StarTrotter wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
My main armies are Orks and Khorne Daemons, and I have a bunch of Orks riding bloodcrushers etc. The idea of allowing the former to summon the latter sounds hilarious

You next need Bloodletters riding either orks or squigs

Herald on a Squig Throne!

SQUIGS FOR THE SQUIG GOD!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I-I've never t-thought of d-doing that u-until I have enough money and FW releases them in a r-rulebook... n-nope

Don't worry, "no one" else has either.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
My main armies are Orks and Khorne Daemons, and I have a bunch of Orks riding bloodcrushers etc. The idea of allowing the former to summon the latter sounds hilarious

You next need Bloodletters riding either orks or squigs

Herald on a Squig Throne!

SQUIGS FOR THE SQUIG GOD!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I-I've never t-thought of d-doing that u-until I have enough money and FW releases them in a r-rulebook... n-nope

Don't worry, "no one" else has either.

Special rule, they explode SD 4 small blasts on death. Thought they were a joke didn't you punk!?

Reminds me of the local GW that is about to close. That owner really cared and tried. Anyways, he made a headless orksman who was an ork riding a squig (you could take off the ork's head and put it in his hand as well. Magnets and all)

 streamdragon wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?

I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.

Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.

I'm sure there are other games you'll find, might I offer a suggestion:

Seriously though. You've had a discussion over a few scanned WD pages without seeing hide nor hair of actual implementation. It's one thing when you have full or partial rules leaks, but we don't even have that. We have a few designer notes with no real foundation or context to it.

The discussion was more inclusive than that, with the latest edition of the rules being the final nail in the coffin. We all decided to meet up this week and play X-wing, one of us has quite a few models and I'm going to get a couple of starter sets. It's fun,You can get two starter sets for the cost of the 6th ed rule book. Who knows what I could get for the cost of the 7th ed. I was just holding on to 40k out of nostalgia.

Like many have said. Each edition and codexs heavily favor some armies, the errata and FAQs for those are gone, (the errata being the more important) it just becomes work after a while. If this ploy doesn't give GW the lift that it needs and they either sell the IP or change their stategy to more long term, I may come back...I'll still have all the models. Too much time spent on that to just let them go.

Orks should be allowed to summon Warboss Tuska.

 insaniak wrote:
Now we can all say 'I was there the day GW killed the 40k fluff...'

No kidding.

Marines can summon Bloodthirsters. Warhammer 40,000, as a game, is over.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Now we can all say 'I was there the day GW killed the 40k fluff...'

No kidding.

Marines can summon Bloodthirsters. Warhammer 40,000, as a game, is over.

Please let there be no limit and even permit GK use it. I'll laugh my ass off. Oh, or better yet. Just let me ally and still get to summon daemons GK! Fight alongside your comrades and chaos daemon bretheren! And leading the charge of bloodthirsters is Draigo himself.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 tarnish wrote:
Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?

The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.

You've seen the new rulebook in its entirety too then? What else is in it?

No, I am talking about the Unbound rules, which is the topic of the conversation you supposedly are joining.

Ive been in the thread since the WD was posted, I'm aware the conversation was about the Unbound rules, which havent been released in its entirety yet as far as I'm aware.

Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.

Yearh shows me for appealing to reason and communication in the community.... I must be worse then hitler himself for suggesting that!

Edit: Thanks for having my back Kilkrazy.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Now we can all say 'I was there the day GW killed the 40k fluff...'

No kidding.

Marines can summon Bloodthirsters. Warhammer 40,000, as a game, is over.

Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

 Ramshackle_Curtis wrote:
Back when I started playing I had to wait for the first army list to be written. You could take anything you wanted and they gave you rules for making up your own vehicles, characters and robots. Rogue Trader was broken, and you simply had to house rule stuff. I still have fun with it now.

1st edition was amazing fun, needed a level of control for sure, was only broken if you tried to break it, a fragile ruleset for sure but for small scale skirmish games, with each model acting individually within small groups was utterly amazing.

And the world didn't end, it grew, army lists developed, it expanded, and became where we are now.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Just because the WD team does something proves nothing.

 StarTrotter wrote:

It's not confirmed that everybody will get to summon. As others have mentioned, WD isn't exactly known for being loyal. I do have my hunch that they weren't breaking rules for this though but until it's confirmed... And to be realistic Chaos has always been an accessory. Chaos guard, CSM, chaos orks. Heck, there used to be chaos genestealers.

Bloodthirsters have never been an accessory. That's a big leap from where we have been in past editions.

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

Oh so you've seen the new rulebook as well then? How does the Demonology pyker disciplines work then? So we can clear up confusion

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

 Idolator wrote:
HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?

I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.

Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.

Our local group here is definitely gearing up for the same kinda decision.

Well its confirmed. Loyalists will now summon deamons.

/flips table over and walks out

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

This is what I get from it:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Just because the WD team does something proves nothing.

I can't tell how much Peregrine and HBMC are kidding...I'd guess Pregrine is mostly serious, HBMC is mostly kidding, though. Am I close, guys?

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

And do you really think that the only thing you'll be able to summon is a Bloodthirster? There's probably a random table in there somewhere (hadn't you heard?? tables are awesome!) that like other people have suggested, will either turn you into a puddle of goo, a greater daemon or something in between.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

 tomjoad wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Just because the WD team does something proves nothing.

I can't tell how much Peregrine and HBMC are kidding...I'd guess Pregrine is mostly serious, HBMC is mostly kidding, though. Am I close, guys?

I've never witnessed Peregrine show a sense of humor about anything (and if he has I just can't tell).

Calling it now, you'll be able to summon riptides, because.. hey you should buy a riptide.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

It implies nothing of the sort.

And since you replied before I'd finished editing my post, here was the second bit:

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

I believe that said that they "Allowed him" to do it implying that it might not be the norm.

Also, this is how I imagine the 7th ed rulebook:

WayneTheGame wrote:
Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.

Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it

That's some narrative forging right there.

firstly, I'm sure it was just a fun twist to the end of a losing game... Can't imagine GW allowing this any official way in 7th. (Crosses fingers)

However, I played dark angels for 10 years, and read all the background and fluff on them. The stories of Johnston buying his time when the heresy broke out in order to side with the winning side, the secrets the angels have of Johnston in the center of the roc, the whispered rumors the "loyal" da were in fact the ones ready to side with Horus (which is the great secret) and the "fallen" were the terra da that were ousted and called the traitors... Now with Ezekiel (knowing how to) channel a blood thirster? Sounds like GW has the makings of an entire multi-year story campaign direction it could take...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It implies nothing of the sort.

The WD Team's track record doesn't really this is really set in stone though, or else we'd all be playing without using points and just plonking all of our toys down on the table all the time already. Because that's what they've done plenty of since 6th launched.

This whole thread has just devolved into

"Aargh, this thing is really worrying/concerning/angering/rage quit"

"Ah, but we don't know that yet!"

For pages and pages, someone, please, try and come up with something new to say, or at least recognise you're trapped in a circular argument and stop until new info lands.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

It implies nothing of the sort.

And since you replied before I'd finished editing my post, here was the second bit:

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

The advent of Daemonology has caused many moral quandaries in the White Dwarf office, not least for Adam Troke. A staunch Dark Angels collector, Adam found himself allowing none other than Grand Master Ezekiel himself to use the Daemonology powers in one of our test games – all in the interest of research and playtesting, of course.

From the WD. There are the facts that are known, he allowed Ezekiel to use those powers for playtest, in the interest of research and playtesting. Explain to me how that makes it a concrete fact that outside of a playtest, the DA GM is allowed to do this in a real setting?

Please quote the 7th edition rulebook page and paragraph that allows this.

 Leth wrote:
I believe that said that they "Allowed him" to do it implying that it might not be the norm.

It says the player allowed Ezekiel, not that they were allowing the player to do anything out of the ordinary (from a rules perspective, not a fluff perspective, that is). The paragraph emphasises the desperation of the Dark Angel player, a situation so desperate that he had to have the head Librarian of the Dark Angels summon a Daemon in order to win.

All that paragraph does is – and I say this both ironically and un-ironically – is forge a narrative. People are trying to find an alternate meaning for “allowing”, removing any and all context from what’s written there.

Dark angels will become Excommunicate Traitoris in 2014! Plot twist!

 techsoldaten wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

It's not confirmed that everybody will get to summon. As others have mentioned, WD isn't exactly known for being loyal. I do have my hunch that they weren't breaking rules for this though but until it's confirmed... And to be realistic Chaos has always been an accessory. Chaos guard, CSM, chaos orks. Heck, there used to be chaos genestealers.

Bloodthirsters have never been an accessory. That's a big leap from where we have been in past editions.

Well except when daemons were just a small segment of the CSM codex

Never mind about my guessing HBMC was mostly kidding. When good posters go bad, I guess.

 azreal13 wrote:
This whole thread has just devolved into

"Aargh, this thing is really worrying/concerning/angering/rage quit"

"Ah, but we don't know that yet!"

For pages and pages, someone, please, try and come up with something new to say, or at least recognise you're trapped in a circular argument and stop until new info lands.

I hope if GW does a Collector's Edition this time that they go with laminated pages. I'd use my current CE if I wasn't worried about the ink rubbing off of the non-laminated pages (not to mention the paper absorbing oils from my skin, yuck).

Is that new enough?

So is it the new starter set or just the rulebook out on the 24th?

 edlowe wrote:
So is it the new starter set or just the rulebook out on the 24th?

Starter set rumors exist but I haven't seen anything saying when that's coming out. It's usually a bit of time after the rulebook though.

 edlowe wrote:
So is it the new starter set or just the rulebook out on the 24th?

rulebook may, starter august.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

Can you please kindly point me to where it says that exactly? Keep in mind it's gw "play testing" which, for all we know, might mean it is a legitimate rule. Plus, considering how the Maelific is played up in the same page, it's doubtful it's restricted to just CSM and Daemons

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Dark angels will become Excommunicate Traitoris in 2014! Plot twist!

That Battle Report where Ezekial summons the Bloodthirster is the secret the Dark Angels were trying to keep....secret!!!

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Sigh. This isn't just a battle report, it's them saying "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules". I really doubt what they meant was "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules, except we're just making it up and you can't actually do it with the new rules".

Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

Cheers! Guess I'll wait for the boxset. I've been considering getting back into 40k proper for a while, fun enough I've just started some daemons, guess they could be the start of lots of armies now.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

Can you please kindly point me to where it says that exactly? Keep in mind it's gw "play testing" which, for all we know, might mean it is a legitimate rule. Plus, considering how the Maelific is played up in the same page, it's doubtful it's restricted to just CSM and Daemons

Sure

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DXGwfut9Ljw/U2pfaITCiGI/AAAAAAAAeWs/ApmCM8sXaTY/s1600/beware-the-daemon.jpg

 Leth wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

I believe that said that they "Allowed him" to do it implying that it might not be the norm.

It's actually not allowed him. It's the DA "allowing" Ezekiel to do it. This can mean from it being a random let's do it for fun to it being a real thing. Plus, why would this even be a moral dilemma if not? Why not use Chaos for this instead?

Here's a prediction:

When a Space Marine Librarian summons a Daemon, it is going to get ATSKNF, POTMS, Chapter Tactics, immunity from daemonic instability, no need to roll on the warp storm table, probably pick up some artefacts on the way out the warp, be able to ride in transports, be able to assault from summoning, have skyfire and up to 4 mastery levels, allow the user to choose psychic powers, be able to overwatch on nearby units, and get rage, counterattack, shrouded, invulnerable save buffs, etc, depending on allegiance.

When a Chaos Sorcerer summons a Daemon, it is going to get fear and soulblaze and cost 10 points less than the loyalist version.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

Alas, if only that they had some...a little....*any* PR.

Going off some of the more recent WDW articles, I think they read this stuff and laugh at us.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

GW would have to acknowledge the Internet for that to happen first, and if they were that concerned about rumorus (something they clearly are not), then they wouldn't keep everyone in the dark.

wow, dark angels summonning daemons has gotten me extremely worried about this edition. Hopefully this was only a playtest, or that it cause severe penality to any loyalist army that use it (like that the rest of your army turn against the daemon, which in rules form, would give the control of the summoned daemons to your opponent). If not, I hate to say it, but it will pretty much kill 40k

 streetsamurai wrote:
wow, dark angels summonning daemons has gotten me extremely worried about this edition. Hopefully this was only a playtest, or that it cause severe penality to any loyalist army that use it (like that the rest of your army turn against the daemon, which in rules form, would give the control of the summoned daemons to your opponent). If not, I hate to say it, but it will pretty much kill 40k

Might as well pull the old Mars Attacks army out of storage. I yearn for more realism in games.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

Psssht they are too busy flipping through hundreds of dollars we spent on our favorite hobby. "Buying their toys"

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Sigh. This isn't just a battle report, it's them saying "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules". I really doubt what they meant was "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules, except we're just making it up and you can't actually do it with the new rules".

The blurb was about a game, much like a battle report is and like a battle report it was basically is "look at what the cool new stuff can do on the table!"), so yeah, I'd lump this in with a Battle Report in the level of actual weight I'd give it. Mostly because they regularly toss rules to the side anymore in the WD.

Heck when I'm asking if GW is even playing the same game as the player base, if they WD team is any indication the answer would be "NO" in hundred foot tall letters. They "forge narratives" in their reports more than they follow the rules anymore, so forgive me if I'm skeptical of what's in the WD (which is really a sad state of affairs if a customer can't trust the magazine that is made by the company that makes the product and is designed to push said product).

 tomjoad wrote:
Never mind about my guessing HBMC was mostly kidding. When good posters go bad, I guess.

Look I can see the point WrentheFaceless is making, but I think that we should take things like this at face value because we have no other information to suggest otherwise.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

GW would have to acknowledge the Internet for that to happen first, and if they were that concerned about rumorus (something they clearly are not), then they wouldn't keep everyone in the dark.

Oh I didn't mean the company as a whole, I meant more like GW Studio employees.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Sigh. This isn't just a battle report, it's them saying "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules". I really doubt what they meant was "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules, except we're just making it up and you can't actually do it with the new rules".

The blurb was about a game, much like a battle report is and like a battle report it was basically is "look at what the cool new stuff can do on the table!"), so yeah, I'd lump this in with a Battle Report in the level of actual weight I'd give it. Mostly because they regularly toss rules to the side anymore in the WD.

Heck when I'm asking if GW is even playing the same game as the player base, if they WD team is any indication the answer would be "NO" in hundred foot tall letters. They "forge narratives" in their reports more than they follow the rules anymore, so forgive me if I'm skeptical of what's in the WD (which is really a sad state of affairs if a customer can't trust the magazine that is made by the company that makes the product and is designed to push said product).

I agree with you Clockwork. Although I do wonder if 7th is an attempt to bring the game more in line with the way the White Dwarf plays games (i.e. do whatever the hell you want!)

 krazynadechukr wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.

Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
'
That's some narrative forging right there.

firstly, I'm sure it was just a fun twist to the end of a losing game... Can't imagine GW allowing this any official way in 7th. (Crosses fingers)

However, I played dark angels for 10 years, and read all the background and fluff on them. The stories of Johnston buying his time when the heresy broke out in order to side with the winning side, the secrets the angels have of Johnston in the center of the roc, the whispered rumors the "loyal" da were in fact the ones ready to side with Horus (which is the great secret) and the "fallen" were the terra da that were ousted and called the traitors... Now with Ezekiel (knowing how to) channel a blood thirster? Sounds like GW has the makings of an entire multi-year story campaign direction it could take...

Only one thing in this list is true, lion in the rock, everything else is just false, as a ten year vet you should know this.

The horus heresy books debunked the "lion was waiting for a winner" and the "loyalist are actually the fallen", ezekial summoning a gd goes against all established da fluff, da hate chaos and will torture and kill anyone tainted or useing it.

Fluff murder aside I'm looking forward to the New book, a psychic phase is something I have wanted for a long while, adamantium will looks like it's going to change possibly, psy hoods too

SM summoning Daemons is stupid?

Yeah because no SM has ever committed heresy before.

That said, I recon DA will be limited to the Sanc half of the powers. Not surprising the guy whose main army is Black Legion wanted to use a Greater Daemon for a laugh trying out new, unreleased rules for the first time.

lol I skipped 12 pages and you're all still hurfblurfing about Ezekiel.

 Accolade wrote:
I agree with you Clockwork. Although I do wonder if 7th is an attempt to bring the game more in line with the way the White Dwarf plays games (i.e. do whatever the hell you want!)

I admit it's possible, but I want to hear it from GW instead of getting wound up about something I haven't even read yet. Jumping to conclusions may be good exercise but I like to get all the facts in if possible before I form hard conclusions on things.

 XT-1984 wrote:
Yeah because no SM has ever committed heresy before.

This is not an argument.

You could always summon an avatar or mephiston. That would be amusing!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
I agree with you Clockwork. Although I do wonder if 7th is an attempt to bring the game more in line with the way the White Dwarf plays games (i.e. do whatever the hell you want!)

I admit it's possible, but I want to hear it from GW instead of getting wound up about something I haven't even read yet. Jumping to conclusions may be good exercise but I like to get all the facts in if possible before I form hard conclusions on things.

HERESY!

I hope im not the only one who thinks, ‘Bring it on!’.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

Can you please kindly point me to where it says that exactly? Keep in mind it's gw "play testing" which, for all we know, might mean it is a legitimate rule. Plus, considering how the Maelific is played up in the same page, it's doubtful it's restricted to just CSM and Daemons

Sure

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DXGwfut9Ljw/U2pfaITCiGI/AAAAAAAAeWs/ApmCM8sXaTY/s1600/beware-the-daemon.jpg

And it is equally just as likely, if not arguably more so that it is how the new rules work. Observe some details, they never say he was allowed to. They say he allowed his model to do it. Along with that, why were moral dilemmas made? Then let's hop to the next part. The "play testing" part is almost said in a tongue in cheek manner. We have absolutely no idea if this really legitimately means play testing, or them just tossing the rules aside again, or if it it's the actual rules. Now then, let us observe some other details we've garnered out which are more likely to actually be true.

"Sanctic and Maleific, and the latter is going to change the future of war altogether - it enables psykers to summon the fell denizens of the Warp to do their bidding on the battlefield! Beware, however, for if you are not Daemonspawn yourself, the cost may be high..."
Now then, let's first laugh at this changing the future of war altogether. This was a thing up until 4th edition came out and people still house rule this stuff all the time. Anyways, it enables psykers to summon them... well who gets it then? Daemons and CSM? Those are the only 100% answers. You can lax it to expand to IG and Inquisitors as well though but it's not that clear cut and even then that means you could theoretically have a GK army allied with an Inquisitor that starts summoning daemons. Onto the next aprt, beware if you are not Daemonspawn. If it's only chaos, that means it will affect a grand total of two models. Ahriman and the sorcerer. That's surprisingly few individuals. So it's most likely much more than that.

Finally, I ask, why not just use CSM in this? It's more marketable, more appealing to "the good guys" and just makes more sense. Yet they specifically chose a named character psyker to do it in a loyalist faction.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

Oh so you've seen the new rulebook as well then? How does the Demonology pyker disciplines work then? So we can clear up confusion

Seriously, would you give it a rest already? We're on a rumour forum, discussing leaked rumours, people should not have to caveat every third bloody sentence with "WARNING: OPINIONS BEING PRESENTED BASED ONLY ON AVAILABLE RUMOURS" just to avoid getting snarked at. Everything we discuss here has an element of speculation, that's basic and assumed by everyone, we don't need a Warden of Caveats going on and on about it.

Thinking about it, I think it'd be pretty hilarious if Dark Angels were the only Loyalist Marines who could summon Daemons. Just because they seem like they're already pretty out there (they have an entire company that is under a permanent Vow of Silence because someone giggled, so yeah, a bit out there in my book) and I wouldn't be too surprised if we found out that they consorted with Daemons (or at least summoning and binding them and using the daemon's knowledge) to hunt the Fallen since they seem to be pretty "anything goes" in every other aspect of how they operate.

That said I'd like to see what these powers actually do. I assume that both of these lores have 6 powers each, and for all we know Ezekial was just trying to use a power (like channeling the warp through himself to try and kill the Hive Tyrant) but rolled doubles or something and exploded into a Bloodthirster as a side-effect. Because I can't imagine it'd be 6 random "Summon X" powers.

Probably for the shock/irony factor. And it sounded like the DA guy was the only one around when they wanted to do this.

 Yodhrin wrote:


Seriously, would you give it a rest already? We're on a rumour forum, discussing leaked rumours, people should not have to caveat every third bloody sentence with "WARNING: OPINIONS BEING PRESENTED BASED ONLY ON AVAILABLE RUMOURS" just to avoid getting snarked at. Everything we discuss here has an element of speculation, that's basic and assumed by everyone, we don't need a Warden of Caveats going on and on about it.

Sure, as soon as opinions on rumors are not being portrayed as or implied to be 'facts'

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
I agree with you Clockwork. Although I do wonder if 7th is an attempt to bring the game more in line with the way the White Dwarf plays games (i.e. do whatever the hell you want!)

I admit it's possible, but I want to hear it from GW instead of getting wound up about something I haven't even read yet. Jumping to conclusions may be good exercise but I like to get all the facts in if possible before I form hard conclusions on things.

Oh, what's the fun in that?

Obviously I'm kidding

I think what I'm wondering about more specifically is if GW included this Bloodthirster tidbit because it was something that was playtested and checked-off as good-to-go. Hence, the sharing of it would draw up attention (as it has) and people could be excited about summoning their very own Bloodthirsters in the near future!

It would also be hilarious if only DA could summon daemons. Imagine the rainbow of [insert color here] angels that appear in games to come!

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Thinking about it, I think it'd be pretty hilarious if Dark Angels were the only Loyalist Marines who could summon Daemons. Just because they seem like they're already pretty out there (they have an entire company that is under a permanent Vow of Silence because someone giggled, so yeah, a bit out there in my book) and I wouldn't be too surprised if we found out that they consorted with Daemons (or at least summoning and binding them and using the daemon's knowledge) to hunt the Fallen since they seem to be pretty "anything goes" in every other aspect of how they operate.

That said I'd like to see what these powers actually do. I assume that both of these lores have 6 powers each, and for all we know Ezekial was just trying to use a power (like channeling the warp through himself to try and kill the Hive Tyrant) but rolled doubles or something and exploded into a Bloodthirster as a side-effect. Because I can't imagine it'd be 6 random "Summon X" powers.

I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

Another thing to note here, is that summoning is a use of the Maleific aspect of daemonology. It's being used against Tyranids, who don't get access to Daemonology at all.

Does this tell us anything about Sanctic? Is that meant to be the polar opposite of Malefic, used to deny summoning?

Something tells me at the end of the day this is just another way GW chooses to screw Chaos.

Big demons will probably require multiple psyker dice, and probably an appropriate cost of wounds to the casting character, or a caveat such as x model/character/unit is sacrificed.

At least thats what i see it being.

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Thinking about it, I think it'd be pretty hilarious if Dark Angels were the only Loyalist Marines who could summon Daemons. Just because they seem like they're already pretty out there (they have an entire company that is under a permanent Vow of Silence because someone giggled, so yeah, a bit out there in my book) and I wouldn't be too surprised if we found out that they consorted with Daemons (or at least summoning and binding them and using the daemon's knowledge) to hunt the Fallen since they seem to be pretty "anything goes" in every other aspect of how they operate.

That said I'd like to see what these powers actually do. I assume that both of these lores have 6 powers each, and for all we know Ezekial was just trying to use a power (like channeling the warp through himself to try and kill the Hive Tyrant) but rolled doubles or something and exploded into a Bloodthirster as a side-effect. Because I can't imagine it'd be 6 random "Summon X" powers.

I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

I can't wait for there to still forcing you to roll on Tzeentch

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

 StarTrotter wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Thinking about it, I think it'd be pretty hilarious if Dark Angels were the only Loyalist Marines who could summon Daemons. Just because they seem like they're already pretty out there (they have an entire company that is under a permanent Vow of Silence because someone giggled, so yeah, a bit out there in my book) and I wouldn't be too surprised if we found out that they consorted with Daemons (or at least summoning and binding them and using the daemon's knowledge) to hunt the Fallen since they seem to be pretty "anything goes" in every other aspect of how they operate.

That said I'd like to see what these powers actually do. I assume that both of these lores have 6 powers each, and for all we know Ezekial was just trying to use a power (like channeling the warp through himself to try and kill the Hive Tyrant) but rolled doubles or something and exploded into a Bloodthirster as a side-effect. Because I can't imagine it'd be 6 random "Summon X" powers.

I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

I can't wait for there to still forcing you to roll on Tzeentch

Yeah, I know. GW hates us Thousand Sons players.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Another thing to note here, is that summoning is a use of the Maleific aspect of daemonology. It's being used against Tyranids, who don't get access to Daemonology at all.

Does this tell us anything about Sanctic? Is that meant to be the polar opposite of Malefic, used to deny summoning?

Something tells me at the end of the day this is just another way GW chooses to screw Chaos.

I'm frankly concerned on what it might do to a daemon army honestly.

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Thinking about it, I think it'd be pretty hilarious if Dark Angels were the only Loyalist Marines who could summon Daemons. Just because they seem like they're already pretty out there (they have an entire company that is under a permanent Vow of Silence because someone giggled, so yeah, a bit out there in my book) and I wouldn't be too surprised if we found out that they consorted with Daemons (or at least summoning and binding them and using the daemon's knowledge) to hunt the Fallen since they seem to be pretty "anything goes" in every other aspect of how they operate.

That said I'd like to see what these powers actually do. I assume that both of these lores have 6 powers each, and for all we know Ezekial was just trying to use a power (like channeling the warp through himself to try and kill the Hive Tyrant) but rolled doubles or something and exploded into a Bloodthirster as a side-effect. Because I can't imagine it'd be 6 random "Summon X" powers.

I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

Sure, so long as you get an extra mastery level that lets you select powers besides the required Tzeentch ones. OH WAIT... you can't.

Funny how the discipline dealing with Daemons is unavailable to CSMs most plentiful source of psykers.

Fluff last only so long as it doesn't get in the way of sales.

FOC limits sales in the sense that if all you can ever play with is three of something, why bother with buying a fourth? No FOC, no limits.

Loyalist/Chaos Human/Xenos are arbitray limits that hurt sales. Little Johnny plays marines but thinks the Bloodthirster is a cool model. Dad says "no, not going to buy that, you can't use it" GW looses sale. Now in 7th, no such limitation...sales commence!

The company doesn't advertise, it has no net presence, it only travels by word of mouth. It has closed shops, its reduced overhead, its tightened every purse string possible? How do you increase sales volume with minimal effort?

You come out with a new rule set two years sooner than planned. In that rule set you make "official" the removal of any and all limitations to purchases. You actively promote mechanics that require the purchase of a model to implement on the table top...psychic power that requires the purchase of somekind of demon stand in.

Why people think a company that would break years of tradition with the FOC but would only "playtest" loyalists summoning demons because the fluff is sacrosanct is beyond me.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
Another thing to note here, is that summoning is a use of the Maleific aspect of daemonology. It's being used against Tyranids, who don't get access to Daemonology at all.

Does this tell us anything about Sanctic? Is that meant to be the polar opposite of Malefic, used to deny summoning?

Something tells me at the end of the day this is just another way GW chooses to screw Chaos.

I'm frankly concerned on what it might do to a daemon army honestly.

Maybe itll give Daemon armies a chance to summon Grey Knight Grand Masters? Haha

 techsoldaten wrote:
Another thing to note here, is that summoning is a use of the Maleific aspect of daemonology. It's being used against Tyranids, who don't get access to Daemonology at all.

Does this tell us anything about Sanctic? Is that meant to be the polar opposite of Malefic, used to deny summoning?

Something tells me at the end of the day this is just another way GW chooses to screw Chaos.

With Deny the Witch going to a WFB style denial thing, then I don't see Santic working that way, it likely does other stuff (like the old Marine power that made you re-roll successful Invul saves).

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

And they'll probably require you to roll randomly for which kind of Greater Daemon you get, because that's the asinine way they roll, and that'll completely kill my desire to even use the stupid Daemonology powers.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
Another thing to note here, is that summoning is a use of the Maleific aspect of daemonology. It's being used against Tyranids, who don't get access to Daemonology at all.

Does this tell us anything about Sanctic? Is that meant to be the polar opposite of Malefic, used to deny summoning?

Something tells me at the end of the day this is just another way GW chooses to screw Chaos.

I'm frankly concerned on what it might do to a daemon army honestly.

Maybe itll give Daemon armies a chance to summon Grey Knight Grand Masters? Haha

An army of Draigos have been summoned sir! Good good we can crush the Daemon army. Forgive me sir but they are charging at us.

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

And they'll probably require you to roll randomly for which kind of Greater Daemon you get, because that's the asinine way they roll, and that'll completely kill my desire to even use the stupid Daemonology powers.

Or just trade that power for the Primaris?

Holy crap, they've done it.
They've turned the game into mini apocalypse. There doesn't even seem to be a percentage system.

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

And they'll probably require you to roll randomly for which kind of Greater Daemon you get, because that's the asinine way they roll, and that'll completely kill my desire to even use the stupid Daemonology powers.

Or just trade that power for the Primaris?

Plot twist, primaris is summoning 2d6 of the standard troop options. It's random gods and random numbers. 2d6 so there is just the chance of getting 12 meaning you'd need 2 boxes instead of one

I want a psychic discipline that gives Chaos things like Chapter Tactics, ATSKNF, POTMS and the ability to choose from different psychic disciplines. That's the only thing that would make this even.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Holy crap, they've done it.
They've turned the game into mini apocalypse. There doesn't even seem to be a percentage system.

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

I'm going with "nothing" until I either see the actual rules via leak or by having the book in my hands, which ever happens first.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That said I'd like to see what these powers actually do. I assume that both of these lores have 6 powers each, and for all we know Ezekial was just trying to use a power (like channeling the warp through himself to try and kill the Hive Tyrant) but rolled doubles or something and exploded into a Bloodthirster as a side-effect. Because I can't imagine it'd be 6 random "Summon X" powers.

Well, why not ?
1- Summon greater daemon
2- Summon daemon prince
3- Summon daemon infantry unit
4- Raise Skeletal Mage
5- Summon fish
6- Summon bigger fish!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

And they'll probably require you to roll randomly for which kind of Greater Daemon you get, because that's the asinine way they roll, and that'll completely kill my desire to even use the stupid Daemonology powers.

Or just trade that power for the Primaris?

Meh. We'll wait and see how it shakes out, and I'm fairly sure that other comments are correct, and they'll "forget" to FAQ the CSM 'dex to allow Daemonology to be used by my squad sorcerers.

Why shouldnt Grey Knights be able to summon demons, they already use daemon weapons.

It fits the fluff

"There are those who might see contradiction between our abhorrence of the Daemon and our wielding of sorcery. Yet these contradictions live only in the minds of weak men, and we are not accountable to such as they."

from Codex:Grey Knights

 StarTrotter wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

And they'll probably require you to roll randomly for which kind of Greater Daemon you get, because that's the asinine way they roll, and that'll completely kill my desire to even use the stupid Daemonology powers.

Or just trade that power for the Primaris?

Plot twist, primaris is summoning 2d6 of the standard troop options. It's random gods and random numbers. 2d6 so there is just the chance of getting 12 meaning you'd need 2 boxes instead of one

Pft. It'll be 6D3, and they'll require you to use their new D3 that they'll sell only on release.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That said I'd like to see what these powers actually do. I assume that both of these lores have 6 powers each, and for all we know Ezekial was just trying to use a power (like channeling the warp through himself to try and kill the Hive Tyrant) but rolled doubles or something and exploded into a Bloodthirster as a side-effect. Because I can't imagine it'd be 6 random "Summon X" powers.

Well, why not ?
1- Summon greater daemon
2- Summon daemon prince
3- Summon daemon infantry unit
4- Raise Skeletal Mage
5- Summon fish
6- Summon bigger fish!

Bigger fish will be a limited release of 1,000 models.

Chad Warden wrote:
Why shouldnt Grey Knights be able to summon demons, they already use daemon weapons.

It fits the fluff

"There are those who might see contradiction between our abhorrence of the Daemon and our wielding of sorcery. Yet these contradictions live only in the minds of weak men, and we are not accountable to such as they."

from Codex:Grey Knights

They use their own weapons against them, but they wouldnt knowingly summon or work with daemons. They'd kill one on the spot as soon as it was summoned.

I doubt they'll have access to these powers, at least pure GKs. Inquisition, probably.

Chad Warden wrote:
Why shouldnt Grey Knights be able to summon demons, they already use daemon weapons.

It fits the fluff

"There are those who might see contradiction between our abhorrence of the Daemon and our wielding of sorcery. Yet these contradictions live only in the minds of weak men, and we are not accountable to such as they."

from Codex:Grey Knights

.... abhorrence of the daemon... wielding of sorcery. That sorcery did not include summoning daemons though. They abhor the daemon not summon them. It's not fluffy.

Chad Warden wrote:
Why shouldnt Grey Knights be able to summon demons, they already use daemon weapons.

It fits the fluff

"There are those who might see contradiction between our abhorrence of the Daemon and our wielding of sorcery. Yet these contradictions live only in the minds of weak men, and we are not accountable to such as they."

from Codex:Grey Knights

That is totally not what that quote means.. It's talking about the lack of education and understanding that most in the Imperium have towards using the warp's energy and being in communion with Demons. It absolutely is against the fluff for the Grey Knights or pretty much any loyal Imperium force to use demons for *any* purpose. Now, there are individuals such as radical inquisitors who may want to harness the power of a demon for various means..but to *summon* a demon? Er..probably not.

I'm pretty amazed that GW could justify the Dark Angels summoning demons..or not, if neither their players nor their designers understand the universe they crafted :(

There better be a feindish dire badger

 Kirasu wrote:

Chad Warden wrote:
Why shouldnt Grey Knights be able to summon demons, they already use daemon weapons.

It fits the fluff

"There are those who might see contradiction between our abhorrence of the Daemon and our wielding of sorcery. Yet these contradictions live only in the minds of weak men, and we are not accountable to such as they."

from Codex:Grey Knights

That is totally not what that quote means.. It's talking about the lack of education and understanding that most in the Imperium have towards using the warp's energy and being in communion with Demons. It absolutely is against the fluff for the Grey Knights or pretty much any loyal Imperium force to use demons for *any* purpose. Now, there are individuals such as radical inquisitors who may want to harness the power of a demon for various means..but to *summon* a demon? Er..probably not.

I'm pretty amazed that GW could justify the Dark Angels summoning demons..or not, if neither their players nor their designers understand the universe they crafted :(

Unless Dark Angles become a secret Radical Chapter!

Like the Relictors, but not doomed to have their chapter basically purged by Grey Knights after the 13th Black Crusade.

Mostly because 1st Founding Chapters can get away with everything short of mushroom stamping the Emperor on the Golden Throne.

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

And they'll probably require you to roll randomly for which kind of Greater Daemon you get, because that's the asinine way they roll, and that'll completely kill my desire to even use the stupid Daemonology powers.

Or just trade that power for the Primaris?

Meh. We'll wait and see how it shakes out, and I'm fairly sure that other comments are correct, and they'll "forget" to FAQ the CSM 'dex to allow Daemonology to be used by my squad sorcerers.

The WDW clips mention the powers are available to all psykers except Tyranid ones.

--

WrentheFaceless wrote:
They use their own weapons against them, but they wouldnt knowingly summon or work with daemons. They'd kill one on the spot as soon as it was summoned.

I doubt they'll have access to these powers, at least pure GKs. Inquisition, probably.

StarTrotter wrote:.... abhorrence of the daemon... wielding of sorcery. That sorcery did not include summoning daemons though. They abhor the daemon not summon them. It's not fluffy.

Again, didnt GKs used to work alongside Daemonhosts, which are exactly that:summoned daemons bound into somr poor schlub?

 streamdragon wrote:
Again, didnt GKs used to work alongside Daemonhosts, which are exactly that:summoned daemons bound into somr poor schlub?

IIRC in 3rd they couldn't work alongside Daemonhosts, the restriction is gone now.

 streamdragon wrote:

Again, didnt GKs used to work alongside Daemonhosts, which are exactly that:summoned daemons bound into somr poor schlub?

I dont think they get a say in the henchmen their Inquisitor gets to bring along.

In the 3rd ed Demon hunters book, there was a rule forbidding GK to be in the same army as a Daemonhost.

May have been retconned in the 5th ed book though.

Besides, a daemonhost isn't the same as a summoned daemon.

A daemonhost is basically a loophole; under controlled conditions in a secure location, the inquisitor summons and binds a daemon into some poor bloke, who is then kept under constant surveillance and warding.
Technically, it's daemon summoning, but as the daemon is in a human vessel, the inquisitor can just say something like "yeah, he has a demon inside of him. But really, he's no different from a psyker, is he? Besides, if I press this button, he is forced to listen to the litany of exorcism"

Summoning a daemon on the battlefield is a different matter; the conditions aren't as stable, and as the daemon doesn't have a human vessel it's not as easily controlled.

 streamdragon wrote:
Again, didnt GKs used to work alongside Daemonhosts, which are exactly that:summoned daemons bound into somr poor schlub?

No. Codex: Daemonhunters didn't allow Grey Knights in the same army as a Daemonhost. The current codex relaxed this restriction.

 streamdragon wrote:

WrentheFaceless wrote:
They use their own weapons against them, but they wouldnt knowingly summon or work with daemons. They'd kill one on the spot as soon as it was summoned.

I doubt they'll have access to these powers, at least pure GKs. Inquisition, probably.

StarTrotter wrote:.... abhorrence of the daemon... wielding of sorcery. That sorcery did not include summoning daemons though. They abhor the daemon not summon them. It's not fluffy.

Again, didnt GKs used to work alongside Daemonhosts, which are exactly that:summoned daemons bound into somr poor schlub?

Nope. Per the Daemonhunters book:

Daemonhosts may only be chosen if an Inquisitor Lord or Inquisitor is also part of the force. If Daemonhosts are chosen the Inquisitor in charge is branded a Radical and may not include Grey Knights in his force.

I stand fully corrected then!

 streamdragon wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:
I will surely TRY to resist the temptation, if one of the powers is "summon greater daemon", to try rolling it up and spam the crap out of it on my squad leaders in my Thousand Sons army.

It'd be a giggle to have that work out once or twice, but I'm sure I'd get bored of it quick, TBH.

If it is a power it's likely a high cost power and the #6 power, if WFB is anything to go off of as an example.

And they'll probably require you to roll randomly for which kind of Greater Daemon you get, because that's the asinine way they roll, and that'll completely kill my desire to even use the stupid Daemonology powers.

Or just trade that power for the Primaris?

Meh. We'll wait and see how it shakes out, and I'm fairly sure that other comments are correct, and they'll "forget" to FAQ the CSM 'dex to allow Daemonology to be used by my squad sorcerers.

The WDW clips mention the powers are available to all psykers except Tyranid ones.

--

WrentheFaceless wrote:
They use their own weapons against them, but they wouldnt knowingly summon or work with daemons. They'd kill one on the spot as soon as it was summoned.

I doubt they'll have access to these powers, at least pure GKs. Inquisition, probably.

StarTrotter wrote:.... abhorrence of the daemon... wielding of sorcery. That sorcery did not include summoning daemons though. They abhor the daemon not summon them. It's not fluffy.

Again, didnt GKs used to work alongside Daemonhosts, which are exactly that:summoned daemons bound into somr poor schlub?

Yeah they are "available" Just a shame that psyker can't buy anything unless hey have ML2 and above. Oh yeah... they can't

Has anyone seen a white dwarf copy by now? They usually get to stores by Wednesdays. (FLGS). I'm curious if Jes' article is the only mention of 7th in the issue...

I would like the idea of some of these new rules more if I believed they were organically generated by the writers, as opposed to externally mandated in order to just sell more models.

Tough for me to be optimistic.

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Has anyone seen a white dwarf copy by now? They usually get to stores by Wednesdays. (FLGS). I'm curious if Jes' article is the only mention of 7th in the issue...

I found some more stuff, like this new poster:

But nothing else about the new edition.

So they're copy'pasting codex art on red/white backgrounds?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Holy crap, they've done it.
They've turned the game into mini apocalypse. There doesn't even seem to be a percentage system.

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

I'm going with "nothing" until I either see the actual rules via leak or by having the book in my hands, which ever happens first.

That's my opinion as well. Some stuff looks interesting, others don't, but doomsaying or eternal praising don't take us anywhere!

 Vector Strike wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Holy crap, they've done it.
They've turned the game into mini apocalypse. There doesn't even seem to be a percentage system.

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

I'm going with "nothing" until I either see the actual rules via leak or by having the book in my hands, which ever happens first.

That's my opinion as well. Some stuff looks interesting, others don't, but doomsaying or eternal praising don't take us anywhere!

Not to sound overly pedantic, but doomsaying/eternal praising, especially if you start ASAP and without any substantial facts, DOES help jack up your post-count. So, that's one place it takes us...

Look, the whole DA summoning daemons thing actually makes sense.

DA is arguably the absolute weakest link in the 6e codexes as even 5e codexes regularly rip it apart. At Adepticon, out of 226 armies, they were primary in 3 and allied in 3. That's not exactly a good showing. DE, by comparison, was primary in 5 and allied 16 times. I wonder if more DE codexes are sold today than DA ones. Now THAT would be funny and a very very good reason to throw the current box set out the window.

So, of course the rules team is going to throw something in there to try and help the boys in green out and what could be more fun than allowing them to transform into a much better army: Daemons!

Fluff? What could that possibly matter. This is the "game" part and anyways there isn't anything like "canon" to hold them back;codexes rewrite history, BL novels rewrite it (or just flat out butcher it), when new models are released they are helpfully written into the past as if they've always been there. So anything goes!

On one hand, I'm dreading the arrival of spam heavy lists.
Like, a bunch of riptides and a single squad of warriors, or an army full of monsterous creatures.

On the other hand, I'm curious what these bonuses are that are supposed to accompany "battle-forged" lists. They might provide some tactical depth.
Also, does that mean that there will be multiple FoC variations?
Like, a HS heavy FoC list provides bonuses to fire power, troop heavy FoC provides objective taking bonuses, ect ect.

Does anybody think that is going to be the new official Warhammer 40,000 eagle?

GW does excel at trolling their fanbase. Chapeau gents!

 Sir Arun wrote:
Does anybody think that is going to be the new official Warhammer 40,000 eagle?

What new eagle? I don't see any new eagle.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
Does anybody think that is going to be the new official Warhammer 40,000 eagle?

What new eagle? I don't see any new eagle.

aquila, you smartass

It could be bearing the Warhammer 40,000 brand name on the new rulebook

 tomjoad wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Holy crap, they've done it.
They've turned the game into mini apocalypse. There doesn't even seem to be a percentage system.

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

I'm going with "nothing" until I either see the actual rules via leak or by having the book in my hands, which ever happens first.

That's my opinion as well. Some stuff looks interesting, others don't, but doomsaying or eternal praising don't take us anywhere!

Not to sound overly pedantic, but doomsaying/eternal praising, especially if you start ASAP and without any substantial facts, DOES help jack up your post-count. So, that's one place it takes us...

Darn it you caught our plans! We are actually grinding our posts to level up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

clively wrote:
Look, the whole DA summoning daemons thing actually makes sense.

DA is arguably the absolute weakest link in the 6e codexes as even 5e codexes regularly rip it apart. At Adepticon, out of 226 armies, they were primary in 3 and allied in 3. That's not exactly a good showing. DE, by comparison, was primary in 5 and allied 16 times. I wonder if more DE codexes are sold today than DA ones. Now THAT would be funny and a very very good reason to throw the current box set out the window.

So, of course the rules team is going to throw something in there to try and help the boys in green out and what could be more fun than allowing them to transform into a much better army: Daemons!

Fluff? What could that possibly matter. This is the "game" part and anyways there isn't anything like "canon" to hold them back;codexes rewrite history, BL novels rewrite it (or just flat out butcher it), when new models are released they are helpfully written into the past as if they've always been there. So anything goes!

This implies GW giving two flips about balance or actually admitting tournaments exist. No, DA will probably just have to rot with CSM and Nids until the next cycle of books. That or something really big changes it in 7th edition.

 Sir Arun wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
Does anybody think that is going to be the new official Warhammer 40,000 eagle?

What new eagle? I don't see any new eagle.

aquila, you smartass

It could be bearing the Warhammer 40,000 brand name on the new rulebook

I know you are talking about the aquila.
I do not see any new aquila / eagle anywhere.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
Does anybody think that is going to be the new official Warhammer 40,000 eagle?

What new eagle? I don't see any new eagle.

aquila, you smartass

It could be bearing the Warhammer 40,000 brand name on the new rulebook

I know you are talking about the aquila.
I do not see any new aquila / eagle anywhere.

this eagle logo....

Just looks like the normal eagle to me.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Just looks like the normal eagle to me.

THAT EAGLE MAKES ME ANGRY.

ALSO, I WANT TO SALUTE IT UNTIL MY ARM FALLS OFF.

But yeah, it looks like a regular slightly modified eagle to me.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Just looks like the normal eagle to me.

Really? Here is current one

no, this is the current logo:




I'm thinking they might change the aquila above bearing the warhammer 40000 brand name to the other aquila style from the poster

Eagle has become more Nazified... Maybe it is just a poster design....

One of the things that is quite honestly plaguing my mind is all of the BS stuff that will be able to be done. Like ok, idk how many people would buy 10 Riptides, but going up a faints a Battle Forged army, they would probably get crushed. I don't know if a little bonus will be able to stand up against cheesy armies like that.

"Ok, I'll take 2 extra VPs for every MC I take out. Oh wait, 10 scoring Riptides. I scoop now."

I know you can always refuse, but it seems more like a marketing ploy for GW so we spend more money, not giving us a balanced game. I think that everyone should be held to the same limitations for how you construct your army. It quite frankly pisses me off.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=40k+eagle&FORM=HDRSC2

People do remember that there is more than one version of the Aquila that GW uses for different things, right?

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Eagle has become more Nazified... Maybe it is just a poster design....

Its not offending me, but just saying, some people could be offended by the Nazi comment, especially if one is of the Jewish faith. Please don't post things that could do that. I know I'm not a moderator, but I do care about what people post to the threads I post to alike.

http://s218.photobucket.com/user/Rick_1138/media/10269362_453231711446950_6273004553695180882_n.jpg.html

If this is true, do you think this means any pyscker can voluntarily chose to become a greater deamon?
Because if so....Oh God, what have they done.

 Commander_Farsight wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Eagle has become more Nazified... Maybe it is just a poster design....

Its not offending me, but just saying, some people could be offended by the Nazi comment, especially if one is of the Jewish faith. Please don't post things that could do that. I know I'm not a moderator, but I do care about what people post to the threads I post to alike.

I am just making a statement. That's all. Nothing behind my comment. To me, it looks a little german WW2esque.

so... what is this confirmed stuff now? New big book out at the end of the month?

I just thought of something particularly disturbing about the whole DA summoning a Bloodthirster: GW thinks the way you playtest new rules is to add stuff that won't actually exist and then talk about the narrative it helped to forge.

Think about that a moment. Instead of wondering about if summoning will be unbalanced, or who should be able to summon, or a myriad of other things game designers should focus on, GW's first thought was about how cool it would be if a Dark Angels librarian condemned his soul to repel a Tyranid invasion.

That is not how you playtest games. Playtesting is about trying out different rules combinations and seeing what's broken/ambiguous/doesn't work, and fixing them, not about deciding at some point "Hey it'd be cool if I test out the daemon possession rules at the end of a game, it'd make a fun story". Not that doing that doesn't have its place, but it doesn't have a place when you're supposed to be testing new rules.

This is why there are broken combos, and unbalanced codexes. This is why there are ambiguous rules that require you to discuss how to fix them with your opponent: Because GW at the end of the day don't care about playtesting, they care about looking and saying "Hey remember when you had Ezekiel sacrifice himself to summon that Bloodthirster? Wasn't that awesome?" instead of "Is summoning a Bloodthirster too powerful? Could it be abused? What about armies that don't have psykers? Are the rules worded right for how we want it to play out? What armies shouldn't be allowed to do it, if any?" and the like.

So someone thought it was a good idea that you get to trade in an injured psyker for a fresh new bloodthrister.

And then when he said his good idea, everyone at the table agreed with him and patted him on the back.

I imagine the GW design studio to be very much like The Office.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?

I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.

Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.

Our local group here is definitely gearing up for the same kinda decision.

Wow. Or just make a the mature choice to play 6th with a few house rules?

To all premature rage quitters, PM me before you toss stuff in trash. I'll even pay shipping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or wait to see 7th first?

So, from what we gathered so far (from Dakka thread, in a nutshell), the 7th edition comes out May 24th, you have FOC a.k.a Battle Forged now & an option for unbound (uber armies that ignore FOC), psychic phase now, armies have a % like fantasy, Dark Angels are now traitors, the boxed edition comes out in August which is Dark Angels & Orks, and the eagle logo has changed, and Bing sucks....

I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

 krazynadechukr wrote:
So, from what we gathered so far (from Dakka thread, in a nutshell), the 7th edition comes out May 24th,

As per the title of the thread, it goes on preorder on the 24th. It won't actually be released until the 31st.

 Ghaz wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
So, from what we gathered so far (from Dakka thread, in a nutshell), the 7th edition comes out May 24th,

As per the title of the thread, it goes on preorder on the 24th. It won't actually be released until the 31st.

I know, I know, but I was being an

You know, I'm not sure about that new tagline. "There is no time for peace". Makes things sound more overworked than grimdark.

 Ghaz wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
So, from what we gathered so far (from Dakka thread, in a nutshell), the 7th edition comes out May 24th,

As per the title of the thread, it goes on preorder on the 24th. It won't actually be released until the 31st.

There have been a number of rumors saying it's releasing the 24th and pre-order is the 17th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Troike wrote:
You know, I'm not sure about that new tagline. "There is no time for peace". Makes things sound more overworked than grimdark.

What about this one?

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because it doesn't say that they were messing around. It says that he gave Ezekiel Daemonology in the interests of playtesting. Nothing in that statement suggests that it isn't normally allowed by the rules. It just says that he was trying out those powers in the new rules.


It's certainly possible that they chose to preview the new rules by talking about the stuff they did that isn't actually in those rules... but I fail to see what the point of that would be.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

What about this one?

I feel like it should be changed to "NO RESPECT" and then someone should photoshop Rodney Dangerfield's face on the contemptor.

 insaniak wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because it doesn't say that they were messing around. It says that he gave Ezekiel Daemonology in the interests of playtesting. Nothing in that statement suggests that it isn't normally allowed by the rules. It just says that he was trying out those powers in the new rules.


It's certainly possible that they chose to preview the new rules by talking about the stuff they did that isn't actually in those rules... but I fail to see what the point of that would be.

The same point that playing a battle report for a new army not using point values and just bringing everything you own has?

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because saying "look at this awesome thing you can do with the new rules" is rather pointless if the thing in question isn't actually possible in the new rules.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
What about this one?

Spoiler:

Better, if a bit generic.

Meanwhile, I have had to once again go through the thread and remove a whole bunch of off-topic chatter. Seriously, folks, the thread is clunky enough without 3 pages of argument over which search engine is better. Please stick to the topic, or we'll have to start pruning posters instead of just posts.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because saying "look at this awesome thing you can do with the new rules" is rather pointless if the thing in question isn't actually possible in the new rules.

Just like all the other times they've done stuff like that then. And that's not even counting the times they just plain get rules wrong.

 Troike wrote:
You know, I'm not sure about that new tagline. "There is no time for peace". Makes things sound more overworked than grimdark.

Pretty sure it's not the new tag line, just a lead-in.

First poster:
"There is no time for peace"

Second:
"No respite"

I think next we'll see:
"There is only Only War"

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The same point that playing a battle report for a new army not using point values and just bringing everything you own has?

You're ignoring the key difference here: battle reports with no point values aren't intended to show off how awesome the new point system is. The event in this "battle report", on the other hand, is mentioned for the sole purpose of showing off the new psyker rules. It would be absolutely stupid to brag about how awesome the new rules are with a "battle report" that uses completely different house rules instead.

 Maddermax wrote:

 Troike wrote:
You know, I'm not sure about that new tagline. "There is no time for peace". Makes things sound more overworked than grimdark.

Pretty sure it's not the new tag line, just a lead-in.

First poster:
"There is no time for peace"

Second:
"No respite"

I think next we'll see:
"There is only Only War"

My money is it being a Space Marine too. Probably from the cover of the Space Marine codex.

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because they clearly weren't messing around. It's ambiguous.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The same point that playing a battle report for a new army not using point values and just bringing everything you own has?

You're ignoring the key difference here: battle reports with no point values aren't intended to show off how awesome the new point system is. The event in this "battle report", on the other hand, is mentioned for the sole purpose of showing off the new psyker rules. It would be absolutely stupid to brag about how awesome the new rules are with a "battle report" that uses completely different house rules instead.

No, the battle reports were to show off a large number of models while ignoring a core game mechanic and I'm pretty sure one of them ended with them talking about how much fun you can have when you just don't bother with the details, like points costs.

The WD team has shown time and time again they're willing to bend, break, or just forget rules to make things look cool in their articles, so why should we treat a small blurb as gospel when they're making Natfka look more consistent and reliable?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually the more I think about it the more I think that's exactly why Ezekial was most likely chosen: it's sensationalist enough to get us talking and waiting impatiently to know more.

The cynical side of me would have to claim that it's more likely they picked someone who can't use the powers normally just to get us talking about it and to keep from completely tipping their hand on who exactly does get access to it.

GW and misinformation go together like bacon and eggs after all.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The WD team has shown time and time again they're willing to bend, break, or just forget rules to make things look cool in their articles, so why should we treat a small blurb as gospel when they're making Natfka look more consistent and reliable?

Because there's a difference between bending the rules to make a fun mission and blatantly inventing rules when your sole purpose is to show off the new rules. "Look at how awesome this is, you can turn your psyker into a demon, except you can't unless you invent your own rules that allow you to do it" isn't a very convincing sales approach. We safely assume that some of the other rules in the game weren't quite by the book, but there's really no reasonable doubt that one of the new psychic powers allows you to summon a demon at the cost of sacrificing the model (or sacrificing some of the model's health).

I really don't like the idea of loyalist Space Marines turning to chaos to win a battle, it goes completely against all of the fluff we have been reading up to now surely?

I mean, one might turn, but not to win a battle for his chapter!

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Actually the more I think about it the more I think that's exactly why Ezekial was most likely chosen: it's sensationalist enough to get us talking and waiting impatiently to know more.

Except that's a terrible idea because anyone who loves the thought of being able to do it with that character is going to be disappointed and angry when they look at the real rules and discover that they can't.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because they clearly weren't messing around. It's ambiguous.

Because if you're PLAYTESTING rules by "Messing around" with things that aren't actually in the rules... well...

Percent based FOC or no FOC at all?

Sounds screwed up. I just invested like $300 into getting the army I wanted, spent most of the year agonizing over lists and trying to find competitive ideas that I like, all the gluing and painting... all for what?

So some cockneyed git can say "Oh bosh the FOC! It's too hard to write lists, and people who are good at it ought to have to relearn it!" This is ridiculous. Sorry, I find this silly, that is my opinion. I do love the hobby, but can I justify GW prices for a painting hobby? Maybe the guys will be more interested in Firestorm Armada now or something?

At any rate, I have a very nice display cabinet full of Marines. Maybe one day I can give em to my kids. Chapter Master Smashface as Molly the Tea Server during playtime? Seems appropriate given the look of things to come...

Also, there's absolutely no reason at all to believe that the rules work differently. The entire argument that the "battle report" is a lie consists of "I really don't want this to be true".

 Peregrine wrote:
Also, there's absolutely no reason at all to believe that the rules work differently. The entire argument that the "battle report" is a lie consists of "I really don't want this to be true".

GW has already established a rule set for allowing anything you want.

So why no toss everything else out the window as well? Grey Knights summoning Daemons? No problem!

Eldar getting Slaanesh Daemons? Drive your race into further damnation!

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Actually the more I think about it the more I think that's exactly why Ezekial was most likely chosen: it's sensationalist enough to get us talking and waiting impatiently to know more.

Except that's a terrible idea because anyone who loves the thought of being able to do it with that character is going to be disappointed and angry when they look at the real rules and discover that they can't.

WD Codex: Sisters of Battle. 4 Specials in a 5 model Dominion Squad in the battle report, 2 per 5 in the codex. They've done it before and they can do it again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
Also, there's absolutely no reason at all to believe that the rules work differently. The entire argument that the "battle report" is a lie consists of "I really don't want this to be true".

Nice accusation, but it's "the WD Team has shown they don't know their ass from their elbow so I'm not trusting some blurb that doesn't even give us all the details of how it happened" in my book. I don't care if it's true, but I do rate the WD team has FAR less reliable than they should be on new product information.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Nice accusation, but it's "the WD Team has shown they don't know their ass from their elbow so I'm not trusting some blurb that doesn't even give us all the details of how it happened" in my book. I don't care if it's true, but I do rate the WD team has FAR less reliable than they should be on new product information.

The funny thing about the WD team is that they could simply phone Matt Ward and get clarification on how to play or a quick fact check, but ya'know, they have a tight schedule and that whip ain't cracking itself.

 WarOne wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Nice accusation, but it's "the WD Team has shown they don't know their ass from their elbow so I'm not trusting some blurb that doesn't even give us all the details of how it happened" in my book. I don't care if it's true, but I do rate the WD team has FAR less reliable than they should be on new product information.

The funny thing about the WD team is that they could simply phone Matt Ward and get clarification on how to play or a quick fact check, but ya'know, they have a tight schedule and that whip ain't cracking itself.

I've reached the point that when the WD team talks about a new product I take it with more salt than I do the Anonymous Rumors from Natfka. I've just seen them screw too many things up, especially since they went to the previous "new" WD version. With them doing 4+ a month now I've lowered my expectations on them getting details and facts right that much more.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
WD Codex: Sisters of Battle. 4 Specials in a 5 model Dominion Squad in the battle report, 2 per 5 in the codex. They've done it before and they can do it again.

That's entirely different. Getting the number of weapons wrong is a minor error that few people are going to care about. That's not at all the same as "oops, we said you could summon a demon but you can't summon demons at all" when you're writing a little story about how cool the new rule for summoning demons is.

Nice accusation, but it's "the WD Team has shown they don't know their ass from their elbow so I'm not trusting some blurb that doesn't even give us all the details of how it happened" in my book. I don't care if it's true, but I do rate the WD team has FAR less reliable than they should be on new product information.

"They make mistakes" isn't a reason to believe that this particular thing is a mistake. If we had some contradictory evidence from another source that gave a reason to doubt the WD claim then yes, it would be reasonable to believe that the WD author made a mistake. But we have absolutely nothing like that, the only reason anyone has for doubting the WD story is stubborn refusal to accept that GW could be doing something that they don't like.

WD is attempting to write a narrative about how cool the new rules are and you should totally but the product. Everything else I believe comes second.

Given that the staff is paid to produce content to incentivize people to play the game, it comes as no surprise.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
WD Codex: Sisters of Battle. 4 Specials in a 5 model Dominion Squad in the battle report, 2 per 5 in the codex. They've done it before and they can do it again.

That's entirely different. Getting the number of weapons wrong is a minor error that few people are going to care about. That's not at all the same as "oops, we said you could summon a demon but you can't summon demons at all" when you're writing a little story about how cool the new rule for summoning demons is.

They screwed up codex options before so when presented with one you say it's not the same thing as screwing up a codex option. Riiiiiiiight.

I think you're too sold on that is MUST be as written not that it MAY be as written. They can leave it out of being available to DA and just point at the line about play testing as a cop out.

For someone who seems to be so aware of how the company is willing to milk people for money you seem rather adamant that the only possibility is that it wasn't done for pure hype reasons. I'm at least trying to entertain other possibilities, such as them getting creative to shill their magazine.

 Peregrine wrote:

Nice accusation, but it's "the WD Team has shown they don't know their ass from their elbow so I'm not trusting some blurb that doesn't even give us all the details of how it happened" in my book. I don't care if it's true, but I do rate the WD team has FAR less reliable than they should be on new product information.

"They make mistakes" isn't a reason to believe that this particular thing is a mistake. If we had some contradictory evidence from another source that gave a reason to doubt the WD claim then yes, it would be reasonable to believe that the WD author made a mistake. But we have absolutely nothing like that, the only reason anyone has for doubting the WD story is stubborn refusal to accept that GW could be doing something that they don't like.

I doubt the accuracy of the WD Staff based on their track record, forgive me for playing cynic and skeptic here. I'm not saying it "can't" be true or that I don't "want" it to be true, I'm just approaching this with the understanding that there is a solid chance it "may not" be as presented. I refuse to jump on the bandwagon either way here, and I really don't see the point of only latching onto the idea of it being true in complete, and intentional, disregard for all the times they've gotten things wrong.

Track records matter, and theirs is far from perfect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 WarOne wrote:
WD is attempting to write a narrative about how cool the new rules are and you should totally but the product. Everything else I believe comes second.

Given that the staff is paid to produce content to incentivize people to play the game, it comes as no surprise.

Which was my point about picking something that'd get hype. It's not like they're lying with how it's worded if it turns out to not be an option for Dark Angels after all. I remain open to both possibilities until I know enough to actually draw a conclusion.

I just think they're completely throwing away the fluff.. similar to how Storm of Magic was absurd for fantasy. There are 0 situations where High Elves would ally with Demons for example.. ditto for Lizardmen yet for some reason it was allowed! Yay sell more models.

Demonology is fine as a discipline but why is it ONLY not allowed by Nids? There is no rational reason why Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, ANY of the rest of the first founding chapters, grey knights, ELDAR or Orks (If you dont understand how orks psychics work then you should read up) would summon demons.

It sorta makes sense for IG in terms of psykers going all crazy yet that's what commissars are for..and obvious CSM but that's really it. It makes little sense for demons to transform into demons.. thats not how demonic possession works.

I think it's foolish to say "well this dude librarian COULD summon a demon if my fluff is written in a way that supports my customer chapter being down with demon friends". Okay, well I'm sure in the span of 10,000 years there can be a justification for just about ANYTHING however the codices are supposed to represent the core theme of an army not every possible fringe idea. What's next, female space marines?

Dark Angels summoning demons should never be condoned under any circumstance.. especially by the chief librarian wtf. IMO the only thing keeping 40k a float is its very strong lore, and they're killing it with every supplement

 ClockworkZion wrote:
They can leave it out of being available to DA and just point at the line about play testing as a cop out.

And, again, there is absolutely no reason to believe that it isn't available to DA besides "I don't like it". The article even very clearly says that all non-Tyranid psykers can take the new powers.

I'm at least trying to entertain other possibilities, such as them getting creative to shill their magazine.

There's a difference between being open-minded, and being so open-minded that your brain falls out. You're on the wrong side of that line, you're just posting skepticism for the sake of skepticism.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
They can leave it out of being available to DA and just point at the line about play testing as a cop out.

And, again, there is absolutely no reason to believe that it isn't available to DA besides "I don't like it".

I'm at least trying to entertain other possibilities, such as them getting creative to shill their magazine.

There's a difference between being open-minded, and being so open-minded that your brain falls out. You're on the wrong side of that line, you're just posting skepticism for the sake of skepticism.

Just because you've chosen to believe it can only happen one way doesn't mean being open to the possibility of it not being that way (or the rule even being presented incorrectly and there is no way to do what they claimed or at least how the described it) doesn't mean you need to try and insinuate claims that I'm intentionally being stupid just so I can argue things.

I'm skeptical of everything the WD team posts until I can see the rules for myself. This is no exception and I see no concrete reason why it should be.

 Kirasu wrote:
I just think they're completely throwing away the fluff...

This is why FW gets such kudos because even though people may "fear" their rules, all their content is based in specializing in lore and grounded in fleshing out what the basic kits and the main game do not provide.

GW is simply pushing to milk as much money as they can. This methodology though will hit a wall at some point and the company will have to make an important decision on whether or not they believe they can sustain that type of strategy.

I'm just going to have to wait and see what bonuses Battle Forged Armies get over unbound armies before I complain about the removal of the FoC at someone's whim. I mean, most armies already take the minimal troops required as it is now; if only Troops can score and win games still, and the bonuses for Battle Forged Armies are worth the points, I can't imagine anyone dropping it for Unbound armies. I mean, it'll be cool to play a First Company army as the Ultramarines, or the ability to take a Tank Brigade without having to buy a forgeworld army, (Though, really, two squads of 5 vets in a Chimera wasn't that prohibitive!).

And I'm not sure how I feel about this psyker phase... are the Psychic powers going to stay the same? Are they going to get more punishing to those who don't have a Psyker in their army to defend themselves, making Psyker HQs even more must takes than they are now? And now I get to pack my Daemons with me when I play my Ultramarines army... take a 65pt Librarian and try to explode him as fast as possible to get a Bloodthirster to rampage around the field. Even if he dies fairly quickly, it's only 65pts for the chance at a 250pt Greater Daemon.

Probably going to keep playing Eternal War missions, just due to the simplicity.

This is going to be a long two weeks.

Inversely, why is it that a new rules edition must be such a mystery? The lead-up seems like it's building the bad hype. I'm not particularly enjoying this, nothing has me "amped up" about it. Why can't it be seen months in advance like Warmachine or Infinity releases? At this point, we're in the Internet age... it's kinda sad and bumming me out that we are stuck with this archaic approach.

I am at the point that the rumors have me not excited to play the game. I'm not performing a max exodus fire sale, but I deleted all the competitive lists I had planned to save up and buy for this year. I'll probably ditch my Gue'vesa list for the time being, too. I'll snatch up some BA ICs that look cool and give them squads to lead, but that's about it.

Crazyterran wrote:
if only Troops can score and win games still

I would be extremely surprised if this is true. There's no point in talking about how awesome your new all-dread army is going to be if the fact that you have no troops means you have no chance of winning. I think even GW is able to figure this one out, and will include a way for unbound armies to have non-troops units score objectives. The only question is whether it will be a blanket "everything scores" rule in the new edition, unbound armies getting to choose one FOC slot to make scoring, etc.

 Peregrine wrote:

Crazyterran wrote:
if only Troops can score and win games still

I would be extremely surprised if this is true. There's no point in talking about how awesome your new all-dread army is going to be if the fact that you have no troops means you have no chance of winning. I think even GW is able to figure this one out, and will include a way for unbound armies to have non-troops units score objectives. The only question is whether it will be a blanket "everything scores" rule in the new edition, unbound armies getting to choose one FOC slot to make scoring, etc.

Everything scores and/or you can score from inside a vehicle like 5E.

Land Raiders/Rhinos on objectives! Locking it down like 2011!

GW WD Batrep: "we thought it would be fun to superglue five Ultramarine tacticals together to form Ultramarine Voltron"

Dakka: "OMGOMG GW HAS LOST THE PLOT VOLTRON MARINES COMING IN 7TH IMMA PLAY WARMACHINE HALP"

 Kirasu wrote:
It makes little sense for demons to transform into demons.. thats not how demonic possession works.

Heh, now I'm imagining demons summoning demons, like a cross between a Russian doll and the Tardis (because the inside ones are bigger!). "Horror summons herald!" *pop* "herald takes demonology, summons prince!" *pop* "prince takes demonology, summons lord of change!"*pop* "lord of change takes demonology, I choose you Tzeentch!" *world. Implodes*.

 ruprecht wrote:
GW WD Batrep: "we thought it would be fun to superglue five Ultramarine tacticals together to form Ultramarine Voltron"

Dakka: "OMGOMG GW HAS LOST THE PLOT VOLTRON MARINES COMING IN 7TH IMMA PLAY WARMACHINE HALP"

Yep, better ignore the legitimate complaints that GW is actively breaking the game and ignoring decades spanning back-story to sell a couple crappy plastic toys.

I may have to go through with my "Imperial Saints" idea for my IG if this is true. Summoning blood letters is a no go, but the spirits of long dead heroes? That may work...

 Peregrine wrote:

Crazyterran wrote:
if only Troops can score and win games still

I would be extremely surprised if this is true. There's no point in talking about how awesome your new all-dread army is going to be if the fact that you have no troops means you have no chance of winning. I think even GW is able to figure this one out, and will include a way for unbound armies to have non-troops units score objectives. The only question is whether it will be a blanket "everything scores" rule in the new edition, unbound armies getting to choose one FOC slot to make scoring, etc.

If you are playing an unbound army, you are going for the table. It'd be a good way to help balance out the fact that your enemy is running nothing but Leman Russes, or an army of Riptides. Troops should continue to be the ones to score, as a way to help balance things out.

I mean, is anyone looking forward to playing against all drop pod armies of Sternguard? Or Drop Pod Ironclads? Or, hell, an all FMC or Flyer list? Or the AV14 spam that Guard could put out, especially if their Leman Russes score?

EDIT: I'd personally hope that taking an unbound list means no Warlord Traits, no Scoring (unless you take Troops) and no Lords of War. But, I doubt the last one, as who wouldn't want their tank brigade led by a Baneblade? *sigh*

 Happygrunt wrote:

 ruprecht wrote:
GW WD Batrep: "we thought it would be fun to superglue five Ultramarine tacticals together to form Ultramarine Voltron"

Dakka: "OMGOMG GW HAS LOST THE PLOT VOLTRON MARINES COMING IN 7TH IMMA PLAY WARMACHINE HALP"

Yep, better ignore the legitimate complaints that GW is actively breaking the game and ignoring decades spanning back-story to sell a couple crappy plastic toys.

I may have to go through with my "Imperial Saints" idea for my IG if this is true. Summoning blood letters is a no go, but the spirits of long dead heroes? That may work...

You could actually fluff it that way. A Daemonology chart could be fluffed as Imperial Miracles instead. That Saint you just summoned? Yah, it has a Bloodthirster statline and Daemon rule, but I swear it came straight from the Golden Toilet of the Emprah.

Super Promise.

Crazyterran wrote:
If you are playing an unbound army, you are going for the table.

Only if you assume that GW is adding unbound armies for competitive play reasons, rather than as an opportunity for fluff players to bring fluffy lists that aren't currently legal. Those fluff players aren't going to realistically hope to table their opponents every game (nor are they likely to find that very much fun), and that means they're going to need some way to get scoring units.

 WarOne wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:

 ruprecht wrote:
GW WD Batrep: "we thought it would be fun to superglue five Ultramarine tacticals together to form Ultramarine Voltron"

Dakka: "OMGOMG GW HAS LOST THE PLOT VOLTRON MARINES COMING IN 7TH IMMA PLAY WARMACHINE HALP"

Yep, better ignore the legitimate complaints that GW is actively breaking the game and ignoring decades spanning back-story to sell a couple crappy plastic toys.

I may have to go through with my "Imperial Saints" idea for my IG if this is true. Summoning blood letters is a no go, but the spirits of long dead heroes? That may work...

You could actually fluff it that way. A Daemonology chart could be fluffed as Imperial Miracles instead. That Saint you just summoned? Yah, it has a Bloodthirster statline and Daemon rule, but I swear it came straight from the Golden Toilet of the Emprah.

Super Promise.

Until you remember the name of the psyker ability, the rumoured bad effects (possibly slaughtering your own units) and more

 insaniak wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because it doesn't say that they were messing around. It says that he gave Ezekiel Daemonology in the interests of playtesting. Nothing in that statement suggests that it isn't normally allowed by the rules. It just says that he was trying out those powers in the new rules.


It's certainly possible that they chose to preview the new rules by talking about the stuff they did that isn't actually in those rules... but I fail to see what the point of that would be.

Yep, I agree. Even more along those lines, if you read the text to the left in the main body--it has partial sentences that strongly imply everyone barring Tyranids can take those powers--with another sentence below mentioning 'Summon the fell'. Given that the main body implies this, as well as the sidebar--and the fact GW has been pushing for people to have the ability to include more and more out of Codex options in their armies to increase sales--I'm inclined to believe it.

 ruprecht wrote:
GW WD Batrep: "we thought it would be fun to superglue five Ultramarine tacticals together to form Ultramarine Voltron"

Dakka: "OMGOMG GW HAS LOST THE PLOT VOLTRON MARINES COMING IN 7TH IMMA PLAY WARMACHINE HALP"

Yes yes... toss everything under the bridge why don't ya' invalidate all the arguments people have. Look, it's more like this. One side says: WD is terrible at keeping consistent to their rules so don't trust them. Another side is looking at it and saying: Nonetheless, it's still a possibility due to how they worded the implications of daemonology in conjunction with their text which is extremely vague in its wording. Neither side is entirely right. Maybe DA shall be capable of using it, maybe it won't, who really knows? But it's kind of like the knee jerk reaction. It's just everthing compiling. 2 years for one edition, rumours of a 100 dollar codex, these new releases constantly being shot out, suddenly battleforged vs. screw the FoC, new allies table, an entire psyker phase, blabbering on about how all psykers get this table and beware the daemon and all that jazz. It's... odd. Plus, it really doesn't work as well for CSM to summon daemons and get stomped. It'll happen but they are far more likely to get along. Heck, they used to be the same bloody book.

Random Daemon summonings?!

Unbound lists?!

Well time to build fallout shelters.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because they clearly weren't messing around. It's ambiguous.

Because if you're PLAYTESTING rules by "Messing around" with things that aren't actually in the rules... well...

But how do we know this? Simply, we don't. We really don't. We don't know much at all about this new book.

 AgeOfEgos wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
I'm confused as to why people think that Dark Angels are summoning demons in 7th Edition when they clearly say that they were messing around in the WD

Because it doesn't say that they were messing around. It says that he gave Ezekiel Daemonology in the interests of playtesting. Nothing in that statement suggests that it isn't normally allowed by the rules. It just says that he was trying out those powers in the new rules.


It's certainly possible that they chose to preview the new rules by talking about the stuff they did that isn't actually in those rules... but I fail to see what the point of that would be.

Yep, I agree. Even more along those lines, if you read the text to the left in the main body--it has partial sentences that strongly imply everyone barring Tyranids can take those powers--with another sentence below mentioning 'Summon the fell'. Given that the main body implies this, as well as the sidebar--and the fact GW has been pushing for people to have the ability to include more and more out of Codex options in their armies to increase sales--I'm inclined to believe it.

Insert internet rage.

So will we also see other "out of Codex" options like an optional 2d6 roll to insert a random $100 model onto the table for your side if you roll well enough?

Because all we need is more random charts and more reasons to invest in models that GW forces you to buy in order to take advantage of a new rule.

Unbound is crazy enough. Forcing armies with psykers to tote around more models for no practical purpose other than to roll on a random chart and pray for the best is even more unhinged.

I am genuinely interested to see how FW is going to change the HH lists for this.

After playing a few games with the FW lists and seeing the new 7th edition rules I am halfway tempted to go out back and burn my 6th ed SM codex.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Random Daemon summonings?!

Unbound lists?!

Well time to build fallout shelters.

Vault time ya' say? So what shall our experiment be? The only recreational hobbies being 40k related?

(I hope nobody is a psyker when we go in. We might have a LoC pop up and gladly bless us all.

 Peregrine wrote:

Crazyterran wrote:
If you are playing an unbound army, you are going for the table.

Only if you assume that GW is adding unbound armies for competitive play reasons, rather than as an opportunity for fluff players to bring fluffy lists that aren't currently legal. Those fluff players aren't going to realistically hope to table their opponents every game (nor are they likely to find that very much fun), and that means they're going to need some way to get scoring units.

Yeah, I'm sure they figure that it would be for fluffy players, but the fact that they said that there are going to be bonuses to take Battle Forged armies leads me to believe that there will be penalties for taking Unbound armies. One of the easiest ways to balance the cheese a bit would be to make it so the Unbound armies can't score; they are formed to wipe the enemy out, or are mindless Hordes that aren't held together by cohesive leadership. Or something. It's not so hard to make a fluffy reason as to why they can't score.

I'm hoping the bonuses for Battle Forged armies actually make it a real choice between the two, and, as I said, a really easy one would be to prevent any chance at score if you went with an unbound army. Otherwise, why wouldn't someone take the most price-efficient unit and spam the hell out of it, and simply make that FoC slot (which we don't use for unbound armies, so I guess there would be no slots to make scoring) scoring.

I mean, as much fun as facing 6-7 Riptides at 1500 points is going to be...

EDIT: I'm more amazed at the thought of my 65pt Librarians being able to throw dice at turning into a Bloodthirster. I mean, I suppose Apoc in regular 40k was a comin', with Lords of War in 40k now.

Might be a little off topic, but what's going to be going up for preorder this Friday? There isn't any more Wood Elf stuff, right?

I'm building a much bigger Saint Celestine model. I'll use that as a Bloodthirster when my allied in Inquisitor goes all Heretic.

He wasn't summoning Kfad'df'gorz'an, but just Saint Katherine, guys. Honest.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Random Daemon summonings?!

Unbound lists?!

Well time to build fallout shelters.

Vault time ya' say? So what shall our experiment be? The only recreational hobbies being 40k related?

(I hope nobody is a psyker when we go in. We might have a LoC pop up and gladly bless us all.

Well first off we would have to try and round up all the Taudar power gamers and force them to play each other. They'd be locked in an eternal stalemate.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Might be a little off topic, but what's going to be going up for preorder this Friday? There isn't any more Wood Elf stuff, right?

I wouldn't be surprised if the new rulebook does honestly, since GW has this habit of doing the teaser vids (which the released Monday) the week of the pre-order.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Well first off we would have to try and round up all the Taudar power gamers and force them to play each other. They'd be locked in an eternal stalemate.

Hey, someone might be legitimately playing Tau with Eldar allies to embrace such fluff as...

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Might be a little off topic, but what's going to be going up for preorder this Friday? There isn't any more Wood Elf stuff, right?

I wouldn't be surprised if the new rulebook does honestly, since GW has this habit of doing the teaser vids (which the released Monday) the week of the pre-order.

No, the article said it's going up for preorder next week.

 TheKbob wrote:
I'm building a much bigger Saint Celestine model. I'll use that as a Bloodthirster when my allied in Inquisitor goes all Heretic.

He wasn't summoning Kfad'df'gorz'an, but just Saint Katherine, guys. Honest.

Forget Saint Katherine, I'm bringing Saint Olga!

Also I think I found a potential wife for Pask: http://www.badassoftheweek.com/index.cgi?id=64071327108

I suddenly have ideas for my 5-6 Contemptor list.

This is hilarious because people in my area absolutely despise them, since the Kheres pattern Mortis ones have caused untold havoc at my hand.

Or, dropping my Plaguebearers from my 5 FMC Daemon list, and reinvesting them into more upgrades for the FMCs.

I sincerely hope the benefits to take a Battle Forged army are worth it...

 TheKbob wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Well first off we would have to try and round up all the Taudar power gamers and force them to play each other. They'd be locked in an eternal stalemate.

Hey, someone might be legitimately playing Tau with Eldar allies to embrace such fluff as...

There have actually been a number of hints that the Tau race was in some way created by, or at least protected by, the Eldar. I can't remember exactly where but the Xenology book definitely talked about it.

I think they just kind of had to be BB with *someone* out of game fairness (sorry, Tyranids) and GW picked the two most 'good' armies as likely allies.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Might be a little off topic, but what's going to be going up for preorder this Friday? There isn't any more Wood Elf stuff, right?

Warzone:VALEDOR!

(Nids vs eldar/Deldar). I'm totally getting one.

 TheKbob wrote:
I'm building a much bigger Saint Celestine model. I'll use that as a Bloodthirster when my allied in Inquisitor goes all Heretic.

He wasn't summoning Kfad'df'gorz'an, but just Saint Katherine, guys. Honest.

If the rumors that summoned Daemons may start attacking "friendly" forces are borne out, it'll be a real laugh when St Katherine starts slaughtering an Inquisition army.

I must have missed the info on summoned Daemons attacking your own forces.

All I saw about that previously was one or two people speculating that it might happen as a risk element.

 Alex C wrote:
I must have missed the info on summoned Daemons attacking your own forces.

All I saw about that previously was one or two people speculating that it might happen as a risk element.

Eh, maybe that's what I remember reading. Still, it'd be funny...AND a serious downside to summoning a GD.

shade1313 wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
I'm building a much bigger Saint Celestine model. I'll use that as a Bloodthirster when my allied in Inquisitor goes all Heretic.

He wasn't summoning Kfad'df'gorz'an, but just Saint Katherine, guys. Honest.

If the rumors that summoned Daemons may start attacking "friendly" forces are borne out, it'll be a real laugh when St Katherine starts slaughtering an Inquisition army.

They were obviously heretics.

Hmmmm...IF they do the utterly stupid move of allowing Malefic Daemonology to armies for which it is completely unfluffy, like Eldar, that seems a perfect use for the FW Avatar model.

Crazyterran wrote:
Yeah, I'm sure they figure that it would be for fluffy players, but the fact that they said that there are going to be bonuses to take Battle Forged armies leads me to believe that there will be penalties for taking Unbound armies. One of the easiest ways to balance the cheese a bit would be to make it so the Unbound armies can't score; they are formed to wipe the enemy out, or are mindless Hordes that aren't held together by cohesive leadership.

There will be bonuses, but "no scoring units" is way too harsh a penalty. Remember, "table to win" is not a strategy that many non-competitive players find enjoyable. GW's ideal fluff player wants to bring their cool army and play normal missions, which means having scoring units. Meanwhile "cheese" won't be a concern because GW assumes that nobody will ever exploit their balance mistakes, and everyone will always take fluffy armies with a wide range of "fair" units.

shade1313 wrote:
Hmmmm...IF they do the utterly stupid move of allowing Malefic Daemonology to armies for which it is completely unfluffy, like Eldar, that seems a perfect use for the FW Avatar model.

Reminds me when I complained to Customer Service about what to do for Sisters since the Apoc book was advertised to have options for "every army" and Sisters didn't get anything, they said I could use anything, and the first thing that came to mind was Celestine using the rules for Unbound C'Tan.

Go on, try to punch my Living Saint in the face. She'll hit you with a massive flamer template, drop rocks FROM SPACE on you and then stomp your head in for good measure!

EDIT: In the end I was a lot nicer and took a Stormlord in our local Apoc game, but it was tempting to go all in for a couple minutes there.

 ruprecht wrote:
GW WD Batrep: "we thought it would be fun to superglue five Ultramarine tacticals together to form Ultramarine Voltron"

Dakka: "OMGOMG GW HAS LOST THE PLOT VOLTRON MARINES COMING IN 7TH IMMA PLAY WARMACHINE HALP"

Whilst the website may or may not be self-aware (I can't confirm that. Move along.) 'Dakka' rarely posts in news and rumours threads.

The opinions of any given dakka poster are the opinions of that poster, not a statement from some sort of gestalt consciousness. The community of people who post here is posting a fairly wide range of opinions on the news presented so far.

 Peregrine wrote:

Crazyterran wrote:
Yeah, I'm sure they figure that it would be for fluffy players, but the fact that they said that there are going to be bonuses to take Battle Forged armies leads me to believe that there will be penalties for taking Unbound armies. One of the easiest ways to balance the cheese a bit would be to make it so the Unbound armies can't score; they are formed to wipe the enemy out, or are mindless Hordes that aren't held together by cohesive leadership.

There will be bonuses, but "no scoring units" is way too harsh a penalty. Remember, "table to win" is not a strategy that many non-competitive players find enjoyable. GW's ideal fluff player wants to bring their cool army and play normal missions, which means having scoring units. Meanwhile "cheese" won't be a concern because GW assumes that nobody will ever exploit their balance mistakes, and everyone will always take fluffy armies with a wide range of "fair" units.

Unless the bonus for the FOC armies is that they get to have scoring units. And even then, I don't think it will really be enough, since most armies now a days tend to lean towards minimal troops anyways with an emphasis on deathstars or power units like FMCs. Take away the troop tax, and suddenly those Deathstars and such get a little bit stronger. Besides, as you said, if they don't care about balance mistakes, why would they give Unbound armies scoring? After all, those Thirty Terminators from your Imperial Fists Chapter Tactics are totally there to just wipe the enemy out, no scoring units needed!

I personally think that it should be that the FoC armies get Scoring units and Warlord traits - at the minimum. Otherwise, I can't really think of anything simple they could give the FoC armies that would outweigh just spamming power units.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
I'm building a much bigger Saint Celestine model. I'll use that as a Bloodthirster when my allied in Inquisitor goes all Heretic.

He wasn't summoning Kfad'df'gorz'an, but just Saint Katherine, guys. Honest.

If the rumors that summoned Daemons may start attacking "friendly" forces are borne out, it'll be a real laugh when St Katherine starts slaughtering an Inquisition army.

They were obviously heretics.

I'm okay with this. It means I was unfaithful.

Guys, this introduces a new meta game... How to table BOTH sides at the same time! Seventh Edition Hard Mode = Playing for the Double-Tabling Draw!

 mattyrm wrote:
I really don't like the idea of loyalist Space Marines turning to chaos to win a battle, it goes completely against all of the fluff we have been reading up to now surely?

I mean, one might turn, but not to win a battle for his chapter!

I agree, plus I think it's just chatter, we will have to hide and watch! If it is true it won't effect me because I don't use them anyway, never seemed like a Blood Angel thing to do.

Then again, since the psyker uses powers from the warp, barely contained when he is at his best, perhaps when he is wounded it takes it's toll, and it isn't an option but ranomized in the die roll? That would be very reasonable! Perhaps then even his own army would have to contend with the beast. I could live with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheKbob wrote:
This is going to be a long two weeks.

Inversely, why is it that a new rules edition must be such a mystery? The lead-up seems like it's building the bad hype. I'm not particularly enjoying this, nothing has me "amped up" about it. Why can't it be seen months in advance like Warmachine or Infinity releases? At this point, we're in the Internet age... it's kinda sad and bumming me out that we are stuck with this archaic approach.

I am at the point that the rumors have me not excited to play the game. I'm not performing a max exodus fire sale, but I deleted all the competitive lists I had planned to save up and buy for this year. I'll probably ditch my Gue'vesa list for the time being, too. I'll snatch up some BA ICs that look cool and give them squads to lead, but that's about it.

Indeed... a very long too weeks...

 TheKbob wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

shade1313 wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
I'm building a much bigger Saint Celestine model. I'll use that as a Bloodthirster when my allied in Inquisitor goes all Heretic.

He wasn't summoning Kfad'df'gorz'an, but just Saint Katherine, guys. Honest.

If the rumors that summoned Daemons may start attacking "friendly" forces are borne out, it'll be a real laugh when St Katherine starts slaughtering an Inquisition army.

They were obviously heretics.

I'm okay with this. It means I was unfaithful.

Guys, this introduces a new meta game... How to table BOTH sides at the same time! Seventh Edition Hard Mode = Playing for the Double-Tabling Draw!

I'd so play an army like that to play that game!

Then again I played a game in 5th that thanks to some poor dice rolls on reserves and some general issues overall (some of which were likely tactical errors on my part) I was tabled 3 times in the same game because I didn't want to give up just because I only had 2 units of Oblits (2 and 1 for the spread) in Reserves (in my defense he only had a small chunk of Eldar and if it wasn't for horrible scatters I actually stood a chance of at least forcing a draw).

I miss that option honestly. I get why GW moved to what they did (to stop the all reserve armies and related problems) but I feel that not giving players the option to play on despite things going badly so they can try to turn things around and win isn't good "forging the narrative".

Crazyterran wrote:
EDIT: I'm more amazed at the thought of my 65pt Librarians being able to throw dice at turning into a Bloodthirster.

Dark angels unbound 2000 pts

28 librarians - 1820 pts
Defense line with quad gun - 100 pts
Combi-meltas on a few, maybe meltabombs on a couple, ymmv

I think this could be great. They're fallen angels that found each other and they're going to drown you in big daemons.

There are 2 of these tables remember so the other one will likely be good as well for you fluff monkeys.

 nolzur wrote:
28 librarians - 1820 pts
Defense line with quad gun - 100 pts
Combi-meltas on a few, maybe meltabombs on a couple, ymmv

Not WAAC enough. Why use expensive DA librarians when you can take an unlimited horde of cheap IG primaris psykers? At 50 points each you can take 38 of them and still have your ADL. Or, if the demon spell requires sacrificing one model instead of the whole unit you could take 31 squads of 5x wyrdvane psykers, which would let you summon 158 bloodthirsters as long as your opponent is too distracted by the first wave to have any chance to kill your horde of psykers.

I wouldn't read into this too hard yet.
GW goes out of their way to tell us that the game should be played on "eff the rules, do random 'awesome' gak instead" basis, and it seems to me that it's what going on in that passage.

Well, it's possible that they may decide to bring it into basic mech, but some people here are overreacting IMO.

It's reassuring that so many folks have seen (and thoroughly read and committed to memory) the new rule set and know for a fact where the game is broken and just what people will bring to the table.

Oh wait, it wasn't the rules, it was a tiny article in aWhite Dwarf?! Ahhh, my mistake. My hyperbole alarm was going off something rotten. I think it may be busted.

It sounds like some of you have proper jeb ends in your gaming groups, with all this wailing about UNBOUND TABLINGS EVERYWHERE!

(I'm just jealous because I don't have a gaming group).

Plenty of them in and around Manchester.

- Edited by insaniak. Please see Dakka's rule #1


Battle-Forged vs. Unbound? - unclear.

Unbound - no, it's not taking everything you want. All individual unit restrictions and Allies relationships apply, whatever the new ones might be.

DA Psyker summoning a Daemon - the wording of that paragraph made it clear to me it was just a random playtesting idea which may or may not be implemented in the finished product. Saying that this will be most definitely included as such makes as much sense as stating that it definitely won't. Schrödinger's rule?

That is what can be relatively objectively interpreted from the article.

Battle-Forged vs. Unbound? - unclear.

If Battle-Forged provides a bonus, what's the point of said bonus if it's not intended to be played against Unbound?

Unbound - no, it's not taking everything you want. All individual unit restrictions and Allies relationships apply, whatever the new ones might be.

Ok, so you need to stick to unit restrictions, but if you can have as many units as you want that only avoids you having 30 man terminator squads instead of 3 x 10 man terminator squads. The allies matrix is apparently different; so we've no idea what happens there.

DA Psyker summoning a Daemon - the wording of that paragraph made it clear to me it was just a random playtesting idea which may or may not be implemented in the finished product. Saying that this will be most definitely included as such makes as much sense as stating that it definitely won't. Schrödinger's rule?

I'm not convinced they'd report on an internal play test that never made it. More likely (giving GW some credit) is that they've followed the rules but ignored the fluff, o it's safe to assume that Azrael is allowed to summon a demon. If that's not the case then it's a pretty awful play test; since they are ignoring the rules completely whilst demonstrating how cinematic the rules are.


All of the above makes some perverse business sense. If anyone can summon Greater Daemons, then everyone is eligable to buy them. If people aren't restricted by the FOC, then they can buy as many elite or giant units as they want.

All of the rumours we've seen so far point towards GW encouraging more big spending, which fits perfectly with their modus operandi.

Shingen wrote:
Plenty of them in and around Manchester.

.

Had a wander up to NWGC the other week. It was rammed, which is good. But I think they were mid-renovation as it was an utter bombsite.

When time allows I'll make more of an effort. Probably best waitng for Nu40k to drop though, put me on an even footing!

Any update on the specific bonuses 'battle-forged' armies will receive? Clever ploy by GW to make it harder for people to refuse to play WAC unbound armies: "Sure I've got nothing but individual psykers in my army but you get such and such a bonus."

Insofar as GW views its IP as essential to its business model/profit, I'll LOL if they f***-up the fluff so badly by allowing all manner of marines to summon demons.

Wow... WD promo: what a bunch of utter garbage. Nothing but 30k for me at this point.

Are we really to the point where players want to attack other players for being skeptical about the new release?

There's a major change coming to 40k. There will be people who like it and don't. No one needs to have a complete rulebook to have an opinion about what they have read.

I think everyone on this board has an open mind about the possibilities, and that's not inconsistent with being skeptical about how this is going to impact the game. The fact of the matter is, we are all waiting for the new rules to come out, and some of us already have opinions based on what we have been seeing.

The problem people are having is that many of those opinions are based on assumptions beyond what is written. I think more and more people are getting fed up with reading that the sky is falling with every single release.

So clearly then the information provided is not enough to make 100% solid opinions on yet then.

But then what was the WD thinking. Players who dont follow news and rumours extensively might obviously know a new edition is coming but havent seen these WD leaks.

The first WD to post information on the new edition was what we saw. How is a player first time reading that supposed to react when all that is advertised for 7th edition is 'you can take whatever you want' unbound vs forged. Maybe it was a bad idea to write a vague teaser for 7th edition without solid information.

 Moopy wrote:
Wow... WD promo: what a bunch of utter garbage. Nothing but 30k for me at this point.

Won't 30K use the same rules edition, so will be 7th as well?

Herzlos wrote:

Battle-Forged vs. Unbound? - unclear.

If Battle-Forged provides a bonus, what's the point of said bonus if it's not intended to be played against Unbound?

Why provide warlord traits even though you can't choose not to have a warlord? Because they felt it made the game more fun.

I'm leaning towards mixed games being allowed, but it's far from clear yet.

For 40k, In the world of the internet, rumours and leaks spread like a plague infecting those who are prone to worry and hate change.

My only message to you all is that you remain calm, the sky is not falling and the world is not going to swallow you up.

Welcome the new challenge, play against these apparently ludicrous "unbound" armies with your structured, proper warhammer 40k list and your additional bonuses for doing so. And when you win, it will taste so much sweeter.

Anyway, I hope Hive Tyrants can summon Daemon Princes #JustSaying

 ascended_mike wrote:
Anyway, I hope Hive Tyrants can summon Daemon Princes #JustSaying

They can't.

 insaniak wrote:

 ascended_mike wrote:
Anyway, I hope Hive Tyrants can summon Daemon Princes #JustSaying

They can't.

Well I'm waiting for the "Hive Tyrant Daemon Commander" supplement, dataslate, formation, book, app, Forgeworld model.

In all seriousness. Relax guys.

 Steve steveson wrote:
I think more and more people are getting fed up with reading that the sky is falling with every single release.

Given the exodus of players that happens with every single release, at least for some of us, those people appear to be right.

There was been huge attrition because of 6th edition. Wargamers interested in a balanced game, fit for tournament play, with writers who keep rules up to date and participate in internet fora dropped 6th in huge numbers. 7th appears to offer little that will bring them back.

 Steve steveson wrote:
I think more and more people are getting fed up with reading that the sky is falling with every single release.

So is that something that we should be blaming on the people who aren't happy with those releases, or with the people responsible for those releases?

The whole point of a discussion is for people to share their opinions. If you're not concerned by what has been revealed so far, that's great... but others are perfectly entitled to air their discontent with the apparent direction of the game based on what we have been shown so far.