the other hand, The Old World is going to be a forgeworld release. I see it sprinkled in among other things the same way the Middle Earth Strategy Game is. There may be an initial big hubbalaboo about it in the first months of its release, but after that? Who knows? I don't see it interrupting the current cycle of AoS, 40k, 30k and keeping things on a 3 year cycle.
H.B.M.C. wrote: 3.5 was far from perfect, but it is something Chaos players have been paying for for 15+ years now.
And as drbored said, Chaos is a vast concept that covers so many different things, and for everything GW adds, we lose two more things (this time around it's tons of HQ options and all our fething Cult Troops ).
It's a shame the Legion supplement for 7th lasted less than a year. It proved my point of how all Legions can theoretically fit in one codex and keep a majority of unit options.
Granted the Legions were absolutely not balanced there either but there ya go.
EviscerationPlague wrote: It's a shame the Legion supplement for 7th lasted less than a year. It proved my point of how all Legions can theoretically fit in one codex and keep a majority of unit options.
The one bit of comfort I tend to get from this hobby is that at the very least, after I've built and painted a model, it's done. And 90% of the time I enjoy that process.
I refuse to buy kits that I personally feel are too old or don't match the aesthetic of the army that they're for (in this case, bikers and rhinos and such) and simply wait until they get updated.
ClockworkZion wrote: I still expect The Old World as a possible launch next year so they can go 40k-AoS-HH-OW in a cycle so they don't double tap on any crowds.
Then again that might just be what the plan was before Covid happened.
With 40k 10th (unofficially) slated for next year, I don't see how it *could* be TOW. A big launch like I would expect for TOW is a once per year release slot, I don't see how TOW and 10th can happen in the same year, so either TOW is delayed or 10th is delayed or next year works out to be expensive.
I'm saying I expect TOW instead of 10th. I know the community expects 10th because it's the end of the 3 year cycle, but I'm hoping by putting a 4th major game in the mix all the games end up on 4 year cycles instead.
I've got mixed feelings on this sort of thing. On the one hand: it gives 9th a longer lifespan, but there are some really key issues with 9th. On the other hand, The Old World is going to be a forgeworld release. I see it sprinkled in among other things the same way the Middle Earth Strategy Game is. There may be an initial big hubbalaboo about it in the first months of its release, but after that? Who knows? I don't see it interrupting the current cycle of AoS, 40k, 30k and keeping things on a 3 year cycle.
This big Horus Heresy push is also a Forge World release. Although I’m not expecting The Old World to have that level of investment unfortunately.
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
What's interesting to me is that the new Horus Heresy has me much more excited than the prospect of what no doubt will be yet another mediocre book for Chaos. If by chance there is some abuseable over powered thing in the book like what we have seen with the last few books, that will still be rather sad.
Starting up some Iron Warriors for the 31st Millennium just seem so much more exciting!
I definitely understand this sentiment. I prefer the 40k Chaos models quite a lot, and I'm always excited about the potential of more Chaos Space Marine models.
But, I am indeed excited for 30k. The chance to play a big army game that isn't updated every 3 years that might actually be relatively balanced and more friendly for narrative players has me pretty thrilled.
But Sisters of Battle and Chaos Space Marines are my 2 favorite 40k factions. So, I hope they just get treated well, if not from a rules standpoint, then at least from a model standpoint, and so far that aspect has been pretty spot on for me. Just a handful of things I want updated.
I've been playing Chaos for three editions now and they just never seem to ever be right. I would love for them to be treated well, but from what I've been told they haven't been treated well since their fourth edition book, which is widely considered to be perfect.
I'll admit that some of it is nostalgia-goggles. 3.5 had so many options, but it was also a very broken Codex. Ever since then, we've been punished for it.
But, a big part of that is that Chaos Space Marines is something different to every fan.
Spoiler:
To one fan, Chaos Marines is a faction where you can take a handful of marines and swarms of cultists to throw at enemy lines like fodder.
To another, Chaos Marines is spikey marines with relics from the Horus Heresy now dedicated to the dark gods.
And another, Chaos Marines is a warpsmith daemonprince that leads an army of siege engines.
If you compare that to factions like Tau, Necron, Sisters of Battle, Custodes, or Imperial/Chaos Knights, you can see that many of these factions have a very straightforward theme. Yes, there are different army builds in each of these factions, but if you asked a fan what they expect out of the Necron, they'll say 'robots with green lightning weapons', and every kit that they've gotten has fit perfectly that theme.
When you look at Chaos Marines, one fan will want more daemon engines, another will want cultists, another will want more options for traitor guard, and still another will want nothing more than new rules for the Vindicator for their Iron Warriors. Any one kit that GW puts out is likely to disappoint more Chaos players than it pleases.
Combine that with the fact that many chaos units have lost more options than they've gained, and you end up with plenty of grumpy people, even if they've only been with the faction since 7th edition.
Edit: Oops, I pressed submit, not preview
I was going to say that this has been said before but GW could solve all of this by expanding Chaos beyond just CSM. Spikey marines in CSM, cults/Ren guard in Lost and the Damned, and daemon engines in Dark Mechanicus.
Then you they'd need to revamp the ally rules, but let's be honest, they should have been revamped a long time ago to account for force mixing in a setting accurate way. There's no reason an Imperial player shouldn't be able to field a lore accurate force of Guard with Marine fire support and Inquisitorial command any more than a Chaos player should be restricted from adding renegade guard and true daemons to their Word Bearers warband.
The problem currently is that most of the force construction rules are either way too general (rule of 3 on everything rather than bespoke unit restrictions for example) or way too restrictive ( all models loosing all of their Chapter rules etc if they include anything outside of their specific codex-subfaction combo that isn't otherwise specifically called out as being ok). They should be paring back bloat in things like strategems and instead give a choice between leveraging the strengths of a combined arms approach to Imperium/Chaos or focus on making the most out of a more specialized force without allies.
At that point the only issue is book costs which again, wasn't an issue until they switched from soft to hard cover and doubled the price of all codexes...
I'm also just concerned that we won't have all that much time to actually play with the chaos marines, if 10th edition is coming next year. There's a little birdy that's talking about 10th ed being a simplification and return to indexes.
What's interesting to me is that the new Horus Heresy has me much more excited than the prospect of what no doubt will be yet another mediocre book for Chaos. If by chance there is some abuseable over powered thing in the book like what we have seen with the last few books, that will still be rather sad.
Starting up some Iron Warriors for the 31st Millennium just seem so much more exciting!
I definitely understand this sentiment. I prefer the 40k Chaos models quite a lot, and I'm always excited about the potential of more Chaos Space Marine models.
But, I am indeed excited for 30k. The chance to play a big army game that isn't updated every 3 years that might actually be relatively balanced and more friendly for narrative players has me pretty thrilled.
But Sisters of Battle and Chaos Space Marines are my 2 favorite 40k factions. So, I hope they just get treated well, if not from a rules standpoint, then at least from a model standpoint, and so far that aspect has been pretty spot on for me. Just a handful of things I want updated.
I've been playing Chaos for three editions now and they just never seem to ever be right. I would love for them to be treated well, but from what I've been told they haven't been treated well since their fourth edition book, which is widely considered to be perfect.
I'll admit that some of it is nostalgia-goggles. 3.5 had so many options, but it was also a very broken Codex. Ever since then, we've been punished for it.
But, a big part of that is that Chaos Space Marines is something different to every fan.
Spoiler:
To one fan, Chaos Marines is a faction where you can take a handful of marines and swarms of cultists to throw at enemy lines like fodder.
To another, Chaos Marines is spikey marines with relics from the Horus Heresy now dedicated to the dark gods.
And another, Chaos Marines is a warpsmith daemonprince that leads an army of siege engines.
If you compare that to factions like Tau, Necron, Sisters of Battle, Custodes, or Imperial/Chaos Knights, you can see that many of these factions have a very straightforward theme. Yes, there are different army builds in each of these factions, but if you asked a fan what they expect out of the Necron, they'll say 'robots with green lightning weapons', and every kit that they've gotten has fit perfectly that theme.
When you look at Chaos Marines, one fan will want more daemon engines, another will want cultists, another will want more options for traitor guard, and still another will want nothing more than new rules for the Vindicator for their Iron Warriors. Any one kit that GW puts out is likely to disappoint more Chaos players than it pleases.
Combine that with the fact that many chaos units have lost more options than they've gained, and you end up with plenty of grumpy people, even if they've only been with the faction since 7th edition.
Edit: Oops, I pressed submit, not preview
I was going to say that this has been said before but GW could solve all of this by expanding Chaos beyond just CSM. Spikey marines in CSM, cults/Ren guard in Lost and the Damned, and daemon engines in Dark Mechanicus.
Then you they'd need to revamp the ally rules, but let's be honest, they should have been revamped a long time ago to account for force mixing in a setting accurate way. There's no reason an Imperial player shouldn't be able to field a lore accurate force of Guard with Marine fire support and Inquisitorial command any more than a Chaos player should be restricted from adding renegade guard and true daemons to their Word Bearers warband.
The problem currently is that most of the force construction rules are either way too general (rule of 3 on everything rather than bespoke unit restrictions for example) or way too restrictive ( all models loosing all of their Chapter rules etc if they include anything outside of their specific codex-subfaction combo that isn't otherwise specifically called out as being ok). They should be paring back bloat in things like strategems and instead give a choice between leveraging the strengths of a combined arms approach to Imperium/Chaos or focus on making the most out of a more specialized force without allies.
At that point the only issue is book costs which again, wasn't an issue until they switched from soft to hard cover and doubled the price of all codexes...
Agreed. The restrictions to units is hamfisted and proof that their own books aren't even internally balanced (in the slightest) and their ally rules punish you a bit too much. Raven Guard don't stop being Raven Guard just because a regiment of Guardsmen is also on the field.
Honestly, they're really close. Losing doctrines for Space Marines, Sacred Rites for Sisters of Battle, things like that? I'm ok with losing those rules in order to ally something. Anything further than that is just kind of disheartening.
But, like I said, rules will change often. Every 3 years at least, it seems. At the very least, GW does seem to want you to be able to play with your toys in as many ways as possible (to encourage you to buy more). There's a conversation over on B&C about people starting Emperor's Children and when the EC Codex eventually drops, it's likely that many of their units wont exist (EC Raptors and such). In an ideal situation, we'd have a more flexible ally system, so you can take those EC Chaos Marines from the regular Chaos Marine Codex, give them a 'choose your own warband' trait that matches your theme, and then ally in the new Emperor's Children stuff as you see fit. It'd be ideal if you could do this with Thousand Sons and Death Guard, and yet instead you get punished for it by having rules stripped away.
Still, complaining about rules being stripped away while also complaining about there being too many rules seems a bit odd to me. Bit of hypocrisy on my part, but I don't apologize for it.
And at the heart of all of this is the fact that the rules and them breaking only really matters at top levels of play. So, at the end of the day, I'll add a detachment of Emperor's Children to my Night Lords with a side of Traitor Guard if I want to.
ClockworkZion wrote: I still expect The Old World as a possible launch next year so they can go 40k-AoS-HH-OW in a cycle so they don't double tap on any crowds.
Then again that might just be what the plan was before Covid happened.
With 40k 10th (unofficially) slated for next year, I don't see how it *could* be TOW. A big launch like I would expect for TOW is a once per year release slot, I don't see how TOW and 10th can happen in the same year, so either TOW is delayed or 10th is delayed or next year works out to be expensive.
I'm saying I expect TOW instead of 10th. I know the community expects 10th because it's the end of the 3 year cycle, but I'm hoping by putting a 4th major game in the mix all the games end up on 4 year cycles instead.
I've got mixed feelings on this sort of thing. On the one hand: it gives 9th a longer lifespan, but there are some really key issues with 9th. On the other hand, The Old World is going to be a forgeworld release. I see it sprinkled in among other things the same way the Middle Earth Strategy Game is. There may be an initial big hubbalaboo about it in the first months of its release, but after that? Who knows? I don't see it interrupting the current cycle of AoS, 40k, 30k and keeping things on a 3 year cycle.
Horus Heresy is a FW release as well, so I fail to see an issue.
It was mentioned earlier that Haarken Worldclaimer might be the only playable jump lord in the new codex. I honestly would not be that upset if it was made into the new official jump Lord model, with the rules to be able to convert on different weapons. I'm not sure if too many fans are that attached to the actual character himself for anyone to be to upset at his loss in the rules.
ArcaneHorror wrote: It was mentioned earlier that Haarken Worldclaimer might be the only playable jump lord in the new codex. I honestly would not be that upset if it was made into the new official jump Lord model, with the rules to be able to convert on different weapons. I'm not sure if too many fans are that attached to the actual character himself for anyone to be to upset at his loss in the rules.
TOW next year is tricky, we know it takes them ~3-4 years for a new model line (from design to release) with a pandemic between
I doubt that there will be a release without a starter set and going with 2 exiting model lines of old fantasy models won't be received well
not even talking about that it would have been not enough time to get the rules done and tested for all the factions
Another point is that releasing 2 Specialist Games in a row does not really fit their marketing model
there are 3 main games at the moment, HorusHeresy is now kind of the 4th and TOW would be the 5th
I rather expect another big LotR release timed with the new show that goes in between SG releases instead of 10th 40k (if GW gets the rights and want to invest into it)
10th Edition would be much easier and also less risky
One can just hope it is a soft reset and the new CSM book survives the edition change
Isn't the "three-year cycle" a thing that was entirely made up by the online *cough* 'community'? Has anyone who actually works for GW ever said anything publically about them even having a long-term plan for new edition frequency?
EDIT: Four main games, all on three-year new edition cycles, seems like a really stupid business plan, to be honest.
kodos wrote: TOW next year is tricky, we know it takes them ~3-4 years for a new model line (from design to release) with a pandemic between
I doubt that there will be a release without a starter set and going with 2 exiting model lines of old fantasy models won't be received well
not even talking about that it would have been not enough time to get the rules done and tested for all the factions
Another point is that releasing 2 Specialist Games in a row does not really fit their marketing model
there are 3 main games at the moment, HorusHeresy is now kind of the 4th and TOW would be the 5th
I rather expect another big LotR release timed with the new show that goes in between SG releases instead of 10th 40k (if GW gets the rights and want to invest into it)
10th Edition would be much easier and also less risky
One can just hope it is a soft reset and the new CSM book survives the edition change
Lotr just had its biggest release since the new edition, they just spread some of it out over months for reasons we don't know. I wouldn't expect a follow up on the scale of Defense of the north already next year.
Duskweaver wrote: Isn't the "three-year cycle" a thing that was entirely made up by the online *cough* 'community'? Has anyone who actually works for GW ever said anything publically about them even having a long-term plan for new edition frequency?
EDIT: Four main games, all on three-year new edition cycles, seems like a really stupid business plan, to be honest.
I preferred when it was four-year editions for WHFB and 40k, so every 2 years one of them would be getting an update. Seemed to work well. The release schedule seems so rushed these days, I can't be the only one who thinks GW releasing something literally every weekend is a bit much.
Duskweaver wrote: Isn't the "three-year cycle" a thing that was entirely made up by the online *cough* 'community'? Has anyone who actually works for GW ever said anything publically about them even having a long-term plan for new edition frequency?
EDIT: Four main games, all on three-year new edition cycles, seems like a really stupid business plan, to be honest.
I preferred when it was four-year editions for WHFB and 40k, so every 2 years one of them would be getting an update. Seemed to work well. The release schedule seems so rushed these days, I can't be the only one who thinks GW releasing something literally every weekend is a bit much.
Probably IS good for sales though, unfortunately.
Releasing something every weekend with the amount of Games GW has is not the problem I think.
It's more that they seem to think they have to release a book every week and don't leave time for an edition to breathe and develop. I don't think crusade will survive into 10th for example, instead it will be replaced by something similar yet different that's not compatible with Crusade because GW doesn't want to think things through. There were many good ideas in 8th edition CA books that never got properly worked out or refined and instead 9th made tabula rasa to all of these, introduced a worse point structure and killed of all of the existing much more interesting mission styles.
Duskweaver wrote: Isn't the "three-year cycle" a thing that was entirely made up by the online *cough* 'community'? Has anyone who actually works for GW ever said anything publically about them even having a long-term plan for new edition frequency?
EDIT: Four main games, all on three-year new edition cycles, seems like a really stupid business plan, to be honest.
It has never been formally declared by GW, but it seems pretty clear that they're trying to regularize their release schedules. E.g. the explicit quarterly roadmaps for Kill Team and Necromunda are good examples of this kind of thinking. The rapid pace at which they release codices is another signal that they are trying to move away from the languorous lengths of <8E editions.
From a business POV it makes sense. Edition launches are natural entry points for new customers and give old players an excuse to reinvest, both of which produce sales spikes. Knowing you have one of these every summer allows you to plan more effectively than having a fallow year in every three.
That said, I'm kind of skeptical that they'll be able to turn HH and OW into franchises on par with 40K and AoS. HH is cool, but unless they use this as an opportunity to make both First Born and Primaris viable in 40K, it seems like you're serving a niche audience of 1) fans of the books, 2) lore-focused players. There can be riches in niches, but it feels more Necromunda-scale than new edition 40K. OW obviously had a big fan base at one point, but it'll be nearly a decade on by the time it launches. Those players are getting longer in the tooth and a ranked mass battle game is a tough sell to cash strapped youths. GW is great at what it does, but elevating both of those franchises to "release year anchors" is a big bet.
I'm curious why they don't use the third year in the cycle to really blow out Kill Team, War Cry, and Necromunda. In any case, will be interesting to watch it all unfold!
Duskweaver wrote:Isn't the "three-year cycle" a thing that was entirely made up by the online *cough* 'community'? Has anyone who actually works for GW ever said anything publically about them even having a long-term plan for new edition frequency?
EDIT: Four main games, all on three-year new edition cycles, seems like a really stupid business plan, to be honest.
40k: 7th in 2014, 8th in 2017 and 9th in 2020
AoS: 1st 2015, 2nd 2018, 3rd 2021
while we have nothing official from GW (of course not, they don't want you to know of any release prior the pre-order announcement), there is a pattern here
not something made up but a conclusion based on the previous editions
Lord of the Rings follows a different pattern, with Rules for the movies followed by a new Rulebook after, with the One Rulebook in 2003/4, Battle of Pelennor Fields in 2018
so 2 main games have a 3 year cycle and the 3rd having a "whatever hollywood does" cycle, hence a 4th main game fits into the 3 year cycle and the chance is high that Horus Heresy will be that game
means 40k 10th in 2023, AoS 4th in 2024 and HH 3rd in 2025, Old World being a SG game doing their own to slowly build up the setting and rules, same as HH did until now, and LotR is doing its own cycle anyway
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Lotr just had its biggest release since the new edition, they just spread some of it out over months for reasons we don't know. I wouldn't expect a follow up on the scale of Defense of the north already next year.
in the past, with a new movie cycle we got a new starter box, question is will there be a new starter box with the Amazon Show or not and if there is one, will it feature models from the show or not
A moment here. If I'm not mistaken, one of the leaked rules for the Master of Possesion was like "He can ressurrect a whole miniature with DAEMONKIN keyword in a squad". And we're suposed to believe that Demons of Chaos will be able to be 25% of your army. So, if the DAEMONKIN also affects the demons, wouldn't this let some crazy overpowered combination? Like, lol
(I don't remember where I saw the changed MoP rules)
Garrac wrote: A moment here. If I'm not mistaken, one of the leaked rules for the Master of Possesion was like "He can ressurrect a whole miniature with DAEMONKIN keyword in a squad". And we're suposed to believe that Demons of Chaos will be able to be 25% of your army. So, if the DAEMONKIN also affects the demons, wouldn't this let some crazy overpowered combination? Like, lol
(I don't remember where I saw the changed MoP rules)
Daemons don't have the Daemonkin keyword.
And the biggest model that's likely to have that is an Obliterator, which is better than any model from a Daemons' squad.
Garrac wrote: A moment here. If I'm not mistaken, one of the leaked rules for the Master of Possesion was like "He can ressurrect a whole miniature with DAEMONKIN keyword in a squad". And we're suposed to believe that Demons of Chaos will be able to be 25% of your army. So, if the DAEMONKIN also affects the demons, wouldn't this let some crazy overpowered combination? Like, lol
(I don't remember where I saw the changed MoP rules)
Daemons don't have the Daemonkin keyword.
And the biggest model that's likely to have that is an Obliterator, which is better than any model from a Daemons' squad.
Wasn't DAEMONKIN going to replace all DEMON keywords?
Ah, the source was the reddit post, and it's not exclusive to the MoP, it's a spell from the Malefic Discipline
Garrac wrote: A moment here. If I'm not mistaken, one of the leaked rules for the Master of Possesion was like "He can ressurrect a whole miniature with DAEMONKIN keyword in a squad". And we're suposed to believe that Demons of Chaos will be able to be 25% of your army. So, if the DAEMONKIN also affects the demons, wouldn't this let some crazy overpowered combination? Like, lol
(I don't remember where I saw the changed MoP rules)
Daemons don't have the Daemonkin keyword.
And the biggest model that's likely to have that is an Obliterator, which is better than any model from a Daemons' squad.
Wasn't DAEMONKIN going to replace all DEMON keywords?
Ah, the source was the reddit post, and it's not exclusive to the MoP, it's a spell from the Malefic Discipline
Possibly? I haven't heard of that, but it might. I think that might only be for CSM Daemons, though. To crush synergies between it and the actual Daemons Codex.
Duskweaver wrote: Isn't the "three-year cycle" a thing that was entirely made up by the online *cough* 'community'? Has anyone who actually works for GW ever said anything publically about them even having a long-term plan for new edition frequency?
EDIT: Four main games, all on three-year new edition cycles, seems like a really stupid business plan, to be honest.
I preferred when it was four-year editions for WHFB and 40k, so every 2 years one of them would be getting an update. Seemed to work well. The release schedule seems so rushed these days, I can't be the only one who thinks GW releasing something literally every weekend is a bit much.
Probably IS good for sales though, unfortunately.
Releasing something every weekend with the amount of Games GW has is not the problem I think.
It's more that they seem to think they have to release a book every week and don't leave time for an edition to breathe and develop. I don't think crusade will survive into 10th for example, instead it will be replaced by something similar yet different that's not compatible with Crusade because GW doesn't want to think things through. There were many good ideas in 8th edition CA books that never got properly worked out or refined and instead 9th made tabula rasa to all of these, introduced a worse point structure and killed of all of the existing much more interesting mission styles.
Garrac wrote: A moment here. If I'm not mistaken, one of the leaked rules for the Master of Possesion was like "He can ressurrect a whole miniature with DAEMONKIN keyword in a squad". And we're suposed to believe that Demons of Chaos will be able to be 25% of your army. So, if the DAEMONKIN also affects the demons, wouldn't this let some crazy overpowered combination? Like, lol
(I don't remember where I saw the changed MoP rules)
Daemons don't have the Daemonkin keyword.
And the biggest model that's likely to have that is an Obliterator, which is better than any model from a Daemons' squad.
Wasn't DAEMONKIN going to replace all DEMON keywords?
Ah, the source was the reddit post, and it's not exclusive to the MoP, it's a spell from the Malefic Discipline
DAEMONKIN will replace DAEMON in the CSM book.
DAEMON will stay DAEMON in the Daemon book.
Or it will be GRIBBLYWIBBLY in the Daemon book and everyone (CSM, TS, DG and Daemons) will keep DAEMON as well, so at least Grey Knights can still kill DAEMONs with their special rules. (EDIT for clarity, all warlord traits, strategems and auras will work off GRIBBLYWIBBLY not DAEMON in the Daemon book).
But the rules writers have just about managed to figure out that being able to cross buff between codexes is bad for balance, it took them 4+ years but they did it, sort of. That is why TS have HERETIC ASTARTES and ARCANA ASTARTES, DG have HERETIC ASTARTEs and BUBOTIC ASTARTES and we expect CSM to have HERETIC ASTARTES and ANGRY ASTARTES.
Garrac wrote: A moment here. If I'm not mistaken, one of the leaked rules for the Master of Possesion was like "He can ressurrect a whole miniature with DAEMONKIN keyword in a squad". And we're suposed to believe that Demons of Chaos will be able to be 25% of your army. So, if the DAEMONKIN also affects the demons, wouldn't this let some crazy overpowered combination? Like, lol
(I don't remember where I saw the changed MoP rules)
Daemons don't have the Daemonkin keyword.
And the biggest model that's likely to have that is an Obliterator, which is better than any model from a Daemons' squad.
Wasn't DAEMONKIN going to replace all DEMON keywords?
Ah, the source was the reddit post, and it's not exclusive to the MoP, it's a spell from the Malefic Discipline
DAEMONKIN will replace DAEMON in the CSM book.
DAEMON will stay DAEMON in the Daemon book.
Or it will be GRIBBLYWIBBLY in the Daemon book and everyone (CSM, TS, DG and Daemons) will keep DAEMON as well, so at least Grey Knights can still kill DAEMONs with their special rules. (EDIT for clarity, all warlord traits, strategems and auras will work off GRIBBLYWIBBLY not DAEMON in the Daemon book).
But the rules writers have just about managed to figure out that being able to cross buff between codexes is bad for balance, it took them 4+ years but they did it, sort of. That is why TS have HERETIC ASTARTES and ARCANA ASTARTES, DG have HERETIC ASTARTEs and BUBOTIC ASTARTES and we expect CSM to have HERETIC ASTARTES and ANGRY ASTARTES.
It could also be a misapplication of the scary phrase "He dentist!". Showing the true cruelty of the model. I mean, give them a comfy chair and then viola, get them with the slowly spinning drill.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: It could also be a misapplication of the scary phrase "He dentist!". Showing the true cruelty of the model. I mean, give them a comfy chair and then viola, get them with the slowly spinning drill.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: You mean like how Armageddon was released and then Necromunda was re-released? How much compatability did GW build in?
GW- "Armageddon what Armageddon? I didn't see a thing!"
Armageddon was a lazy affort to sell new terrain and old models with just using the old Necromunda rules (i.e. modified 2nd edition 40k rules) minus most of the campaign system. It's successor was the former edition of Kill Team, not the current Necromunda.
other voices said that Armageddon was done because of a clash between 2 design teams as one got Necromunda, but the other one wanted it, so the made their own similar game with the main target of being close in rules but faster in release
yet still one of the better Kill Team games GW made (the one during 4th was better)
kodos wrote: other voices said that Armageddon was done because of a clash between 2 design teams as one got Necromunda, but the other one wanted it, so the made their own similar game with the main target of being close in rules but faster in release
Doesn't make sense for me. So one design team took some outdated rules, left the fun aside (real campaign system) and called it a win? I'm very suspicious.
kodos wrote: yet still one of the better Kill Team games GW made (the one during 4th was better)
The one with Kill Team versus guards? Well, as one player had to be the dungeon master with lots of the same troops, it wasn't a great success. Fun, yes. But you usually don't go to a store or meeting with a bag full of Ork boyz, termagants etc. just to play the antagonist. Of course most people wanted to play the Kill Team.
kodos wrote: other voices said that Armageddon was done because of a clash between 2 design teams as one got Necromunda, but the other one wanted it, so the made their own similar game with the main target of being close in rules but faster in release
Doesn't make sense for me. So one design team took some outdated rules, left the fun aside (real campaign system) and called it a win? I'm very suspicious.
That does sound like something GW would do though, especially during Kirby era.
kodos wrote: other voices said that Armageddon was done because of a clash between 2 design teams as one got Necromunda, but the other one wanted it, so the made their own similar game with the main target of being close in rules but faster in release
Doesn't make sense for me. So one design team took some outdated rules, left the fun aside (real campaign system) and called it a win? I'm very suspicious.
That does sound like something GW would do though, especially during Kirby era.
There's a "Boxed Game Division", and it appears that there's a lot of competition between them and other departments.
Duskweaver wrote:Isn't the "three-year cycle" a thing that was entirely made up by the online *cough* 'community'? Has anyone who actually works for GW ever said anything publically about them even having a long-term plan for new edition frequency? EDIT: Four main games, all on three-year new edition cycles, seems like a really stupid business plan, to be honest.
40k: 7th in 2014, 8th in 2017 and 9th in 2020 AoS: 1st 2015, 2nd 2018, 3rd 2021
while we have nothing official from GW (of course not, they don't want you to know of any release prior the pre-order announcement), there is a pattern here not something made up but a conclusion based on the previous editions
Lord of the Rings follows a different pattern, with Rules for the movies followed by a new Rulebook after, with the One Rulebook in 2003/4, Battle of Pelennor Fields in 2018
so 2 main games have a 3 year cycle and the 3rd having a "whatever hollywood does" cycle, hence a 4th main game fits into the 3 year cycle and the chance is high that Horus Heresy will be that game
means 40k 10th in 2023, AoS 4th in 2024 and HH 3rd in 2025, Old World being a SG game doing their own to slowly build up the setting and rules, same as HH did until now, and LotR is doing its own cycle anyway
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Lotr just had its biggest release since the new edition, they just spread some of it out over months for reasons we don't know. I wouldn't expect a follow up on the scale of Defense of the north already next year.
in the past, with a new movie cycle we got a new starter box, question is will there be a new starter box with the Amazon Show or not and if there is one, will it feature models from the show or not
HH is still a SG game, I don't know where people keep getting the idea that its not when its been made explicitly clear in multiple places. Likewise the leaks from the influencer event a couple weeks ago indicated that there s no plan for the game to get regular edition updates and the plan is to support the game in a manner similar to AT and Necromunda - i.e. regular "splatbook" type releases.
Doesn't make sense for me. So one design team took some outdated rules, left the fun aside (real campaign system) and called it a win? I'm very suspicious.
Yes. The publications team (responsible for doing one-off products and side games) wanted to re-release Necromunda. James Hewitt and the Specialist Games team got the permission to do it instead. The publications team then cooked up "Shadow War Armageddon" as totally-not-Necromunda and rushed to scoop specialist games by putting it out first with basically a lazy copy-paste of the old Necromunda rules updated for use with 40k miniature collections.
James has implied that the publications team (or rather one specific person on the team) had a difference of opinion of what Newcromunda should look like and hoped to sabotage the success of it by releasing Shadow War as a superior alternative that would contrast favorably vs James Necromunda design, and ultimately result in Necromunda flopping so that the publications team could take over running it.
I'm looking at the part where it says legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and 1 special weapon each. Praying that's not the case, really really don't want that. I have 8 squads that are outfitted with double plasma guns, double flamers, double melta guns double heavy bolters and one squad double missile launchers. Now I gotta break their arms and backpacks off and give them different weapons, so fething frustrating.
kodos wrote: yet still one of the better Kill Team games GW made (the one during 4th was better)
The one with Kill Team versus guards?
the one in the back of the 4th Edition Rulebook
chaos0xomega wrote: HH is still a SG game, I don't know where people keep getting the idea that its not when its been made explicitly clear in multiple places. Likewise the leaks from the influencer event a couple weeks ago indicated that there s no plan for the game to get regular edition updates and the plan is to support the game in a manner similar to AT and Necromunda - i.e. regular "splatbook" type releases.
This comes up simply because of the large amount of plastic that is released now, and some people dream of a full plastic range
in addition, some of the ForgeWorld stuff was re-branded as "Expert Level Model Kits" (started as a test to combine webshops with the relase of the Tau Codex) which stirs up rumours that HH Resin kits are coming into the regular GW shop
for GW to get the maximum profit out of the investment, going the way of the main-game edition cycle makes sense
HH is popular enough, for a lot of people it is a better 40k using more detailed rules they miss in 40k with availability being the only problem etc.
to keep it as a side game, all the work for new rules and plastic models instead of resin upgrades for exiting kits makes only sense if GW wants HH to grow
and if it stays a SG game, looking at Necromunda a regular update/re-release of the rulebook is still a thing and it is still not a reason why 10th 40k won't happen next year
Irritating that Legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and special weapon. I got 8 squads that are doubled up with either special weapons or heavy weapons, now I gotta change them. Praying that it's wrong or just not true so I don't have to break my fething models apart.
Lord Tarkin wrote: Irritating that Legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and special weapon. I got 8 squads that are doubled up with either special weapons or heavy weapons, now I gotta change them. Praying that it's wrong or just not true so I don't have to break my fething models apart.
I'm in the same boat. A lot of the rules are rough translations of a playtest of the rules, so here's hoping that it's still the same old 1 special or 1 heavy per 5
Lord Tarkin wrote: Irritating that Legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and special weapon. I got 8 squads that are doubled up with either special weapons or heavy weapons, now I gotta change them. Praying that it's wrong or just not true so I don't have to break my fething models apart.
GW, in a rare moment of legitimate genius, made it possible to take two heavy weapons in a CSM squad in 8th ed - which was a very neat choice.
Of course, because it's GW, they had to correct this choice. White Knights and other ghouls will tell you his is fluffy, actually.
Lord Tarkin wrote: Irritating that Legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and special weapon. I got 8 squads that are doubled up with either special weapons or heavy weapons, now I gotta change them. Praying that it's wrong or just not true so I don't have to break my fething models apart.
GW, in a rare moment of legitimate genius, made it possible to take two heavy weapons in a CSM squad in 8th ed - which was a very neat choice.
Of course, because it's GW, they had to correct this choice. White Knights and other ghouls will tell you his is fluffy, actually.
Lord Tarkin wrote: Irritating that Legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and special weapon. I got 8 squads that are doubled up with either special weapons or heavy weapons, now I gotta change them. Praying that it's wrong or just not true so I don't have to break my fething models apart.
I'm more interested what the breakpoint is at 5 models, is it special only at 5? If so my 5 man lascannon blobs will be sad. Saying that if you have some that are double special and some that are double heavy... swap one special with one heavy to meet requirements? Not sure that needs anything breaking apart unless you're all heavies or specials and potentially don't want to take them in 5's.
Lord Tarkin wrote: Irritating that Legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and special weapon. I got 8 squads that are doubled up with either special weapons or heavy weapons, now I gotta change them. Praying that it's wrong or just not true so I don't have to break my fething models apart.
I'm more interested what the breakpoint is at 5 models, is it special only at 5? If so my 5 man lascannon blobs will be sad. Saying that if you have some that are double special and some that are double heavy... swap one special with one heavy to meet requirements? Not sure that needs anything breaking apart unless you're all heavies or specials and potentially don't want to take them in 5's.
I'm fairly sure it will be the same as tactical marines.
Voss wrote: Meanwhile, Hellblasters are re-creating legion support squads in defiance of the Codex Astartes, because reasons.
Who's gonna tell him?
Tell who, Bobby? He's fine with it. He's bemused that the Space Marines have been following the Codex so slavishly all this time.
I'm just amused by the dichotomy, the rulebook-bound loyalists have options and variance, and the 'chaotic' faction is hard coded to insane degree.
GW's concept of chaos is far more 'daemons of law' (with their set forms and functions) and rigid followers of a 'one true path' exemplified by each of the traitor legions.
The random tentacles are rather disruptive of the real underlying themes, to the point that they tend to feel out of place now.
• 4+ inv to DAEMONKIN units and enemy's take mortals if they charge
• Beat the models toughness on d6 destroy it
• 6's to hit auto wound for a DAEMONKIN unit
• +1 str or toughness (or both if rolled high on test)
The 4+ inv it's the most intriguing, isn't it? At first, what you all said about the daemonkin key convinced me, but then why should a sorcerer need to invoke a posessed unit?
Lord Tarkin wrote: I'm looking at the part where it says legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and 1 special weapon each. Praying that's not the case, really really don't want that. I have 8 squads that are outfitted with double plasma guns, double flamers, double melta guns double heavy bolters and one squad double missile launchers. Now I gotta break their arms and backpacks off and give them different weapons, so fething frustrating.
If each unit is visibly distinct from the others, maybe.
But I'd take one of your plasma gunners and swap him with one of your heavy bolters, and there's two units that don't need any changes instead of a squad with two heavies and another with two specials, you now have two units with one of each- no remodeling required. Then I'd swap a flamer dude for a missile launcher dude, and that's two more units that don't need any changes. Your double meltaguns don't seem to have a corresponding double-up heavy to swap with, so one of the models in that unit might need to be modified.
I used to move the heavies and specials around for my metal sisters all the time; sometimes I'd pull all the heavies out of BSS units to field them as retributors- ditto for specials becoming dominion units.
I have seen people really theme up individual units though- so much so that this approach wouldn't work. If that's you, obviously, my suggestion won't be helpful.
It does serve as an object lesson for people though: with Crusade, I've been tempted to really kit out each unit with a theme and identity... but it does inhibit the flexibility of my toy soldiers when I can't group them up in alternative configurations... So as much as the extensive theming of individual units within the army appeals to me as both a modeler and a storyteller, it's a good idea to keep my theming discreet enough that models can still work in different configurations and arrangements when they need to.
The thing is, even if they're limiting you to the box, the rules should still allow you to take 2 heavy weapons or 2 special weapons in 10, since you can have a missile launcher and heavy bolter, or plasma gun and melta gun, or plasma gun and missile launcher. Options are there.
But, if we're going to be doom and gloom over the presence or lack of a singular weapon, I'd rather direct our doom and gloom to the fact we haven't seen any hint of the rumored Chaos Bikers.
drbored wrote: The thing is, even if they're limiting you to the box, the rules should still allow you to take 2 heavy weapons or 2 special weapons in 10, since you can have a missile launcher and heavy bolter, or plasma gun and melta gun, or plasma gun and missile launcher. Options are there.
But, if we're going to be doom and gloom over the presence or lack of a singular weapon, I'd rather direct our doom and gloom to the fact we haven't seen any hint of the rumored Chaos Bikers.
Bikers are horribly outdated, you're not wrong. Outriders look decent and shows they could potentially do good.
drbored wrote: The thing is, even if they're limiting you to the box, the rules should still allow you to take 2 heavy weapons or 2 special weapons in 10, since you can have a missile launcher and heavy bolter, or plasma gun and melta gun, or plasma gun and missile launcher. Options are there.
But, if we're going to be doom and gloom over the presence or lack of a singular weapon, I'd rather direct our doom and gloom to the fact we haven't seen any hint of the rumored Chaos Bikers.
Bikers are horribly outdated, you're not wrong. Outriders look decent and shows they could potentially do good.
They're just as old as Khorne Berzerkers and older than the Defiler and Noise Marines.
I know a big part of it is my fault that I put a little too much trust in the rumors and it seems like Chaos Bikers just won't be happening right now, else they would have been revealed I think. Would love to be wrong.
As it stands, setting aside World Eaters and Emperor's Children, it's Bikers, the Defiler, and Huron Blackheart that need to be brought into the modern age. Ideally the rhino-chassis vehicles and chaos land raider too, but I'd be happy with just the Bikers and Huron Blackheart at this point.
Voss wrote: Meanwhile, Hellblasters are re-creating legion support squads in defiance of the Codex Astartes, because reasons.
Who's gonna tell him?
Tell who, Bobby? He's fine with it. He's bemused that the Space Marines have been following the Codex so slavishly all this time.
I'm just amused by the dichotomy, the rulebook-bound loyalists have options and variance, and the 'chaotic' faction is hard coded to insane degree.
GW's concept of chaos is far more 'daemons of law' (with their set forms and functions) and rigid followers of a 'one true path' exemplified by each of the traitor legions.
The random tentacles are rather disruptive of the real underlying themes, to the point that they tend to feel out of place now.
This is extremely true. Chaos is the most orderly faction there is.
Every bloodletter is the same as every other bloodletter. Same for all the other lesser deamons or greater deamons.
Each of the chaos gods have the same structure, each of them has their lesser deamons, greater deamons, heralds, favored champions and so on. Complete homogeneity.
Chaos works according to extremely predictable patterns.
I also agree with the random tentacles. Chaos mutations should be alterations to things already present. A jewel turns into an eye. A piece of iconography turns into a real face. A spike turns into a horn. A helmet turns into a monstrous head. Tentacles and stuff like that should be sparse and added where they make sense. A posessed space marine or a rhino perhaps.
In Death Guard, yes, but not really across the rest of the faction. The Chosen feature tentacles on their backpacks that help them hold extra weapons, but that's about it.
As said above, for the Death Guard, there are heaps. Paint up a set and you'll be surprised how often you're going "Oh... there are more. I need more Pink Horror!"
In Death Guard, yes, but not really across the rest of the faction. The Chosen feature tentacles on their backpacks that help them hold extra weapons, but that's about it.
I intend to paint those metallic, so that they look like cables. Then I'll just clip off and file away the "danglers". All better.
Lord Tarkin wrote: Irritating that Legionary squads can only take 1 heavy weapon and special weapon. I got 8 squads that are doubled up with either special weapons or heavy weapons, now I gotta change them. Praying that it's wrong or just not true so I don't have to break my fething models apart.
I'm more interested what the breakpoint is at 5 models, is it special only at 5? If so my 5 man lascannon blobs will be sad. Saying that if you have some that are double special and some that are double heavy... swap one special with one heavy to meet requirements? Not sure that needs anything breaking apart unless you're all heavies or specials and potentially don't want to take them in 5's.
That makes sense. I could get a couple squads legal without breaking anybody, because I only have 2 squads that are double heavy weapons and they're carrying heavy bolters. It just irritates me because my squads have been like this for years now, ever since 5th edition I believe. From 5th edition until 9th, Chaos Marines could do whatever they wanted with the 2 weapon slots they had. 2 heavies, 2 specials, 1 of each or nothing at all. It was great. This may sound weird but I write a lot of fluff on my legion, and the units within my army all have their own fluff and the sergeants and captains Ect all have their own names, history and personality traits. Sergeant Loris has 2 guys in his squad carrying meltaguns, it feels weird to me changing his unit after all these years. If this BS is true, then I'm just not gonna be using the doubled up squads in any games period, and that's if I even do decide to play because GW is losing me with the constant rulebook changes. And I mostly paint and and write anyway, so this edition is just more disappointing to me than anything else.
As said above, for the Death Guard, there are heaps. Paint up a set and you'll be surprised how often you're going "Oh... there are more. I need more Pink Horror!"
Eldarain wrote: Ah yes. Chaos. The faction known for rigid equipment doctrine. Don't let the Aspiring Champion see that non standard issue gear.
How have they strayed so far?
Chapterhouse mainly.
Well that and the fact that there is always going to be some disconnect between the nature of Chaos and what can be put on the table to ensure a relatively fun (I would say balanced but someone would take offense to the word so let's stick with "fun for both players") experience. I'd be all for for a more free form army building experience, but I'll just be happy if they don't remove yet more options.
drbored wrote: The thing is, even if they're limiting you to the box, the rules should still allow you to take 2 heavy weapons or 2 special weapons in 10, since you can have a missile launcher and heavy bolter, or plasma gun and melta gun, or plasma gun and missile launcher. Options are there.
It will be interesting to see what they do. Hopefully it won't be a Plague Marine level of silliness. Just using the old assembly instructions (not including the new Legionary sprue from Kill Team) it would be something like:
If the unit has less then 10 models, 1 model may be armed with a Meltagun, Missile Launcher, Heavy Bolter, Plasma Gun, or Flamer
If the unit has 10 models then 1 Legionnaire may be replace their Boltgun with a Meltagun or a Missile Launcher, another Legionnaire can replace their Boltgun with a Heavy Bolter of Plasma Gun, and another Legionnaire can replace their Boltgun with a Flamer.
Up 5 Legionaries can replace their Boltgun with an Astartes Chainsword
And to think this doesn't deal with the two Legionaire Champion models in the box or all the Kill Team sprue fun! I think they might be better off adhering to the Codex Astartes.
Eldarain wrote: Ah yes. Chaos. The faction known for rigid equipment doctrine. Don't let the Aspiring Champion see that non standard issue gear.
How have they strayed so far?
Started a long time ago, when people started insisting Chaos Marines ought to fought in those super-unfluffy uniform Legions or mono-God armies in a weird freakish Heresy-enactment, instead of mixing it together under the strongest Warlord/Daemon Prince in a riot of colours, warbands and allegiences as thematic counter-point to the mono-colour/uniform loyalist Marines as Chaos was originally intended to be played.
drbored wrote: The thing is, even if they're limiting you to the box, the rules should still allow you to take 2 heavy weapons or 2 special weapons in 10, since you can have a missile launcher and heavy bolter, or plasma gun and melta gun, or plasma gun and missile launcher. Options are there.
It will be interesting to see what they do. Hopefully it won't be a Plague Marine level of silliness. Just using the old assembly instructions (not including the new Legionary sprue from Kill Team) it would be something like:
If the unit has less then 10 models, 1 model may be armed with a Meltagun, Missile Launcher, Heavy Bolter, Plasma Gun, or Flamer
If the unit has 10 models then 1 Legionnaire may be replace their Boltgun with a Meltagun or a Missile Launcher, another Legionnaire can replace their Boltgun with a Heavy Bolter of Plasma Gun, and another Legionnaire can replace their Boltgun with a Flamer.
Up 5 Legionaries can replace their Boltgun with an Astartes Chainsword
And to think this doesn't deal with the two Legionaire Champion models in the box or all the Kill Team sprue fun! I think they might be better off adhering to the Codex Astartes.
Yep... I guess we'll see. I'm hoping it's not nearly this bad.
And here's the thing, Chapterhouse is long done. As much as I pu-pu 3d printing, that's the way that people are going to be getting their extra bits, either by printing the pieces themselves, or ordering from the other services out there that will take those things and print them for you. There's nothing stopping people from doing that, so there's no sense in GW pointing to Chapterhouse as the reason that they make their kits this way.
There are a couple of overlapping things that contribute to this:
A. The designers design the miniatures. For the most part, and according to people in the industry I've talked to, the designers are given quite a bit of freedom to make all sorts of different things. Those things are then spliced apart and put onto sprues, with various sacrifices made to make sure that certain kits can fit onto X or Y number of sprues. They've crammed TONS more bits on modern sprues than past ones, just do a google search on some of the older kits and you'll see the difference.
B. The rules writers get the kits that the designers make and create rules that match the miniatures. In the case of brand new things, they've got a lot more wiggle room into what to give those things, like the Venomcrawler. They work with the lore team to put stuff together, like giving the Venomcrawler a bonus for psychic tests done by nearby casters because lore reasons. There's not a lot of physical reason that a Venomcrawler should make psykers better, but hey, there it is, because lore. For classic units, there is an expectation that those units will retain a semblance of their battlefield role from one edition to the next.
C. The higher ups, marketing teams and such, determine how best to market this product and ruleset. They come up with guidelines and rules, and the latest guideline that they've been pushing is that players should have rules that match the models that come in the box set. No matter how limited that box set might be, it's better for new players to be able to build, without much confusion, exactly what's in the box. If they did this to dissuade bits sellers, that's debunked by the new horus heresy special weapons kits. If they did this to dissuade 3rd party bits designers, that ship has sailed, due to all the companies that have popped up selling conversion bits and even whole models. This is all about their guideline to ease new players into the hobby.
Now, like all things GW does, they remain inconsistent with even this, because the mess of weapons that you give to things like Blightlord Terminators and Plague Marines make it difficult to determine any sort of ideal load-out for a new player. It would have been MUCH better to give something like Plague Marines only one or two ranged weapons to pick from, one or two melee weapons for the champion, and otherwise keep everything else bolters and plague knives. But, the designers made a bunch of extra weapons, the rules writers made the rules for all those weapons, and then the marketing team said 'we gotta limit this to our new guidelines' and boom, you have the latest plague marine datasheet.
Here's the thing that bugs me: I can't think of another faction that struggles with this as much as Chaos. Sisters of Battle, even having their updates 20 years apart, only lost a Canoness with jump pack, really. They MADE A KIT WITH 4 OF EVERY SPECIAL WEAPON for the Sisters of Battle, AS WELL AS all the combi-weapon options and tons of melee options for the superior. Genestealer Cult had the mess of weapons that Abominants and the Atalan Jackals simply flattened into fewer profiles, but otherwise weren't punished for taking x or y. Other factions are simply not designed like Chaos Marines are - they have units that all have 1 weapon loadout and either no options or very few options.
Between 5th and 7th, I honestly don't think GW knew what to do with Chaos Marines, hence putting out the mix of dinobots and a collection of other models that then got out-scaled by 8th edition's scale shift. Chosen and Cultists were in one box set that stretched 2 editions and never got a full release until now, 2 more editions later. I do believe that GW FINALLY have an idea of what they want to do with the faction, but it's going to be a painful decade of gaining and losing options as they force Chaos Marines to fit whatever new design space they want for the faction.
There will be retcons, redesigns, rules shifts, and much more we'll have to work through.
The forthcoming CSM Kill Team is the closest I’ve seen GW get Chaos “right” in a long old time. Now for clarity that is of course “right” purely within my own preferences.
Whilst a squad, they’re also personalities unto themselves. Each member exploring or starting to explore a given Passion/Obsession. They’re Reavers with eclectic equipment loadouts, as befits Chaos in my mind’s eye.
They’re a collection of individuals banded together for at least temporary mutual benefit. Functionally immortal warriors with nothing holding them back except their own abilities. Champions of their own lives enjoying freedom relative to that not enjoyed by Loyalists or indeed the majority of The Imperium.
They look an absolute riot. They’re not particularly uniform, and I’m absolutely, 100% here for it.
Add to them the forthcoming mutants and possessed? It might just be time for me to think about treading the Eight Fold Path once more.
If I do, I reckon I might go for a proper mishmash of units. Go for a visual riot on the board. Of course whilst not fussed for “optimal performance” I still need to hope none of the visually appealing units are bobbins on the board, because I’d at least like a shot at winning games.
Eldarain wrote: Ah yes. Chaos. The faction known for rigid equipment doctrine. Don't let the Aspiring Champion see that non standard issue gear.
How have they strayed so far?
Started a long time ago, when people started insisting Chaos Marines ought to fought in those super-unfluffy uniform Legions or mono-God armies in a weird freakish Heresy-enactment, instead of mixing it together under the strongest Warlord/Daemon Prince in a riot of colours, warbands and allegiences as thematic counter-point to the mono-colour/uniform loyalist Marines as Chaos was originally intended to be played.
'Super-unfluffy'
This has been something in the lore since 2nd edition. The 3.5 ed codex had full rules for legions. The game has also now reestablished the legions as key forces and has been doing this since the end of 7th.
I think the 4th ed codex mentions warbands of random units led by the strongest Warlord once or twice in its showcase section.
The first edition legion armies were all “mono-god” single legion unfiied armies that had very similar laid outs to normal marines. It wasn’t the only way to field chaos armies but the lists in realms of chaos: slaves to darkness were very similar to standard marine lists. It’s not new.
Andykp wrote: The first edition legion armies were all “mono-god” single legion unfiied armies that had very similar laid outs to normal marines. It wasn’t the only way to field chaos armies but the lists in realms of chaos: slaves to darkness were very similar to standard marine lists. It’s not new.
It's not new at all but a strong tendency in the 40k community is to have this incredibly specific idea of the right way an army should be organised or how the lore actually is. People are free to have this as an opinion - and many people can back their opinions up quite well (the good Mr Gad, for example), but plenty of other people assert the true concept of how the armies should work while also claiming any other viewpoint is simply wrong and anti-ethical to the lore - when the lore says the exact opposite of what they claim.
Eldarain wrote: Ah yes. Chaos. The faction known for rigid equipment doctrine. Don't let the Aspiring Champion see that non standard issue gear.
How have they strayed so far?
Started a long time ago, when people started insisting Chaos Marines ought to fought in those super-unfluffy uniform Legions or mono-God armies in a weird freakish Heresy-enactment, instead of mixing it together under the strongest Warlord/Daemon Prince in a riot of colours, warbands and allegiences as thematic counter-point to the mono-colour/uniform loyalist Marines as Chaos was originally intended to be played.
Chaos guys are pretty disagreeable people by default. So putting multiple culturally different units in an army would be a recipe for disaster. I also remember the demonic animosity rules which were fine to represent this. Those animosity rules would be good to extend to mortal units as well.
What's this nonsense about the "correct" way to run chaos marines? Want to do the extreme darwinism 'only the strongest can lead' band of individuals? Go for it. Want to do a bunch of grunts holding rigidly to the old legion command structure because its the only anchor they have left in their fractured world and even more fractured mind? Also fine.
Garrac wrote: So, it looks like, according to B&Ch, Huron's mini has disappeared from the WHW expo...
Spoiler:
Not saying I don't think Huron is coming, but the photo doesn't mean much. The old Possessed are there and they're confirmed to be getting a new release
Garrac wrote: So, it looks like, according to B&Ch, Huron's mini has disappeared from the WHW expo...
Spoiler:
Not saying I don't think Huron is coming, but the photo doesn't mean much. The old Possessed are there and they're confirmed to be getting a new release
Well you can't buy huron any more so that could be why, but to me, the fact corsairs are represented as a legion in the new codex, not generic renegades, says they have something for them they want to sell and it won't be a 4th ed oop finecast model.
Fergie0044 wrote: What's this nonsense about the "correct" way to run chaos marines? Want to do the extreme darwinism 'only the strongest can lead' band of individuals? Go for it. Want to do a bunch of grunts holding rigidly to the old legion command structure because its the only anchor they have left in their fractured world and even more fractured mind? Also fine.
It's how I'm building my Night Lords (red hands supporting Curze) for HH and will be carrying them over to 40k the same way, so a failing legion structure even as they surround themselves with their more twisted brethren and mortal slaves fits my view of my army at least.
Clearly not long enough, as playing as Legions has been a thing since Rogue Trader.
Yeah there's literally army lists for the specific, uniformed legions in Slaves to Darkness.
I've noticed in the aftermath of the 4th ed CSM codex this weird niche of frankly delusional people emerged who began claiming that Legions didn't make sense, weren't true to the Chaos Space Marine tradition, and that really the bulk of CSM stuff should focus on ... random renegades?
Clearly not long enough, as playing as Legions has been a thing since Rogue Trader.
Yeah there's literally army lists for the specific, uniformed legions in Slaves to Darkness.
I've noticed in the aftermath of the 4th ed CSM codex this weird niche of frankly delusional people emerged who began claiming that Legions didn't make sense, weren't true to the Chaos Space Marine tradition, and that really the bulk of CSM stuff should focus on ... random renegades?
Both are correct? There will numerically be more renegades than original legionnaires by most accounts, hence the want to represent both to some degree. Even the legion fluff states that they reform from a gathering of numerous warbands, which likely will all have different schemes/gear etc. Likewise some renegade chapters maintain full chapter identity and fight more like a uniform body than some legion forces.
The key word for chaos marines is chaos. They can be what ever you want, diehard adherents to the legion tradition, fine, crazy bunch of warlords and their followers, fine. There is definitely no right way!
Andykp wrote: The key word for chaos marines is chaos. They can be what ever you want, diehard adherents to the legion tradition, fine, crazy bunch of warlords and their followers, fine. There is definitely no right way!
Clearly not long enough, as playing as Legions has been a thing since Rogue Trader.
Yeah there's literally army lists for the specific, uniformed legions in Slaves to Darkness.
I've noticed in the aftermath of the 4th ed CSM codex this weird niche of frankly delusional people emerged who began claiming that Legions didn't make sense, weren't true to the Chaos Space Marine tradition, and that really the bulk of CSM stuff should focus on ... random renegades?
Both are correct? There will numerically be more renegades than original legionnaires by most accounts, hence the want to represent both to some degree. Even the legion fluff states that they reform from a gathering of numerous warbands, which likely will all have different schemes/gear etc. Likewise some renegade chapters maintain full chapter identity and fight more like a uniform body than some legion forces.
I don't think it's wrong to say renegades are the bulk of new CSMs but it's more the position taken by people that coherent legion fighting forces don't exist. Except in the cases of like, the World Eaters and Emperors Children (this is slowly being revised in the case of the EC lore as well btw, at least in the novels), the Legions remained fairly coherent.
Both exist and should be represented (I don't really mind standard CSMs being called 'legionnaires' because that feels like a pretty simple espirit de corps thing - plus plenty of renegade Space Marines like to emulate the legions of old - just ask Huron).
Clearly not long enough, as playing as Legions has been a thing since Rogue Trader.
Yeah there's literally army lists for the specific, uniformed legions in Slaves to Darkness.
I've noticed in the aftermath of the 4th ed CSM codex this weird niche of frankly delusional people emerged who began claiming that Legions didn't make sense, weren't true to the Chaos Space Marine tradition, and that really the bulk of CSM stuff should focus on ... random renegades?
Both are correct? There will numerically be more renegades than original legionnaires by most accounts, hence the want to represent both to some degree. Even the legion fluff states that they reform from a gathering of numerous warbands, which likely will all have different schemes/gear etc. Likewise some renegade chapters maintain full chapter identity and fight more like a uniform body than some legion forces.
You're quite right, but I think that Blood Reaper and other posters are reacting to this post from up thread:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Eldarain wrote: Ah yes. Chaos. The faction known for rigid equipment doctrine. Don't let the Aspiring Champion see that non standard issue gear.
How have they strayed so far?
Started a long time ago, when people started insisting Chaos Marines ought to fought in those super-unfluffy uniform Legions or mono-God armies in a weird freakish Heresy-enactment, instead of mixing it together under the strongest Warlord/Daemon Prince in a riot of colours, warbands and allegiences as thematic counter-point to the mono-colour/uniform loyalist Marines as Chaos was originally intended to be played.
Which flat states that warbands based on the old Legions are "super-unfluffy", and that only those that have an extremely eclectic mix of units from different Legions/Renegades are "fluffy". This is a typical depiction of CSM favored by many who don't play CSM, and is usually used to justify the various other arguments that they favor, such as that CSM, whether former Legionaries or Renegades, are also: poorly organized, equipped, supplied, disciples, etc, etc. In short: worse than loyalists.
Clearly not long enough, as playing as Legions has been a thing since Rogue Trader.
Yeah there's literally army lists for the specific, uniformed legions in Slaves to Darkness.
I've noticed in the aftermath of the 4th ed CSM codex this weird niche of frankly delusional people emerged who began claiming that Legions didn't make sense, weren't true to the Chaos Space Marine tradition, and that really the bulk of CSM stuff should focus on ... random renegades?
Both are correct? There will numerically be more renegades than original legionnaires by most accounts, hence the want to represent both to some degree. Even the legion fluff states that they reform from a gathering of numerous warbands, which likely will all have different schemes/gear etc. Likewise some renegade chapters maintain full chapter identity and fight more like a uniform body than some legion forces.
You're quite right, but I think that Blood Reaper and other posters are reacting to this post from up thread:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Eldarain wrote: Ah yes. Chaos. The faction known for rigid equipment doctrine. Don't let the Aspiring Champion see that non standard issue gear.
How have they strayed so far?
Started a long time ago, when people started insisting Chaos Marines ought to fought in those super-unfluffy uniform Legions or mono-God armies in a weird freakish Heresy-enactment, instead of mixing it together under the strongest Warlord/Daemon Prince in a riot of colours, warbands and allegiences as thematic counter-point to the mono-colour/uniform loyalist Marines as Chaos was originally intended to be played.
Which flat states that warbands based on the old Legions are "super-unfluffy", and that only those that have an extremely eclectic mix of units from different Legions/Renegades are "fluffy". This is a typical depiction of CSM favored by many who don't play CSM, and is usually used to justify the various other arguments that they favor, such as that CSM, whether former Legionaries or Renegades, are also: poorly organized, equipped, supplied, disciples, etc, etc. In short: worse than loyalists.
I took it as partially satirical/sarcastic ranting tbh, maybe I was off tone via the medium of text.
I get the whole none uniformal colour thing, the legions weren't in uniformal colours during the heresy, some companies had more embellishments than others, but the splinter warbands probably struck out to be more independent in appearance.
Point stands I guess that there isn't a right or wrong, all interpretations are correct, the only fault is insisting one is more right than the other.
Agreed, trying to say that Chaos warbands have to fit x or y mold is the first mistake.
The true fault lies with GW not understanding what that means and shoehorning us all into a hodgepodge of rules that don't let many fans play any of those interpretations.
Andykp wrote: The key word for chaos marines is chaos. They can be what ever you want, diehard adherents to the legion tradition, fine, crazy bunch of warlords and their followers, fine. There is definitely no right way!
That's the spirit!
One idea I have always liked is that time being meaningless in the warp, the siege of terra could have just happened to some chaos guys. Would like to see an army based on that idea done well.
drbored wrote: Agreed, trying to say that Chaos warbands have to fit x or y mold is the first mistake.
The true fault lies with GW not understanding what that means and shoehorning us all into a hodgepodge of rules that don't let many fans play any of those interpretations.
Which in a way the God awful 6th edition codex gave a lot of freedom in that regard. While rumors have SOME element of that (Cult units can get taken still, though they get worse for reasons), I'd prefer just keeping Renegades separate.
Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
I could not agree more. I actually really like the idea of the "accursed weapons" or whatever they are called. It is great for modeling because now I can equip whatever weapon I like i.e. whip, knife, spear, halberd, ax, demonic hand etc. etc., and it all has the same profile, so no having to explain to my opponent what each one does. And everyone always took whatever weapon was best at the time anyway (all axes or swords etc) so it is not like having squads with mixed weapons was super popular. And also attacking with mixed weapons was always a pain because you almost always had to roll them all seperate. The new rule lets me build a squad exactly how I want it to look and they all have the same rules (which is also a good stat line).
No them getting rid of the ranged options is the one that stings, especially in light of GW actually selling bits to upgrade units for HH, yet they can't do that for 40k? L
Dudeface wrote: I took it as partially satirical/sarcastic ranting tbh, maybe I was off tone via the medium of text.
Given the source, trust me, it was't.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
Personally, as a Chaos player who has done nothing but see his army slowly eroded since 2007, I'd rather not lose more of my options, especially when we know it derives from GW fumbling to find a solution* to squad options without giving us another Plague Marine-esque labyrinth of nonsense.
*A solution to a 'problem' that is only a problem because they made it a problem.
Dudeface wrote: I took it as partially satirical/sarcastic ranting tbh, maybe I was off tone via the medium of text.
Given the source, trust me, it was't.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
Personally, as a Chaos player who has done nothing but see his army slowly eroded since 2007, I'd rather not lose more of my options, especially when we know it derives from GW fumbling to find a solution* to squad options without giving us another Plague Marine-esque labyrinth of nonsense.
*A solution to a 'problem' that is only a problem because they made it a problem.
That also depends on how important you think the difference between a Power Axe vs Sword vs Maul vs Lance is. I'm content with just two profiles to encompass that and then bespoke in more niche situations.
Dudeface wrote: I took it as partially satirical/sarcastic ranting tbh, maybe I was off tone via the medium of text.
Given the source, trust me, it was't.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
Personally, as a Chaos player who has done nothing but see his army slowly eroded since 2007, I'd rather not lose more of my options, especially when we know it derives from GW fumbling to find a solution* to squad options without giving us another Plague Marine-esque labyrinth of nonsense.
*A solution to a 'problem' that is only a problem because they made it a problem.
That gets into the nuance of which options are being lost. If consolidating power weapons back together is a loss, then by extension it was a gain that happened during the time period you mention. If it was not a significant gain, then it is also not a significant loss. If it was a significant gain, that undermines the core point made here (IMO it is the former). In my eyes the power weapon differentiation simply amounted to extra hoops of optimization needed to maintain functionality the models already had previously by picking whichever option is favored in the given edition. Perhaps more importantly all existing models and builds with them remain viable. The Plague Marine equivalent would be merging all of the disparate melee weapons into one 'accursed plague weapons' profile then letting players mix & match whichever ones they like the look of (leaving the bespoke weapon stats for Kill Team where such is appropriate) and I think we can all agree such would be an improvement.
That is a very different story to something like removing jump packs as an option for chaos lords or adding additional restrictions on how many of each weapon a squad can have.
Dudeface wrote: I took it as partially satirical/sarcastic ranting tbh, maybe I was off tone via the medium of text.
Given the source, trust me, it was't.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
Personally, as a Chaos player who has done nothing but see his army slowly eroded since 2007, I'd rather not lose more of my options, especially when we know it derives from GW fumbling to find a solution* to squad options without giving us another Plague Marine-esque labyrinth of nonsense.
*A solution to a 'problem' that is only a problem because they made it a problem.
That gets into the nuance of which options are being lost. If consolidating power weapons back together is a loss, then by extension it was a gain that happened during the time period you mention. If it was not a significant gain, then it is also not a significant loss. If it was a significant gain, that undermines the core point made here (IMO it is the former). In my eyes the power weapon differentiation simply amounted to extra hoops of optimization needed to maintain functionality the models already had previously by picking whichever option is favored in the given edition. Perhaps more importantly all existing models and builds with them remain viable. The Plague Marine equivalent would be merging all of the disparate melee weapons into one 'accursed plague weapons' profile then letting players mix & match whichever ones they like the look of (leaving the bespoke weapon stats for Kill Team where such is appropriate) and I think we can all agree such would be an improvement.
That is a very different story to something like removing jump packs as an option for chaos lords or adding additional restrictions on how many of each weapon a squad can have.
If the rumors are correct we are losing...
Freedom to equip Terminators with any combination of weapons.
Freedom to equip Chosen with any combination of weapons.
Jump packs for Chaos Lords and Sorcerers.
Lightning Claws for Aspiring Champions of many kinds.
Mutilators.
The ability to take up to 20 Chaos Marines in a unit.
And potentially the ability to take 2 special weapons or 2 heavy weapons in a Chaos Marine squad.
Possessed are changing dramatically, so hard to say that's a loss or gain.
We are gaining cultists, cultist HQ, accursed cultists, and traitor guard, as well as finally getting models for Chosen which haven't had models outside of the Dark Vengeance box.
It's a very mixed bag. The factors above could force many long-time players to dramatically change up their list, with a slew of their collection now invalidated or relatively useless. That's a bad feel if you spent hundreds of dollars on those models and don't even have a new kit to replace some of the options that have been lost (like getting a new Chaos Lord that actually has weapon options).
drbored wrote: If the rumors are correct we are losing...
Freedom to equip Terminators with any combination of weapons.
Freedom to equip Chosen with any combination of weapons.
Jump packs for Chaos Lords and Sorcerers.
Lightning Claws for Aspiring Champions of many kinds.
Mutilators.
The ability to take up to 20 Chaos Marines in a unit.
And potentially the ability to take 2 special weapons or 2 heavy weapons in a Chaos Marine squad.
Don't forget they're taking our Cult units away as well... except Noise Marines, because they don't have a new model kit.
drbored wrote: If the rumors are correct we are losing...
Freedom to equip Terminators with any combination of weapons.
Freedom to equip Chosen with any combination of weapons.
Jump packs for Chaos Lords and Sorcerers.
Lightning Claws for Aspiring Champions of many kinds.
Mutilators.
The ability to take up to 20 Chaos Marines in a unit.
And potentially the ability to take 2 special weapons or 2 heavy weapons in a Chaos Marine squad.
Don't forget they're taking our Cult units away as well... except Noise Marines, because they don't have a new model kit.
Ah yes that too. By moving Death Guard, Khorne Berzerkers, and Rubric Marines, you now have to buy all the other codexes to jankily ally them in...
Yeah. It's... a bit rough to be a Chaos fan, but... I'm gunna keep painting my Night Lords because frankly I'm pretty happy with how they're coming out.
Dudeface wrote: I took it as partially satirical/sarcastic ranting tbh, maybe I was off tone via the medium of text.
Given the source, trust me, it was't.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
Personally, as a Chaos player who has done nothing but see his army slowly eroded since 2007, I'd rather not lose more of my options, especially when we know it derives from GW fumbling to find a solution* to squad options without giving us another Plague Marine-esque labyrinth of nonsense.
*A solution to a 'problem' that is only a problem because they made it a problem.
That gets into the nuance of which options are being lost. If consolidating power weapons back together is a loss, then by extension it was a gain that happened during the time period you mention. If it was not a significant gain, then it is also not a significant loss. If it was a significant gain, that undermines the core point made here (IMO it is the former). In my eyes the power weapon differentiation simply amounted to extra hoops of optimization needed to maintain functionality the models already had previously by picking whichever option is favored in the given edition. Perhaps more importantly all existing models and builds with them remain viable. The Plague Marine equivalent would be merging all of the disparate melee weapons into one 'accursed plague weapons' profile then letting players mix & match whichever ones they like the look of (leaving the bespoke weapon stats for Kill Team where such is appropriate) and I think we can all agree such would be an improvement.
That is a very different story to something like removing jump packs as an option for chaos lords or adding additional restrictions on how many of each weapon a squad can have.
I'm of a similar opinion. I can deal with Accursed Weapons, at least they open up modeling opportunities. But all of that other stuff that drbored and H.B.M.C outlined above? That's just not right. Sticking Chaos Terminators with restrictions on their ranged weapons, removing Cult Marines from the codex, and taking away the option of jump packs for Chaos Lords and Sorcerers is just another way to throw roadblocks in the way of CSM players trying to represent their own vision for the faction. And that's something we've had far more than enough of in our last 3 codexes.
H.B.M.C. wrote: We've seen the instructions for Terminators. There is a single melee weapon profile + fists + chainfists.
Same for Raptor Aspiring Champions. They've got the +1S, AP-3, D1 profile, and a power fist. Which makes me wonder if all Aspiring Champions will have the option of Accursed Weapons, or power fists. Or it could just be a power sword. Combi-weapons still completely up in the air, though.
H.B.M.C. wrote: We've seen the instructions for Terminators. There is a single melee weapon profile + fists + chainfists.
That only covers the datasheet for that specific not, not possible wargear options not on that datasheet. Or are we pretending 9th doesn't still have wargear lists?
I also have some small hope GW is smart/greedy enough to cash in on HH options for units.
drbored wrote: If the rumors are correct we are losing...
Freedom to equip Terminators with any combination of weapons.
Freedom to equip Chosen with any combination of weapons.
Jump packs for Chaos Lords and Sorcerers.
Lightning Claws for Aspiring Champions of many kinds.
Mutilators.
The ability to take up to 20 Chaos Marines in a unit.
And potentially the ability to take 2 special weapons or 2 heavy weapons in a Chaos Marine squad.
Don't forget they're taking our Cult units away as well... except Noise Marines, because they don't have a new model kit.
Ah yes that too. By moving Death Guard, Khorne Berzerkers, and Rubric Marines, you now have to buy all the other codexes to jankily ally them in...
Yeah. It's... a bit rough to be a Chaos fan, but... I'm gunna keep painting my Night Lords because frankly I'm pretty happy with how they're coming out.
9th Edition has just been disgusting so far. The splitting up of all the codex's and the incomplete core rulebook for me outline how greedy and disgusting GW is being about this. It's painfully obvious that the goal of 8th edition was to lure people into buying tons of units that are available in their codex's (for the time) by making them ridiculously overpowering, like the Khorne Berserkers fighting 2 or 3 times. I guarantee you a lot of new or even veteran chaos players started buying Khorne Berserkers because WOW they're so good in melee, and maybe even gotten closer to the Khorne faction as a result and now BAMM 9th edition drops and Khorne Berserkers are now in a different codex haha because GW is greedy af and wants EVERY penny they can get their filthy rat claws on. And this is coming from a player who has owned Khorne Berserkers ever since 5th Ed and now for the first time I will be buying a CSM codex without.....Berserkers. And possibly without any daemons as well. I gotta buy 3 codex's just so I can play the units I own. That's garbage and I don't care what excuse anyone can offer for that it's inexcusable trash. But it's alright, if I do get the CSM codex I'm stopping there. Not letting GW win, my daemons and Khorne Berserkers are going to the shelf for good now, I got enough anyway without them. No more foot slogging 30 Khorne Berserkers for me. It was just fun to do time to time, while holding objectives with the Legionaries.
Edit: they did the same thing to the Genestealer cults. You gotta buy the AM codex now if you wanna field your Leman Russ' and Brood Brothers, and maybe more.
Are we also pretending that instruction sheets haven't had quite extensive weapon lists in the (very recent) past, containing the weapon options that come on the sprue, and that this one doesn't, fitting quite well with the rumours?
I'd almost prefer that Aspiring Champions get to choose between "Power Fist" and "Accursed Weapon" since then I can give my Night Lords Lightning Claws and just say they're Accursed Weapons.
It's a weird sort of flexibility that lets me choose whatever style I want without worrying about which weapon option is the best.
Are we also pretending that instruction sheets haven't had quite extensive weapon lists in the (very recent) past, containing the weapon options that come on the sprue, and that this one doesn't, fitting quite well with the rumours?
No, what I'm doing is not jumping to conclusions because every other 9th ed codex has had a wargear list that most units have access to that isn't always the contents of the kit.
I admit I might be huffing the copium but as with every release until I see the codex pages I'm not letting myself get wound up about anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
drbored wrote: I'd almost prefer that Aspiring Champions get to choose between "Power Fist" and "Accursed Weapon" since then I can give my Night Lords Lightning Claws and just say they're Accursed Weapons.
It's a weird sort of flexibility that lets me choose whatever style I want without worrying about which weapon option is the best.
ClockworkZion wrote: No, what I'm doing is not jumping to conclusions because every other 9th ed codex has had a wargear list that most units have access to that isn't always the contents of the kit.
It's not jumping to conclusions when we have strong rumours that have proven to be correct in most instances and then pictorial evidence to supports said rumours.
Are we also pretending that instruction sheets haven't had quite extensive weapon lists in the (very recent) past, containing the weapon options that come on the sprue, and that this one doesn't, fitting quite well with the rumours?
No, what I'm doing is not jumping to conclusions because every other 9th ed codex has had a wargear list that most units have access to that isn't always the contents of the kit.
I admit I might be huffing the copium but as with every release until I see the codex pages I'm not letting myself get wound up about anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
drbored wrote: I'd almost prefer that Aspiring Champions get to choose between "Power Fist" and "Accursed Weapon" since then I can give my Night Lords Lightning Claws and just say they're Accursed Weapons.
It's a weird sort of flexibility that lets me choose whatever style I want without worrying about which weapon option is the best.
That's the kind of thing I'm hoping for honestly.
It'd be one of the few *consistent* things that they'd have done
drbored wrote: I'd almost prefer that Aspiring Champions get to choose between "Power Fist" and "Accursed Weapon" since then I can give my Night Lords Lightning Claws and just say they're Accursed Weapons.
It's a weird sort of flexibility that lets me choose whatever style I want without worrying about which weapon option is the best.
Yeah, like I said, that's something that I can deal with. But it doesn't address the other options, like combi-weapons. Those have been an option for Aspiring Champions for a long time, and it looks like the only "official" Chaos combi-weapons will be available in the Chosen and Terminators kits. So it's unknown if we'll be keeping those. And some of us have a lot of Aspiring Champions with combi-weapons.
ClockworkZion wrote: No, what I'm doing is not jumping to conclusions because every other 9th ed codex has had a wargear list that most units have access to that isn't always the contents of the kit.
It's not jumping to conclusions when we have strong rumours that have proven to be correct in most instances and then pictorial evidence to supports said rumours.
At this point I'm just shocked the CSM codex proper hasn't leaked yet. I mean as soon as I've got final codex information I'll be more than "happy" to get wound up about what's going on. In the meantime I'm trying to be patient and not get depressed about the codex since I'm primarily picking up a HH Legion that I'm looking at double dipping into 40k with and not the other way around and I don't want to ruin my excitement for that because this is less exciting.
ClockworkZion wrote: No, what I'm doing is not jumping to conclusions because every other 9th ed codex has had a wargear list that most units have access to that isn't always the contents of the kit.
It's not jumping to conclusions when we have strong rumours that have proven to be correct in most instances and then pictorial evidence to supports said rumours.
At this point I'm just shocked the CSM codex proper hasn't leaked yet. I mean as soon as I've got final codex information I'll be more than "happy" to get wound up about what's going on. In the meantime I'm trying to be patient and not get depressed about the codex since I'm primarily picking up a HH Legion that I'm looking at double dipping into 40k with and not the other way around and I don't want to ruin my excitement for that because this is less exciting.
This is definitely a real challenge sometimes. I've been in this hobby since the 4th ed codex, so I've gone through this cycle of hype and disappointment 5 times now with this faction. But, I'm hopeful that between the updated datasheets, faction rules, stratagems, relics, warlord traits, and all sorts of other things that it's at least a fun and relatively balanced codex to enjoy for a few years.
drbored wrote: I'd almost prefer that Aspiring Champions get to choose between "Power Fist" and "Accursed Weapon" since then I can give my Night Lords Lightning Claws and just say they're Accursed Weapons.
It's a weird sort of flexibility that lets me choose whatever style I want without worrying about which weapon option is the best.
Yeah, like I said, that's something that I can deal with. But it doesn't address the other options, like combi-weapons. Those have been an option for Aspiring Champions for a long time, and it looks like the only "official" Chaos combi-weapons will be available in the Chosen and Terminators kits. So it's unknown if we'll be keeping those. And some of us have a lot of Aspiring Champions with combi-weapons.
Yep... Doesn't the Havoc kit have a combi-weapon in it or no?
ClockworkZion wrote: No, what I'm doing is not jumping to conclusions because every other 9th ed codex has had a wargear list that most units have access to that isn't always the contents of the kit.
It's not jumping to conclusions when we have strong rumours that have proven to be correct in most instances and then pictorial evidence to supports said rumours.
At this point I'm just shocked the CSM codex proper hasn't leaked yet. I mean as soon as I've got final codex information I'll be more than "happy" to get wound up about what's going on. In the meantime I'm trying to be patient and not get depressed about the codex since I'm primarily picking up a HH Legion that I'm looking at double dipping into 40k with and not the other way around and I don't want to ruin my excitement for that because this is less exciting.
Perhaps the codex is further out than we expected?
drbored wrote: Yep... Doesn't the Havoc kit have a combi-weapon in it or no?
The Havoc kit is weirder than that in that it has full special weapons - Melta, Plasma, and Flamer - rather than combi-weapons.
Just another one of those "The miniatures team made it, so I guess we have to make it fit!" situations, I 'spose. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Personally I'm going to take one of my Havoc Champions and hope to Khorne that the new double-handed Chainaxe works on that model. He'll make a cool character for Black Crusade.
Surprised that the flamey guy is part of the box. It'll also suck when this box of 8 costs as much as a box of 10.
Guess that means we can also look forward to:
A Cultist Warband consists of 8-16 Chaos Cultists. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Firebrand, armed with a Fire-Thingy. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Champion armed with Unnecessarily Unique Long-Ranged Auto-Pistol and a Cultist Chainsword. The remaining Cultists are equipped with Autoguns.
1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Grenade Launcher. 1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Heavy Stubber.
Surprised that the flamey guy is part of the box. It'll also suck when this box of 8 costs as much as a box of 10.
Guess that means we can also look forward to:
A Cultist Warband consists of 8-16 Chaos Cultists. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Firebrand, armed with a Fire-Thingy. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Champion armed with Unnecessarily Unique Long-Ranged Auto-Pistol and a Cultist Chainsword. The remaining Cultists are equipped with Autoguns.
1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Grenade Launcher. 1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Heavy Stubber.
Surprised that the flamey guy is part of the box. It'll also suck when this box of 8 costs as much as a box of 10.
Guess that means we can also look forward to:
A Cultist Warband consists of 8-16 Chaos Cultists. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Firebrand, armed with a Fire-Thingy. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Champion armed with Unnecessarily Unique Long-Ranged Auto-Pistol and a Cultist Chainsword. The remaining Cultists are equipped with Autoguns.
1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Grenade Launcher. 1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Heavy Stubber.
Oh no, it'll be something dumber.
"A Cultist Warband consists of 8 cultists. It may add 2 cultists for +1 power level, or 8 cultists for +2 power level, or 14 cultists for +4 power level. If this unit contains 8 models, they are equipped with autoguns, krak grenades, and frag grenades. If this unit contains 10 models, each model is equipped with a cultist knife and auto pistol and frag grenades and krak grenades. If this unit contains 16 models, each model is equipped with an autogun and frag grenades and krak grenades. If this unit contains 20 models, each model is equipped with a cultist knife and auto pistol and frag grenades and krak grenades."
Firebrand becoming part of the unit is neat. It is no longer feeding VP for Assasinate to your opponent as it most probably looses the character keyword.
It is odd that the granade launcher has different ranges on the different profiles.
New box art appearing means also that codex might be really close
Lord Tarkin wrote: 9th Edition has just been disgusting so far. The splitting up of all the codex's and the incomplete core rulebook for me outline how greedy and disgusting GW is being about this.
Just want to go back to this rant for a second... how the heck are you defining the 9th core rulebook as incomplete?
Dudeface wrote: I took it as partially satirical/sarcastic ranting tbh, maybe I was off tone via the medium of text.
Given the source, trust me, it was't.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Come to think of it, consolidating the various types of power weapon into one profile (among the few rumors I really like about this codex) is a great way to let squads be chaotic without hampering gameplay. Each member can have their own preferred method of beating things up in melee but it all 'averages out' to a single profile in abstract so that IRL games can be streamlined.
Personally, as a Chaos player who has done nothing but see his army slowly eroded since 2007, I'd rather not lose more of my options, especially when we know it derives from GW fumbling to find a solution* to squad options without giving us another Plague Marine-esque labyrinth of nonsense.
*A solution to a 'problem' that is only a problem because they made it a problem.
That gets into the nuance of which options are being lost. If consolidating power weapons back together is a loss, then by extension it was a gain that happened during the time period you mention. If it was not a significant gain, then it is also not a significant loss. If it was a significant gain, that undermines the core point made here (IMO it is the former). In my eyes the power weapon differentiation simply amounted to extra hoops of optimization needed to maintain functionality the models already had previously by picking whichever option is favored in the given edition. Perhaps more importantly all existing models and builds with them remain viable. The Plague Marine equivalent would be merging all of the disparate melee weapons into one 'accursed plague weapons' profile then letting players mix & match whichever ones they like the look of (leaving the bespoke weapon stats for Kill Team where such is appropriate) and I think we can all agree such would be an improvement.
That is a very different story to something like removing jump packs as an option for chaos lords or adding additional restrictions on how many of each weapon a squad can have.
I'm of a similar opinion. I can deal with Accursed Weapons, at least they open up modeling opportunities. But all of that other stuff that drbored and H.B.M.C outlined above? That's just not right. Sticking Chaos Terminators with restrictions on their ranged weapons, removing Cult Marines from the codex, and taking away the option of jump packs for Chaos Lords and Sorcerers is just another way to throw roadblocks in the way of CSM players trying to represent their own vision for the faction. And that's something we've had far more than enough of in our last 3 codexes.
Totally agreed. The only reason I go out of my way to mentioned accursed weapons is because it is an exception among a long list of things that I really don't like.
I am curious if Acursed Weapons get maybe some options to upgrade them, or a Strat or something. The concept of a pre stage of a deamonic weapon is actually quite cool
charles_the_dead_lizzard wrote: I am curious if Acursed Weapons get maybe some options to upgrade them, or a Strat or something. The concept of a pre stage of a deamonic weapon is actually quite cool
This would be neat. Maybe a 1 cp strat for a unit that only has one accursed weapon (like for an aspiring champ) and it's 2cp for a unit that has more, like Chosen and Terminators.
But anyway, what I HOPE they do with that Cultist Warband is have it be its own 8-man datasheet, and have Cultists be its own 10-20 datasheet.
Surprised that the flamey guy is part of the box. It'll also suck when this box of 8 costs as much as a box of 10.
Guess that means we can also look forward to:
A Cultist Warband consists of 8-16 Chaos Cultists. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Firebrand, armed with a Fire-Thingy. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Champion armed with Unnecessarily Unique Long-Ranged Auto-Pistol and a Cultist Chainsword. The remaining Cultists are equipped with Autoguns.
1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Grenade Launcher. 1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Heavy Stubber.
Oh no, it'll be something dumber.
"A Cultist Warband consists of 8 cultists. It may add 2 cultists for +1 power level, or 8 cultists for +2 power level, or 14 cultists for +4 power level. If this unit contains 8 models, they are equipped with autoguns, krak grenades, and frag grenades. If this unit contains 10 models, each model is equipped with a cultist knife and auto pistol and frag grenades and krak grenades. If this unit contains 16 models, each model is equipped with an autogun and frag grenades and krak grenades. If this unit contains 20 models, each model is equipped with a cultist knife and auto pistol and frag grenades and krak grenades."
my body is ready.
But the box only has 8 models. How can the unit have 16?
And how much you wanna bet they decide the Firebrand is such a special model that he needs a special rule to show how special he is. Something real useful, like if his unit destroys an enemy unit in melee it empowers the horns on his chest which allow him to make special hornbutt attacks for the rest of the game (+1 to hit in melee). Can't have that for free though.
+20 pts.
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: And how much you wanna bet they decide the Firebrand is such a special model that he needs a special rule to show how special he is. Something real useful, like if his unit destroys an enemy unit in melee it empowers the horns on his chest which allow him to make special hornbutt attacks for the rest of the game (+1 to hit in melee). Can't have that for free though. +20 pts.
That's far too straight forward. There will be a Stratagem specific to that model instead.
So maybe these are the shooty cultists and the new ones are the melee ones?
Aaaah ! Why still 8 ?! They are releasing a slew of new cultist. Can't they design a sprue of 4 new ones while they're at it and make it a box of 20 !?
Looks like I'll be sticking with only Noise Marines as Troup choices yet again.
So maybe these are the shooty cultists and the new ones are the melee ones?
Aaaah ! Why still 8 ?! They are releasing a slew of new cultist. Can't they design a sprue of 4 new ones while they're at it and make it a box of 20 !?
Looks like I'll be sticking with only Noise Marines as Troup choices yet again.
This is a repack of old models, the new cultists will likely follow in a different box, likely in 10s.
Surprised that the flamey guy is part of the box. It'll also suck when this box of 8 costs as much as a box of 10.
Guess that means we can also look forward to:
A Cultist Warband consists of 8-16 Chaos Cultists. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Firebrand, armed with a Fire-Thingy. One Chaos Cultist is a Cultist Champion armed with Unnecessarily Unique Long-Ranged Auto-Pistol and a Cultist Chainsword. The remaining Cultists are equipped with Autoguns.
1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Grenade Launcher. 1 in every 8 Cultists can exchange their Autogun for a Heavy Stubber.
Look it's necessary that the box is like this or otherwise the meta chasers who killed my family in a Come and See-style massacre may be able to play a functional game.
So maybe these are the shooty cultists and the new ones are the melee ones?
Aaaah ! Why still 8 ?! They are releasing a slew of new cultist. Can't they design a sprue of 4 new ones while they're at it and make it a box of 20 !?
Looks like I'll be sticking with only Noise Marines as Troup choices yet again.
...This is a repack of old models, the new cultists will likely follow in a different box, likely in 10s.
I know, I'm just saying that the new models would have been the occasion to make a new sprue of 4 in the Blackstone style. Put this new sprue in with two of the old sprues with the rebox and make it a box of 20.
Especially because the new cultists are already in the same style anyway.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'm just thinking on how all of this adds to a Cultist-only army, in a Lost and Damned style. Problem is, for what I'm seeing, that if this is the "shooting unit", then that list wouldn't have a lot of things able to take down vehicles. I was thinking that maybe the new Accursed Cultists could, but their leaked profile alludes only to a maximum of S5.
Then again, you could add some CSM to the mix so there would be some anti-vehicle support, but you'd be losing the "Cultist-only" touch
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
White knight something something CAAC something consoomer something capital. Covered it for you.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
White knight something something CAAC something consoomer something capital. Covered it for you.
I was more trying to figure out who was on more copium than me. Like I never expect the book to be some Tyranid level ball buster of a book, I'm just trying to find out what options actually made it in beyond whatever was out there for playtesting since right now it feels like looking into a dark room through dirty glass. Sure you can basically make out stuff that's inside but it's not the same as knowing 100% for sure what's there.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
As far as we know, Accursed Weapons are something for Chosen and for Terminators - not for standard CSMs, it looks like the only new option for Aspiring Champions are the 'Daemonic Blade'. If we're going on the evidence we have now, this stuff will probably be limited to the data sheets. It's not impossible it'll be available for other units, but with stuff like lightning claws not being available for Raptor Champions, I really would not bet on Accursed Weapons being available for CSMs.
This could all change, and I could be wrong - but based on what we know, there's a good chance that GWs design philosophy is that units have their own 'special' weapon profiles which don't have much crossover with one another.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
White knight something something CAAC something consoomer something capital. Covered it for you.
drbored wrote: Yep... Doesn't the Havoc kit have a combi-weapon in it or no?
The Havoc kit is weirder than that in that it has full special weapons - Melta, Plasma, and Flamer - rather than combi-weapons.
Just another one of those "The miniatures team made it, so I guess we have to make it fit!" situations, I 'spose. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Personally I'm going to take one of my Havoc Champions and hope to Khorne that the new double-handed Chainaxe works on that model. He'll make a cool character for Black Crusade.
Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
Garrac wrote:I'm just thinking on how all of this adds to a Cultist-only army, in a Lost and Damned style. Problem is, for what I'm seeing, that if this is the "shooting unit", then that list wouldn't have a lot of things able to take down vehicles. I was thinking that maybe the new Accursed Cultists could, but their leaked profile alludes only to a maximum of S5.
Then again, you could add some CSM to the mix so there would be some anti-vehicle support, but you'd be losing the "Cultist-only" touch
Neither the original LatD list in EoT or the R&H list in IA13 included Cultists. They both had Traitor Guardsmen. And Mutants. Which we're getting. Those Guardsmen have at least plasma guns, maybe there's a melta in there too. But for real AT, both lists had tanks of their own. We're getting the infantry, we just need some Brood Brothers style rules for the vehicles.
Garrac wrote:I'm just thinking on how all of this adds to a Cultist-only army, in a Lost and Damned style. Problem is, for what I'm seeing, that if this is the "shooting unit", then that list wouldn't have a lot of things able to take down vehicles. I was thinking that maybe the new Accursed Cultists could, but their leaked profile alludes only to a maximum of S5.
Then again, you could add some CSM to the mix so there would be some anti-vehicle support, but you'd be losing the "Cultist-only" touch
Neither the original LatD list in EoT or the R&H list in IA13 included Cultists. They both had Traitor Guardsmen. And Mutants. Which we're getting. Those Guardsmen have at least plasma guns, maybe there's a melta in there too. But for real AT, both lists had tanks of their own. We're getting the infantry, we just need some Brood Brothers style rules for the vehicles.
I hope youre right. I don't know if the rumours have already pointed to a BB mechanic with the AM army, as Im expecting only the KT unit to get to the codex.
But having chaotic Leam Russes? that would be dope
drbored wrote: Yep... Doesn't the Havoc kit have a combi-weapon in it or no?
The Havoc kit is weirder than that in that it has full special weapons - Melta, Plasma, and Flamer - rather than combi-weapons.
Just another one of those "The miniatures team made it, so I guess we have to make it fit!" situations, I 'spose. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Personally I'm going to take one of my Havoc Champions and hope to Khorne that the new double-handed Chainaxe works on that model. He'll make a cool character for Black Crusade.
Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
Garrac wrote:I'm just thinking on how all of this adds to a Cultist-only army, in a Lost and Damned style. Problem is, for what I'm seeing, that if this is the "shooting unit", then that list wouldn't have a lot of things able to take down vehicles. I was thinking that maybe the new Accursed Cultists could, but their leaked profile alludes only to a maximum of S5.
Then again, you could add some CSM to the mix so there would be some anti-vehicle support, but you'd be losing the "Cultist-only" touch
Neither the original LatD list in EoT or the R&H list in IA13 included Cultists. They both had Traitor Guardsmen. And Mutants. Which we're getting. Those Guardsmen have at least plasma guns, maybe there's a melta in there too. But for real AT, both lists had tanks of their own. We're getting the infantry, we just need some Brood Brothers style rules for the vehicles.
Unfortunately GWs own stance towards the last run of Brood Brother rules makes anything like this very unlikely.
Garrac wrote:I'm just thinking on how all of this adds to a Cultist-only army, in a Lost and Damned style. Problem is, for what I'm seeing, that if this is the "shooting unit", then that list wouldn't have a lot of things able to take down vehicles. I was thinking that maybe the new Accursed Cultists could, but their leaked profile alludes only to a maximum of S5.
Then again, you could add some CSM to the mix so there would be some anti-vehicle support, but you'd be losing the "Cultist-only" touch
Neither the original LatD list in EoT or the R&H list in IA13 included Cultists. They both had Traitor Guardsmen. And Mutants. Which we're getting. Those Guardsmen have at least plasma guns, maybe there's a melta in there too. But for real AT, both lists had tanks of their own. We're getting the infantry, we just need some Brood Brothers style rules for the vehicles.
I hope youre right. I don't know if the rumours have already pointed to a BB mechanic with the AM army, as Im expecting only the KT unit to get to the codex.
But having chaotic Leam Russes? that would be dope
Oh, I'm right that we need some Brood Brothers type rules for a real LatD/R&H style list. There's no evidence we're actually getting that yet though. It wouldn't be difficult, as that's how both the 8th and 9th (Legends) R&H lists were done. LatD as well, you needed 3.5 and the Guard Codex to really make that list work. Doesn't mean they'll actually do it though.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
As far as we know, Accursed Weapons are something for Chosen and for Terminators - not for standard CSMs, it looks like the only new option for Aspiring Champions are the 'Daemonic Blade'. If we're going on the evidence we have now, this stuff will probably be limited to the data sheets. It's not impossible it'll be available for other units, but with stuff like lightning claws not being available for Raptor Champions, I really would not bet on Accursed Weapons being available for CSMs.
This could all change, and I could be wrong - but based on what we know, there's a good chance that GWs design philosophy is that units have their own 'special' weapon profiles which don't have much crossover with one another.
All we know for sure is datasheet content, but every codex has had wargear lists outside of the datasheets and no one knows whats on those so I've got questions that haven't been answered.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
As far as we know, Accursed Weapons are something for Chosen and for Terminators - not for standard CSMs, it looks like the only new option for Aspiring Champions are the 'Daemonic Blade'. If we're going on the evidence we have now, this stuff will probably be limited to the data sheets. It's not impossible it'll be available for other units, but with stuff like lightning claws not being available for Raptor Champions, I really would not bet on Accursed Weapons being available for CSMs.
This could all change, and I could be wrong - but based on what we know, there's a good chance that GWs design philosophy is that units have their own 'special' weapon profiles which don't have much crossover with one another.
All we know for sure is datasheet content, but every codex has had wargear lists outside of the datasheets and no one knows whats on those so I've got questions that haven't been answered.
On that note: Over on B&C, Clockworkchris just posted that their source says that the rules for the "Cultist Warband" isn't in their version of the playtest rules. So, sounds like some things have been changed/added since those "old playtest rules" were written. Shocking, isn't it?
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
As far as we know, Accursed Weapons are something for Chosen and for Terminators - not for standard CSMs, it looks like the only new option for Aspiring Champions are the 'Daemonic Blade'. If we're going on the evidence we have now, this stuff will probably be limited to the data sheets. It's not impossible it'll be available for other units, but with stuff like lightning claws not being available for Raptor Champions, I really would not bet on Accursed Weapons being available for CSMs.
This could all change, and I could be wrong - but based on what we know, there's a good chance that GWs design philosophy is that units have their own 'special' weapon profiles which don't have much crossover with one another.
All we know for sure is datasheet content, but every codex has had wargear lists outside of the datasheets and no one knows whats on those so I've got questions that haven't been answered.
On that note: Over on B&C, Clockworkchris just posted that their source says that the rules for the "Cultist Warband" isn't in their version of the playtest rules. So, sounds like some things have been changed/added since those "old playtest rules" were written. Shocking, isn't it?
Gadzilla666 wrote: Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
I dunno. I wish special weapons were legal in Havoc squads. Had all my Death Guard Havocs invalidated when that stopped.
It's an upcoming Chaos Codex FFS. There's nothing good to talk about.
I am sure some white knight can tell me that we should consider ourselves lucky we even got a codex.
People attacking me for a 'lack of creativity' are truly living in glass houses, since briefly looking over their own posts basically reveals well, very little in the way of serious contributions - or people huffing copium like no tomorrow and being like "And here's how the codex could s-still be good!"
I'd like to know who that is because I thought I was being the overly positive person when I was like "do we have information about the wargear lists yet?" because I want to know if they at least snuck accursed weapons in as a generic option for units that doesn't put it on the datasheets.
As far as we know, Accursed Weapons are something for Chosen and for Terminators - not for standard CSMs, it looks like the only new option for Aspiring Champions are the 'Daemonic Blade'. If we're going on the evidence we have now, this stuff will probably be limited to the data sheets. It's not impossible it'll be available for other units, but with stuff like lightning claws not being available for Raptor Champions, I really would not bet on Accursed Weapons being available for CSMs.
This could all change, and I could be wrong - but based on what we know, there's a good chance that GWs design philosophy is that units have their own 'special' weapon profiles which don't have much crossover with one another.
All we know for sure is datasheet content, but every codex has had wargear lists outside of the datasheets and no one knows whats on those so I've got questions that haven't been answered.
On that note: Over on B&C, Clockworkchris just posted that their source says that the rules for the "Cultist Warband" isn't in their version of the playtest rules. So, sounds like some things have been changed/added since those "old playtest rules" were written. Shocking, isn't it?
But how much DID change?
We don't know. That's the point. We can't take leaks from old playtest rules as what will actually be in the codex. Playtest rules - they were testing things. And they're old, so things could have changed because of that testing. When we asked Clockworkchris about the rumored Traitor Guardsmen, his response was , but gw said that they'd "Make a good addition to your CSM army", so we can assume that they were something else that wasn't in the playtest rules that have been added afterwards. We're working with incomplete information.
H.B.M.C. wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
I dunno. I wish special weapons were legal in Havoc squads. Had all my Death Guard Havocs invalidated when that stopped.
Agreed. Being able to use special weapons instead of just heavy weapons was something that differentiated Havocs from Devastators, and CSM from loyalists. Removing that distinction was just another step towards making CSM "loyalists, but spikey".
Gadzilla666 wrote: Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
I dunno. I wish special weapons were legal in Havoc squads. Had all my Death Guard Havocs invalidated when that stopped.
On the plus side, Death Guard just can't even take Havoks anymore. So problem solved!
Gadzilla666 wrote: Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
I dunno. I wish special weapons were legal in Havoc squads. Had all my Death Guard Havocs invalidated when that stopped.
I actually preferred that they made Havocs locked to Heavy Weapons since it gave them a more specialized role compared to Chosen.
However there's the issue of "Havocs are only ever five dudes in a squad" and "Chosen aren't gonna be able to spam special weapons anymore", so I guess that's that.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
I dunno. I wish special weapons were legal in Havoc squads. Had all my Death Guard Havocs invalidated when that stopped.
I actually preferred that they made Havocs locked to Heavy Weapons since it gave them a more specialized role compared to Chosen.
However there's the issue of "Havocs are only ever five dudes in a squad" and "Chosen aren't gonna be able to spam special weapons anymore", so I guess that's that.
Which is a distinction that never should have been needed to be made. When Chosen were first introduced (in 3.5) they were the most customizable unit in the game, not a special weapon spam unit. Havocs were far better suited for that purpose. The fact that Chosen were devolved into nothing more than a delivery method for plasma/melta/flamers was one of the many slights perpetuated on CSM in the godawful 4th edition codex that the faction still suffers from to this day.
My source says these are not in his playtest rules. So maybe the codex will have them who knows.
So it looks like there are surprises awaiting us after all.
EDIT: I hold out a small hope that the playtesting documents were focused on testing changes and didn't muck with everything that was remaining unchanged.
Apparently each Legion is getting at least 1 Secondary Objective for Matched Play. Here's the one for Night Lords according to Clockwork Chris:
"NL Score a point when
Fail moral
Fall back
Fail action
In addition when you kill a unit in melee, roll equal or greater than the leadership of the unit and you gain a point. Resurrected units can continue to score points"
A few things that need clarification, like if modified leadership due to NL legion trait affects some of the rolls and such, but against many factions this could max out points real fast.
As for World Eaters, I kinda doubt they'll be in the 10th ed box set. Their book and models should be out before 10th edition. I'm personally predicting that the 10th ed box set will be Space Marines (as usual) versus Tyranids for the big update that they need.
Another thing I considered...
Could we see a "Renegade Warbands" supplement or campaign book for Chaos Marines in the future, featuring new Huron Blackheart and Bikers? I thought about that last night as a possibility, since it would allow them to bring back rules for those random rules for Crimson Slaughter, The Purge, etc. while also counting as a second wave of releases for Chaos Marines...
drbored wrote: NL Score a point when
Fail moral
Fall back
Fail action
Night Lords get VPs for running away? Now that's fluffy!
lmao, pretty sure it's when the enemy does any of those things, but... tbh either way it's great XD
Eh, it's ok against some factions, practically useless against others. But that's ok, you'll just use it if you're playing against the factions it will work on, and something else for the ones it won't work on.
Still, like the Legion trait, it looks pretty sad when you've seen what Night Lords are getting in HH 2.0.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
I dunno. I wish special weapons were legal in Havoc squads. Had all my Death Guard Havocs invalidated when that stopped.
I actually preferred that they made Havocs locked to Heavy Weapons since it gave them a more specialized role compared to Chosen.
However there's the issue of "Havocs are only ever five dudes in a squad" and "Chosen aren't gonna be able to spam special weapons anymore", so I guess that's that.
Which is a distinction that never should have been needed to be made. When Chosen were first introduced (in 3.5) they were the most customizable unit in the game, not a special weapon spam unit. Havocs were far better suited for that purpose. The fact that Chosen were devolved into nothing more than a delivery method for plasma/melta/flamers was one of the many slights perpetuated on CSM in the godawful 4th edition codex that the faction still suffers from to this day.
You're not wrong on that, but that's partially on fault to creating the lame ass CSM profile which was just Tactical Marine with spikes.
drbored wrote: NL Score a point when
Fail moral
Fall back
Fail action
Night Lords get VPs for running away? Now that's fluffy!
lmao, pretty sure it's when the enemy does any of those things, but... tbh either way it's great XD
Eh, it's ok against some factions, practically useless against others. But that's ok, you'll just use it if you're playing against the factions it will work on, and something else for the ones it won't work on.
Still, like the Legion trait, it looks pretty sad when you've seen what Night Lords are getting in HH 2.0.
I don't play comp and have zero intention of using the trait as given by Chris. Gonna go with the fear part and the +1S/M warband trait.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Which is weird when remember the weapon options Havocs had before the current kit. I mean, if one chaincannon is enough to allow four in the squad, then why isn't one of each type of special enough for that as well? Just too many options for gw? Not close enough to the codex Astartes?
I dunno. I wish special weapons were legal in Havoc squads. Had all my Death Guard Havocs invalidated when that stopped.
I actually preferred that they made Havocs locked to Heavy Weapons since it gave them a more specialized role compared to Chosen.
However there's the issue of "Havocs are only ever five dudes in a squad" and "Chosen aren't gonna be able to spam special weapons anymore", so I guess that's that.
Which is a distinction that never should have been needed to be made. When Chosen were first introduced (in 3.5) they were the most customizable unit in the game, not a special weapon spam unit. Havocs were far better suited for that purpose. The fact that Chosen were devolved into nothing more than a delivery method for plasma/melta/flamers was one of the many slights perpetuated on CSM in the godawful 4th edition codex that the faction still suffers from to this day.
You're not wrong on that, but that's partially on fault to creating the lame ass CSM profile which was just Tactical Marine with spikes.
Uhhh.....how exactly did the CSM profile cause gw to strip away all of the awesome customizable rules that we had in 3.5 and replace them with the cold, lifeless husk that was the 4th edition CSM codex?
drbored wrote: NL Score a point when
Fail moral
Fall back
Fail action
Night Lords get VPs for running away? Now that's fluffy!
lmao, pretty sure it's when the enemy does any of those things, but... tbh either way it's great XD
Eh, it's ok against some factions, practically useless against others. But that's ok, you'll just use it if you're playing against the factions it will work on, and something else for the ones it won't work on.
Still, like the Legion trait, it looks pretty sad when you've seen what Night Lords are getting in HH 2.0.
I don't play comp and have zero intention of using the trait as given by Chris. Gonna go with the fear part and the +1S/M warband trait.
Groovy. Assuming nothing changes in the actual codex, I'll be using the fallback + charge + shoot trait. Ave Dominus Nox.
drbored wrote: NL Score a point when
Fail moral
Fall back
Fail action
Night Lords get VPs for running away? Now that's fluffy!
lmao, pretty sure it's when the enemy does any of those things, but... tbh either way it's great XD
Eh, it's ok against some factions, practically useless against others. But that's ok, you'll just use it if you're playing against the factions it will work on, and something else for the ones it won't work on.
Still, like the Legion trait, it looks pretty sad when you've seen what Night Lords are getting in HH 2.0.
I don't play comp and have zero intention of using the trait as given by Chris. Gonna go with the fear part and the +1S/M warband trait.
Groovy. Assuming nothing changes in the actual codex, I'll be using the fallback + charge + shoot trait. Ave Dominus Nox.
Thought about using that, but then I realized I'm probably going to be using chosen rather than legionaries and I can just get both traits on them. And for other units I'd rather have the strength, in the end.
Lord Tarkin wrote: 9th Edition has just been disgusting so far. The splitting up of all the codex's and the incomplete core rulebook for me outline how greedy and disgusting GW is being about this.
Just want to go back to this rant for a second... how the heck are you defining the 9th core rulebook as incomplete?
Because it's incomplete. Have you played any games so far buddy? I played 3 so far and this is a garbage and INCOMPLETE rulebook. Don't care what you or any of you GW loyalists say about it. feth their garbage rulebooks and their garbage errata. There's a reason they've been releasing a new rulebook every 3 years they're incompetent. I have a right to be angry about where this fething game has gone. GW wants their money and that's it. They've shown time and time again they don't care about you or me or anybody, they just want the money that's on us.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Ok ease down Wilhuff! You'll break your Death Star.
I think Dysartes would like some examples, not just "They just are, ok!".
Smite. It's the only psychic power in the game that can be used multiple times and yet GW doesn't clarify on whether the same unit can use it multiple times. Don't give me that "oh it wasn't interpreted right" nonsense, they literally just didn't put it in the book. I've read through looking for it, can't find it. Ok so what happens to a unit after its transport is destroyed, and they can't legally disembark? Is the whole unit gone? Only models that can't fit? Don't know, doesn't say. I found this out after only 1 full game, though I played 2 others that couldn't be finished. I'm sure I'll find a few more things missing at least.
Also, I'm irritated by the way some of you talk to me, it's been multiple times over multiple days. "How in the world (heck)" is not the correct way to ask a question, it's arrogant and it belittles the supposed intelligence of the person you're talking to. Just fething ask the question ok? You don't have to be a prick about it. I'm tired of it. I made a rant about GW, not you or Dysartes.
Automatically Appended Next Post: If you're rude to me, I'll be rude back. Treat me with respect and I'll treat you with respect. Very honest and simple arrangement.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Ok ease down Wilhuff! You'll break your Death Star.
I think Dysartes would like some examples, not just "They just are, ok!".
Smite. It's the only psychic power in the game that can be used multiple times and yet GW doesn't clarify on whether the same unit can use it multiple times. Don't give me that "oh it wasn't interpreted right" nonsense, they literally just didn't put it in the book. I've read through looking for it, can't find it. Ok so what happens to a unit after its transport is destroyed, and they can't legally disembark? Is the whole unit gone? Only models that can't fit? Don't know, doesn't say. I found this out after only 1 full game, though I played 2 others that couldn't be finished. I'm sure I'll find a few more things missing at least.
Also, I'm irritated by the way some of you talk to me, it's been multiple times over multiple days. "How in the world (heck)" is not the correct way to ask a question, it's arrogant and it belittles the supposed intelligence of the person you're talking to. Just fething ask the question ok? You don't have to be a prick about it. I'm tired of it. I made a rant about GW, not you or Dysartes.
People tend to respond to certain modes of talk. If you don't like the way people are talking to you, maybe it's because you're jumping into a conversation with the wrong verbiage or attitude. Even if you yourself are not angry, your text comes out as angery. If you want a calm and collected and intelligent conversation, then making wild statements and using aggressive verbiage is likely not going to get you what you want.
As for all those questions... Well, welcome to GW. Smite wasn't given a complete clarification but was covered in an FAQ. Emergency disembark is indeed covered in the core rulebook.
Go back to the transport sections, check the FAQs and Erratas, and if nothing else, people online have figured it out.
But yes, your opinion based on 1 or 2 unfinished games is noted. Is 9th edition 'incomplete'? Eh, maybe you would be right on a very technical standpoint, but it has been quite well polished as a set of core rules. Most people I've met have had no issues with the edition. Most I've talked to seem to have a larger issue with the Codexes themselves and the overlayering of rules, excess stratagems, and the command point system as a whole.
I've played 15 games over the past 3 months and have not had any of these issues. These issues did come up, but regular searching through the books and FAQs answered them easily enough and we were able to proceed.
And remember... Respect is earned, not freely given.
More to the point, the initial claim remains without evidence. One rule having an unclear aspect is nothing more than a hiccup, it needs to be a trend of that happening to act as evidence.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Ok ease down Wilhuff! You'll break your Death Star.
I think Dysartes would like some examples, not just "They just are, ok!".
Smite. It's the only psychic power in the game that can be used multiple times and yet GW doesn't clarify on whether the same unit can use it multiple times. Don't give me that "oh it wasn't interpreted right" nonsense, they literally just didn't put it in the book. I've read through looking for it, can't find it. Ok so what happens to a unit after its transport is destroyed, and they can't legally disembark? Is the whole unit gone? Only models that can't fit? Don't know, doesn't say. I found this out after only 1 full game, though I played 2 others that couldn't be finished. I'm sure I'll find a few more things missing at least.
Also, I'm irritated by the way some of you talk to me, it's been multiple times over multiple days. "How in the world (heck)" is not the correct way to ask a question, it's arrogant and it belittles the supposed intelligence of the person you're talking to. Just fething ask the question ok? You don't have to be a prick about it. I'm tired of it. I made a rant about GW, not you or Dysartes.
Automatically Appended Next Post: If you're rude to me, I'll be rude back. Treat me with respect and I'll treat you with respect. Very honest and simple arrangement.
In the rulebook I've got, the first paragraph under MANIFESTING PSYCHIC POWERS ends with "The Same PSYKER cannot attempt to manifest Smite more than once during the same battle round." Plus, I think you're overcomplicating the transport thing. Can you set up the unit wholly within 3" of the TRANSPORT and not within Engagement Range of any enemy models? Yes? You're fine. No? You don't get to set the unit up. I don't know where you get the idea that you might not be able to set up individual models since nothing about the rules even hint that that may be the case? It talks purely about the unit.
edit: to clarify, the disembark thing is tantamount to like, "Can I set this deep striking unit up so that some models would be within 9" of an enemy unit and just remove those models?" - the answer is no. The entire unit must be set up and it must meet all restrictions on that setup. You don't get to just remove models that would make it difficult/not optimal and make the unit fit where you want it to.
If you can't meet the requirements at all, there goes the unit.
ClockworkZion wrote: Can we go back to arguing about Chaos Marine rumors? Arguing about if 9th edition is "complete" or not seems like it's own thread topic.
ClockworkZion wrote: Can we go back to arguing about Chaos Marine rumors? Arguing about if 9th edition is "complete" or not seems like it's own thread topic.
Ah, good point, I apologize.
Gosh darn it, we're derailed by a troll again.
So, what do y'all think about 10th edition potentially being Space Marines vs. Chaos Marines this time around?
Or perhaps there being a Red Corsairs or Renegade Warbands Supplement for Chaos Marines that we haven't seen yet that could be where Huron Blackheart and Bikers are updated?
ClockworkZion wrote: Can we go back to arguing about Chaos Marine rumors? Arguing about if 9th edition is "complete" or not seems like it's own thread topic.
Ah, good point, I apologize.
Gosh darn it, we're derailed by a troll again.
So, what do y'all think about 10th edition potentially being Space Marines vs. Chaos Marines this time around?
Or perhaps there being a Red Corsairs or Renegade Warbands Supplement for Chaos Marines that we haven't seen yet that could be where Huron Blackheart and Bikers are updated?
Doubt csm now and csm in starter next year. Csm ain't loyalist marines.
We i could believe if gw hadn't already mentioned we coming which means odds are they come this year.
It's going to be Space Marines versus Space Fimir, obviously.
But yeah, this edition and last edition GW used the opportunity of a new edition to hand out new models to a faction that they thought they wanted to expand by a considerable amount. I'm not sure Chaos Marines have a lot left that would warrant a similarly sized expansion. Obliterators and the spider engine that went away with the start collecting? Maybe chosen Terminators for Abaddon? Is there anything else blatantly missing? If GW wanted Chaos in the starter box I could see Marines versus Traitor Guard, as that has a lot of potential. Or general Lost and Damned, with the models we get this time around as a first wave to build on. But Chaos Marines?
I'd expect Chaos Marines to lose Emperor's Children/Noise Marines some time into 10th ed to wrap up the cult codices before they even get another look, and not much in the way of models next time around. Maybe not just a clampack character and codex, given the aforementioned missing models, but not enough to warrant putting them in a starter box.
Geifer wrote: It's going to be Space Marines versus Space Fimir, obviously.
But yeah, this edition and last edition GW used the opportunity of a new edition to hand out new models to a faction that they thought they wanted to expand by a considerable amount. I'm not sure Chaos Marines have a lot left that would warrant a similarly sized expansion. Obliterators and the spider engine that went away with the start collecting? Maybe chosen Terminators for Abaddon? Is there anything else blatantly missing? If GW wanted Chaos in the starter box I could see Marines versus Traitor Guard, as that has a lot of potential. Or general Lost and Damned, with the models we get this time around as a first wave to build on. But Chaos Marines?
I'd expect Chaos Marines to lose Emperor's Children/Noise Marines some time into 10th ed to wrap up the cult codices before they even get another look, and not much in the way of models next time around. Maybe not just a clampack character and codex, given the aforementioned missing models, but not enough to warrant putting them in a starter box.
World Eaters or Emperor's Children could be a good expansion since they both need a proper release and giving them a Death Guard style expansion that way would be solid.
ClockworkZion wrote: Can we go back to arguing about Chaos Marine rumors? Arguing about if 9th edition is "complete" or not seems like it's own thread topic.
Ah, good point, I apologize.
Gosh darn it, we're derailed by a troll again.
So, what do y'all think about 10th edition potentially being Space Marines vs. Chaos Marines this time around?
Or perhaps there being a Red Corsairs or Renegade Warbands Supplement for Chaos Marines that we haven't seen yet that could be where Huron Blackheart and Bikers are updated?
Ha!
I think its pretty clear by now that no one else gets supplements, particularly not Chaos, where the aim seems to be to create smaller and smaller slices of pie. (See: What Cult Marines?)
They could start over and do a new paradigm, but don't hold your breath waiting for Heretic Astartes Supplement: Those Red Guys from a Bit Ago.
ClockworkZion wrote: World Eaters or Emperor's Children could be a good expansion since they both need a proper release and giving them a Death Guard style expansion that way would be solid.
Not quite following you here - we know WE are getting their own book in the near-ish future, and going by the DG release, it is unlikely anything released for that with backfill into the main CSM book.
You might get more conversion material, but that's about it.
ClockworkZion wrote: World Eaters or Emperor's Children could be a good expansion since they both need a proper release and giving them a Death Guard style expansion that way would be solid.
Not quite following you here - we know WE are getting their own book in the near-ish future, and going by the DG release, it is unlikely anything released for that with backfill into the main CSM book.
You might get more conversion material, but that's about it.
Yeah, if we see World Eaters before the end of the year, and we probably will, I doubt it will be a codex with a sparse initial wave of models, half a year of wait until GW confirms that the rest of the army comes in the 10th ed starter box, and then another two months of waiting for that box. And then a tail of releases that accompanies a new edition for another month or two. That doesn't sound remotely like how GW operates.
I'd rule Emperor's Children out as well simply because of the proximity to World Eaters. We should assume both legions get their respective Primarch, and so far it doesn't look like GW is inclined to release Primarchs so close to each other. This could of course change, and in this particular case it would be a change for the better. But for now it's not something that seems terribly likely to me.
If GW releases new chaos bikes I would assume they would make them available to the god legions too… or at least, world eaters and EC both should field plenty.
Also, looks like youtubers have begun releasing reviews of the Horus Heresy box set.
Usually this happens about a week before preorder. Could be a little earlier, but my thinking is that if we aren't for preorder this coming Saturday, then it's going to be after 30k comes out.
drbored wrote: Also, looks like youtubers have begun releasing reviews of the Horus Heresy box set.
Usually this happens about a week before preorder. Could be a little earlier, but my thinking is that if we aren't for preorder this coming Saturday, then it's going to be after 30k comes out.
The wait continues.
Yeah it feels like CSM should be out already but there is a strong chance they missed their delivery window due to shipping related problems and got pushed back.
drbored wrote: Also, looks like youtubers have begun releasing reviews of the Horus Heresy box set.
Usually this happens about a week before preorder. Could be a little earlier, but my thinking is that if we aren't for preorder this coming Saturday, then it's going to be after 30k comes out.
The wait continues.
Yeah it feels like CSM should be out already but there is a strong chance they missed their delivery window due to shipping related problems and got pushed back.
Yeah, after another week of radio silence, it looks like we'll be waiting a while longer than expected. Oh well, what's another month after fifteen years of waiting for a good codex. I just hope this isn't just another clock reset on that wait.......
drbored wrote: Also, looks like youtubers have begun releasing reviews of the Horus Heresy box set.
Usually this happens about a week before preorder. Could be a little earlier, but my thinking is that if we aren't for preorder this coming Saturday, then it's going to be after 30k comes out.
The wait continues.
Usually ndk's stop on day preorders start so this is unusully early.
drbored wrote: Also, looks like youtubers have begun releasing reviews of the Horus Heresy box set.
Usually this happens about a week before preorder. Could be a little earlier, but my thinking is that if we aren't for preorder this coming Saturday, then it's going to be after 30k comes out.
The wait continues.
Usually ndk's stop on day preorders start so this is unusully early.
For big boxes like this that GW wants to generate a lot of hype on, it's usually allowed for them to preview them a week or more before preorder, to continue generating hype and talk about value of the box.
But yeah, at this point, mid June would be the earliest I see the Chaos Marine codex coming out. If this is a 2 week preorder for the 30k stuff, there may be a week of no preorders.
drbored wrote: Also, looks like youtubers have begun releasing reviews of the Horus Heresy box set.
Usually this happens about a week before preorder. Could be a little earlier, but my thinking is that if we aren't for preorder this coming Saturday, then it's going to be after 30k comes out.
The wait continues.
Usually ndk's stop on day preorders start so this is unusully early.
For big boxes like this that GW wants to generate a lot of hype on, it's usually allowed for them to preview them a week or more before preorder, to continue generating hype and talk about value of the box.
But yeah, at this point, mid June would be the earliest I see the Chaos Marine codex coming out. If this is a 2 week preorder for the 30k stuff, there may be a week of no preorders.
I know the hype train is full speed ahead right now, but somehow I don't see them announcing the pre-orders while they're still going through all the Legion focus articles.
So I know it's a bit early since all we have is playtest leaks, but I was thinking about the viability of the various marks/icons. What they're best on, which ones seem like winners or losers. So just gonna write my thoughts down here.
Here's the marks from the op
Khorne: +1S on the charge
Tzeentch ignore damage on first failed save once per turn per unit
Slaanesh fight first in the fight phase
Nurgle -1 to wound if Strength = Toughness and if Strength divided by 2 (rounded up) is greater or equal to the Toughness of the unit
Personally I bet nurgle will just end up being -1 to wound because the dividing thing sounds... stupid. So I'll just write from here on if as if it's regular -1 to wound.
And aside from characters who I'm guessing will all have access to marks, here's the units we know can take them from the OP.
So all of them pretty clearly benefit from Nurgle's mark (assuming I'm right about the dividing thing being gone!). Unless it ends up with the OP's version, pretty much everything here would stand to benefit immensely from -1 to wound. Whether they're a ranged or melee unit, you get a ton of survivability out of it. Compare to tzeentch which I consider the big loser here. Not just because it's not as good a mark, but because of the icon and armor of contempt. But that's getting ahead of myself. In particular though, I don't see any reason to take anything but Nurgle on say terminators. -1 to wound on a 2+/5++/3W platform is pretty great. Talk about board control...
Slaanesh and Khorne are the marks that are the hardest to decide between, and both are best on purely melee units. I could totally see minimum strength raptor units with slaanesh being used to mess with activations in the fight phase, as much as I can see full warp talon units getting khorne to shred... really anything, honestly, if they can get a +1 to wound alongside it.
Things shake up with icons, where again there's a big question with nurgle. As well as not all markable units getting icons (including a unit or two that USED to get icons, no longer getting them!).
Icons:
vengeance +1 CA wrath +1ap melee
flame +1ap shooting
excess +1 to hit melee
despair 6s to hit = autowound
which can go on...
Legionaires
Chosen
Possessed
Bikers
Terminator
So the big nurgle question is if the 6s to hit counts in shooting or not. I'm gonna take a wild guess it doesn't, but MAN if it does, there's not much of a reason to take any other mark I feel. Assuming it doesn't, terminators seem to continue being best with nurgle. Not just because it's a great effect adding onto their increased durability, but because with armor of contempt the icons of flame and wrath just feel... useless. Adding an extra point of AP to your bolters/combi-bolters just ends up being worthless. At least the khorne one will keep your AP where it already is, but I'd rather get autowounding than "the same AP I already had" against marines.
Slaanesh continues being interesting with the +1 to hit. It's been mentioned a bunch how nice that is with emperor's children where a unit with an icon will be hitting in melee, at worst, on a 2+. Compare a unit of legionaries with chainswords with a khorne mark+icon to a unit of slaanesh ones. As well as a base unmarked unit as a control. In a mirror match the khorne ones will be wounding on a 3+ while getting to keep a point of AP compared to the control unit, while the slaanesh ones will be hitting on a 2+, fighting first, but losing their only point of AP. I'm no mathematician, but I feel like the slaanesh ones edge things out because even if the khorne legionaries charge, they'd have to be picked to fight first by the controlling player to not lose a few models and not hit back as hard.
So to sum up my thoughts, I'm just gonna go ahead and rank the marks/icons with a briefer explanation.
1: Nurgle. All-rounder that exceeds both in durability and in increasing damage. Unless it keeps the division thing, it's going to be the mark of choice for pretty much anything.
2: Slaanesh. Good on purely melee units, great on Emperor's Children who'll get the unique benefit of fists and hammers hitting on 2s. Losing out on increased durability at range will hurt though.
3: Khorne. Again, good on purely melee units, but completely lacks any durability bonus and will struggle against anything hitting them first. They effectively get to ignore armor of contempt AND hurt non-power armor armies more than other marks.
4: Tzeentch. The only one I'd call outright bad. With the exception of chosen/terminators loaded up with combi-meltas/plasma/etc, and even then really only if nurgle keeps the divided thing.
Unranked: Undivided. If marks are more expensive than anyone might guess (higher than 10 points) then armies might end up being mostly undivided with just a few important units being marked. The icon is worthless on anything except night lords... and even then, only if they're facing something that doesn't ignore morale.
There's a few units that are exceptions for these rankings. Certain legions will make certain marks better or worse. Black Legion has no reason to ever take the slaanesh icon for instance, so Khorne may be overall a better choice for them. A chosen unit that's taken the +1S/M warband trait may also benefit more from the Khorne mark, to get +3S/AP-4 total on their attacks with accursed weapons. Though D1 is... bad. Iron Warriors will benefit slightly more from Tzeentch's AP boost, since they also ignore cover. And a helbrute in particular might like tzeentch's mark, if the first save they fail is against something intended to be shot at a helbrute rather than just a mass of lasgun fire.
Final thought: Give raptors their icon back GW, you cowards.
Oh, if we can start speculating: I keep wondering if the new leaked rules about a BL strat that lets cult units have BL rules will be useful. I would really love to build a Rubricae squad/aka Khayon and his boys on my army
Have in mind that I left warhammer 8 years ago, so I want to reiforce my main BL army, but also buy and put together this new fashion Death Guard and Rubricae. And, of course, some berserkers on the future...
Also I forgot to take spells (which are in the leaks) into account. They bump up Slaanesh/Tzeentch/Nurgle significantly compared to Khorne, the increased durability for all three is really nice... though also a known factor from 8th since they're just the same spells again.
Also in terms of characters since they also can't take icons obviously, everything is viable. Characters are by and large going to be more melee/support focused and really any of them benefit from khorne/slaanesh/nurgle. Tzeentch... well, we'll see the stratagems eventually I guess lol.
Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
Mhm, lore begs to differ on multiple occaisions, alas gw couldn't be bothered to give us a propper replacement for R&H and instead just shoved those entries into the csm dex, then turn around and get annoyed when CSM players field cultists or traitor guardsmen, because no csm are fielded, not realising that csm being not fielded has to do with their failure at designing the list in the first place.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
Mhm, lore begs to differ on multiple occaisions, alas gw couldn't be bothered to give us a propper replacement for R&H and instead just shoved those entries into the csm dex, then turn around and get annoyed when CSM players field cultists or traitor guardsmen, because no csm are fielded, not realising that csm being not fielded has to do with their failure at designing the list in the first place.
GW designs around theme, players design around efficiency.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
Mhm, lore begs to differ on multiple occaisions, alas gw couldn't be bothered to give us a propper replacement for R&H and instead just shoved those entries into the csm dex, then turn around and get annoyed when CSM players field cultists or traitor guardsmen, because no csm are fielded, not realising that csm being not fielded has to do with their failure at designing the list in the first place.
GW designs around theme, players design around efficiency.
Not all players. I am all about theme and I am sure I am not alone.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
Mhm, lore begs to differ on multiple occaisions, alas gw couldn't be bothered to give us a propper replacement for R&H and instead just shoved those entries into the csm dex, then turn around and get annoyed when CSM players field cultists or traitor guardsmen, because no csm are fielded, not realising that csm being not fielded has to do with their failure at designing the list in the first place.
GW designs around theme, players design around efficiency.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
R&H units could take Chaos Covenants, and Alpha Legion Cultists could have the Mark of Chaos Undivided in 3.5, you're lack of knowledge of previous editions aside. Still no explanation why vehicles, especially Daemon Engines wouldn't be able to bear Marks, either.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
Mhm, lore begs to differ on multiple occaisions, alas gw couldn't be bothered to give us a propper replacement for R&H and instead just shoved those entries into the csm dex, then turn around and get annoyed when CSM players field cultists or traitor guardsmen, because no csm are fielded, not realising that csm being not fielded has to do with their failure at designing the list in the first place.
GW designs around theme, players design around efficiency.
And "a few Chaos Space Marines leading a horde of mortal followers" is definitely a "theme" that many CSM players enjoy and build armies around.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Marks are like blessings, as the bearer of the mark is "marked out" as worthy. Cultists are not worthy.
Mhm, lore begs to differ on multiple occaisions, alas gw couldn't be bothered to give us a propper replacement for R&H and instead just shoved those entries into the csm dex, then turn around and get annoyed when CSM players field cultists or traitor guardsmen, because no csm are fielded, not realising that csm being not fielded has to do with their failure at designing the list in the first place.
GW designs around theme, players design around efficiency.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Also, sadly, contemptors probably won't get marks. Since they lost the helbrute keyword.
I'm also annoyed by cultists not getting marks, but I wonder if the cultist group HQ might have the equivalent of covenants.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Also, sadly, contemptors probably won't get marks. Since they lost the helbrute keyword.
I'm also annoyed by cultists not getting marks, but I wonder if the cultist group HQ might have the equivalent of covenants.
You don't need the [HELLBRUTE] keyword, according to the playtest rules leaks, you need the [CORE] keyword, and Contemptors are CORE, currently.
Hmmm, that would be a good way to make the Cultist HQ squad more useful.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Also, sadly, contemptors probably won't get marks. Since they lost the helbrute keyword.
I'm also annoyed by cultists not getting marks, but I wonder if the cultist group HQ might have the equivalent of covenants.
You don't need the [HELLBRUTE] keyword, according to the playtest rules leaks, you need the [CORE] keyword, and Contemptors are CORE, currently.
Hmmm, that would be a good way to make the Cultist HQ squad more useful.
It also lets them keep cultists from getting the same benefits as the marks, not because those benefits are "too good" but because they straight up don't make sense for a cultist. Ignoring the first failed save in a turn might work for a helbrute, but cultists are gonna be getting plinked by lots of small damage shots.
Looking at R&H's 7th edition covenants, some of them make more sense than the leaked marks at least.
Khorne: Re-roll wounds. That feels good as an aura on a group that can spread out pretty wide, compared to +1S.
Nurgle: FNP. Giving a 6+++ to a unit with a 6+ again feels pretty good. It's not as drastic a change as -1 to wound, and if they're taking lots of shots it probably feels better to play with.
Slaanesh: Fleet. Fast cultists able to run around the board is pretty good. And I know I wouldn't want to have to fight cultists that always get to fight first.
Tzeentch: snap shots fire at BS2 instead of BS1. Uh... I guess BS+1? I dunno lmao.
Also good to know about contemptors, makes my plans for the HH box one easier.
Dysartes wrote: Well, the first models for this CSM wave are available for pre-order next week, as that is when Kill Team: Moloch goes up.
That's sort of half true I guess? If you want a likely £120 box set for some cultists, sure, I dread to think what they'll go for on the scalping market, I'm guessing given they're immensely popular and infiltrators aren't, £60?
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one that finds it annoying that Marks are locked to CORE? That seems to leave out Cultists (which leads one to wonder exactly what they're "Cultists" of), as well as every vehicle besides Hellbrutes and Contemptors? Is it possible we'll get the option to "dedicate" vehicles to the Chaos Gods, as we could in previous editions, similar to what CK got? Or maybe something like Legacies of Ruin from IA13, with options for things besides god specific stuff? They've already been mining some of the old fw rules for ideas, recently.
Also, sadly, contemptors probably won't get marks. Since they lost the helbrute keyword.
I'm also annoyed by cultists not getting marks, but I wonder if the cultist group HQ might have the equivalent of covenants.
You don't need the [HELLBRUTE] keyword, according to the playtest rules leaks, you need the [CORE] keyword, and Contemptors are CORE, currently.
Hmmm, that would be a good way to make the Cultist HQ squad more useful.
It also lets them keep cultists from getting the same benefits as the marks, not because those benefits are "too good" but because they straight up don't make sense for a cultist. Ignoring the first failed save in a turn might work for a helbrute, but cultists are gonna be getting plinked by lots of small damage shots.
Looking at R&H's 7th edition covenants, some of them make more sense than the leaked marks at least.
Khorne: Re-roll wounds. That feels good as an aura on a group that can spread out pretty wide, compared to +1S.
Nurgle: FNP. Giving a 6+++ to a unit with a 6+ again feels pretty good. It's not as drastic a change as -1 to wound, and if they're taking lots of shots it probably feels better to play with.
Slaanesh: Fleet. Fast cultists able to run around the board is pretty good. And I know I wouldn't want to have to fight cultists that always get to fight first.
Tzeentch: snap shots fire at BS2 instead of BS1. Uh... I guess BS+1? I dunno lmao.
Also good to know about contemptors, makes my plans for the HH box one easier.
Yeah, some of the Mark abilities wouldn't work well with Cultists, same for vehicles. Which is why I was wondering if they'd be able to get something else, like they could in previous editions. Like being Dedicated to one of the Chaos Gods, or Legacies of Ruin. -1 to wound could be pretty ridiculous on a T8 2+ AoC vehicle, even if it does follow the weird rules from the playtest rules.
Dysartes wrote:Well, the first models for this CSM wave are available for pre-order next week, as that is when Kill Team: Moloch goes up.
Nice! And it says that you can build them as either Killteam specialists or a normal a normal Traitor Guardsmen squad. Though I'll probably be waiting for them to be released separately.
And I see that the Chaos Knights are getting their standalone release as well. Good. That means CSM are up next.
). The leaked Terminators instruction sheet had a power fist and a chainfist, which are supposed to be separate from "Accursed Weapons", and a power sword, which we all assumed was the "Accursed Weapons" with the +1S, 
).
, but 
