yukishiro1 wrote: Yeah, VH is the best boost to them, which is a bit awkward since VH doesn't initially seem to be all that promising.
The other awkward thing about paragons is they effectively lock you out of taking while we stand (or I guess in the very best scenario limit you to 10 on it), an extremely powerful secondary that a lot of the best lists build around right now.
Is it though? Exactly which AP-1 or AP-2 weapons is a 2+ save T5 model with -1 damage worried about?
Paragon battle suits are incredibly resilient to anything VH could help them against already and VH doesn't help at all against the things your opponent's going to kill them with.
Paragons should almost always be either bloody rose or argent shroud simply because they're so fragile against the weapons that prey on them, nothing you do is going to help defensively. You should just sell out entirely on their offensive output and hope you can use good positioning and target priority to kill what kills them before they get blapped.
Which is why you should always take meltas tbh. It's the best shot they have at killing the things that would otherwise kill them. The extra 30pts does make them even more of a target, but at least now they have a fighting chance against something like Raiders.
yukishiro1 wrote: Yeah, VH is the best boost to them, which is a bit awkward since VH doesn't initially seem to be all that promising.
The other awkward thing about paragons is they effectively lock you out of taking while we stand (or I guess in the very best scenario limit you to 10 on it), an extremely powerful secondary that a lot of the best lists build around right now.
Is it though? Exactly which AP-1 or AP-2 weapons is a 2+ save T5 model with -1 damage worried about?
Paragon battle suits are incredibly resilient to anything VH could help them against already and VH doesn't help at all against the things your opponent's going to kill them with.
Paragons should almost always be either bloody rose or argent shroud simply because they're so fragile against the weapons that prey on them, nothing you do is going to help defensively. You should just sell out entirely on their offensive output and hope you can use good positioning and target priority to kill what kills them before they get blapped.
Which is why you should always take meltas tbh. It's the best shot they have at killing the things that would otherwise kill them. The extra 30pts does make them even more of a target, but at least now they have a fighting chance against something like Raiders.
Uh if something has -1 damage, 1 damage weapons are literally one of the best things to shoot them with. Even massed AP 1 fire threatens paragons with enough volume. (Edit: Vanguard strat doesn't work on them because they're vehicles, derp, but even without it they still are quite threatening). VH halves the damage they take from AP1 fire, meaning that all you have to worry about is anti-tank weapons; the big problem with paragon suits is that they're vulnerable BOTH to massed small arms fire *and* to anti-tank, so taking half of that out of the equation is a big deal IMO.
And the 5++ is actually relevant vs bombers too, which otherwise eat up paragons, because the combination of multiple models and VEHICLE is just brutal otherwise. - a bomber kills a paragon on average just flying over the squad, but not with the 5++.
I mean, we're all on the same page here that they're not actually immune to 1 damage weapons, right, just like they're not actually 240 points a model?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just realized that to an attempt an action you can't be in engagement range, so Celestine can't heal herself while in combat - and also can't heal herself if she falls back, since that also prohibits actions.
Celestine is very well balanced considering how much harder she is to kill, her ability to deep strike and the fact she can use that jumpack redeploy strat.
ClockworkZion wrote: Celestine is very well balanced considering how much harder she is to kill, her ability to deep strike and the fact she can use that jumpack redeploy strat.
Honestly, she is how she should be. I hated her 8th book rules.
dammit wrote: indomitable belief is order core infantry and the hymn is core infantry or character, no order lock.
in the book there are no infantry with shield of faith that are neither core or character, but none of the characters are core.
The hymn is just CORE or CHARACTER, so it can affect the warsuits. 3 model unit _could_ be hard to hide if you don't go first though.
Part of the reason the Admech defensive rules are so strong is they can be used if your opponent goes first and they're no conditional.
Theoretically you could have the warsuits as a 5++ and a neg 1 to hit or no rerolls, but if you go second then you can't add any of the buffs. Might be fine with good terrain, might not.
yukishiro1 wrote: Yeah, VH is the best boost to them, which is a bit awkward since VH doesn't initially seem to be all that promising.
The other awkward thing about paragons is they effectively lock you out of taking while we stand (or I guess in the very best scenario limit you to 10 on it), an extremely powerful secondary that a lot of the best lists build around right now.
Is it though? Exactly which AP-1 or AP-2 weapons is a 2+ save T5 model with -1 damage worried about?
Paragon battle suits are incredibly resilient to anything VH could help them against already and VH doesn't help at all against the things your opponent's going to kill them with.
Paragons should almost always be either bloody rose or argent shroud simply because they're so fragile against the weapons that prey on them, nothing you do is going to help defensively. You should just sell out entirely on their offensive output and hope you can use good positioning and target priority to kill what kills them before they get blapped.
Which is why you should always take meltas tbh. It's the best shot they have at killing the things that would otherwise kill them. The extra 30pts does make them even more of a target, but at least now they have a fighting chance against something like Raiders.
Uh if something has -1 damage, 1 damage weapons are literally one of the best things to shoot them with. Even massed AP 1 fire threatens paragons with enough volume. (Edit: Vanguard strat doesn't work on them because they're vehicles, derp, but even without it they still are quite threatening). VH halves the damage they take from AP1 fire, meaning that all you have to worry about is anti-tank weapons; the big problem with paragon suits is that they're vulnerable BOTH to massed small arms fire *and* to anti-tank, so taking half of that out of the equation is a big deal IMO.
And the 5++ is actually relevant vs bombers too, which otherwise eat up paragons, because the combination of multiple models and VEHICLE is just brutal otherwise. - a bomber kills a paragon on average just flying over the squad, but not with the 5++.
I mean, we're all on the same page here that they're not actually immune to 1 damage weapons, right, just like they're not actually 240 points a model?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just realized that to an attempt an action you can't be in engagement range, so Celestine can't heal herself while in combat - and also can't heal herself if she falls back, since that also prohibits actions.
Makes her way riskier and less useful a pick IMO.
Don't only 2 factions take bombers? And one of them it's pretty rare?
As for small arms, I still don't think they matter that much to Paragons, even outside of VH. The only other vehicles we're likely to have on the field are Rhinos and Mortifiers/Pengines. Mortifiers are a much better target for small arms fire and Taking Vahl AND Paragons means you just don't have the points to overload your opponent's anti-tank with Rhino chassis. I.e. Your opponent will almost always have anti-tank to shoot at them.
To me it seems like their inbuilt defenses are plenty to survive sub-optimal weapons. Their offensive capabilities are far more suspect so the extra flexibility of Argent Shroud or the extra DPS of Bloody Rose seem like the more efficient value add.
Though to be fair, the entire discussion hinges on Paragons being competitively viable in the first place, which...meh? Probably not.
As for Celestine... the idea of her healing to full and resurrecting a geminae every turn for free while in combat is as ridiculous as her -1 damage not having a minimum 1. She's basically unkillable as it is outside of the 1 in 6 chance you have at failing her rez. More annoying is the fact that, judging by what I could tell from the Codex Reviews, she's lost an attack as payment for her mortal wound ability. Her and Vahl still represent almost guaranteed 10pts for While We Stand We Fight.
Which brings me to our secondaries. ROD is a guaranteed 12pts with 2 units of Deadly Descent handflamer Seraphim (which is probably why DD doesn't work on inferno pistols anymore) and WWSWF is close to a guaranteed 10 if you bring Celestine and Vahl and play smart. The problem is finding a 3rd expensive unit that isn't likely to get toasted. 20 BSS maybe? Sacred Grounds is Criminally easy in some missions and Leap of Faith isn't particularly difficult to max for Either Sacred Rose or OOML. Defend the Shrine isn't too hard on certain missions and could force your opponent to over commit to one side of the board. Slay the Heretic you can somewhat reliably get 10pts out of but killing something with a Flamer weapon 3 turns out of 5 is pretty tough if you want to max it.
Our biggest weakness as far as secondaries go is that our most 'guaranteed' options are in No Mercy, No Respite and Shadow Operations. This leaves us somewhat at our opponents mercy. Engage on all fronts is never a bad option but it's pretty hard to max. Purge the enemy requires your opponent to overload on certain unit types OR requires you to bring enough of the holy trinity to have a reasonable shot at flamer kills 3 out of 5 turns.
Ad Mech, Dark Eldar and Tau all have bombers and mortals in the movement phase are a great way to soften targets (which Dark Eldar can do by flying past a unit with more than just bombers).
Autocannons and Heavy Bolters are good vs Paragons as well which lets them.save heavier weapons for things like Rhinos, Vahl or any tanks.
It takes 27 standard Autocannon shots and 36 heavy bolter shots to kill one Paragon(assuming BS3). Both are better off shooting Rhinos (12 and 18 shots for the same number of wounds repectively).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ClockworkZion wrote: Ad Mech, Dark Eldar and Tau all have bombers and mortals in the movement phase are a great way to soften targets (which Dark Eldar can do by flying past a unit with more than just bombers).
Tau never take their planes and Ad Mech lists exclude bombers as often or more as they include them.
They're a threat for sure, but building your conviction around mitigating them is a bit bold. Besides, Argent Shroud still lets you dodge mortal on a 4++ if you really need it.
Tau don't currently take their bombers but never dismiss something strictly on it not currently being used. It's worth being aware of at least.
And again my point wasn't what makes the strongest army, but what buff benefits them the most.
Frankly I don't like how incredibly fragile they are for their points when a melta is even waved vaguely in their direction. When each costs nearly as much as a Rhino you kind of expect more mileage out of them.
Picked up my codex today, and i'm getting super hyped about order of our martyred lady, also I picked up some paints for the theme.
Something I noticed; miracle dice are only generated by 'Adepta Sororitas' units, and penintent engines dont have that keyword. Maybe a typo, because mortifiers do have that keyword.
Spreelock wrote: Picked up my codex today, and i'm getting super hyped about order of our martyred lady, also I picked up some paints for the theme.
Something I noticed; miracle dice are only generated by 'Adepta Sororitas' units, and penintent engines dont have that keyword. Maybe a typo, because mortifiers do have that keyword.
Because Mortifiers are piloted by disgraced Repentia and Penitent engines are piloted by non-sister sinners.
Spreelock wrote: Picked up my codex today, and i'm getting super hyped about order of our martyred lady, also I picked up some paints for the theme.
Something I noticed; miracle dice are only generated by 'Adepta Sororitas' units, and penintent engines dont have that keyword. Maybe a typo, because mortifiers do have that keyword.
Probably not since Penitent Engines are criminals and heretics, while Mortifiers are Repentia who failed to repent (such as fleeing battle instead of dying like the religious zealots they're supposed to be).
yukishiro1 wrote: I dunno, the Acts of Faith one encourages you you to churn your miracle dice instead of actually using them where and when they're most important. If you go SR yeah obviously you'll make it without even trying, but otherwise with the overall nerfs to MD generation I would be pretty hesitant to commit to a secondary that requires you to burn them, especially one that encourages you to burn them on your opponent's turn, which is not generally where you get the most value from them.
The other problem with A Leap of Faith is that it does cap you at 12 VP instead of 15 for a secondary. Slay the Heretic, meanwhile, potentially doubles up with other kill-based secondaries.
Spreelock wrote: Picked up my codex today, and i'm getting super hyped about order of our martyred lady, also I picked up some paints for the theme.
Something I noticed; miracle dice are only generated by 'Adepta Sororitas' units, and penintent engines dont have that keyword. Maybe a typo, because mortifiers do have that keyword.
Probably not since Penitent Engines are criminals and heretics, while Mortifiers are Repentia who failed to repent (such as fleeing battle instead of dying like the religious zealots they're supposed to be).
Which is honestly like the top end of what battle sisters become repentia for. One of the sisters in Faith and Fire became a repentia because a psyker made her feel sad one time.
ERJAK wrote: As for Celestine... the idea of her healing to full and resurrecting a geminae every turn for free while in combat is as ridiculous as her -1 damage not having a minimum 1. She's basically unkillable as it is outside of the 1 in 6 chance you have at failing her rez. More annoying is the fact that, judging by what I could tell from the Codex Reviews, she's lost an attack as payment for her mortal wound ability. Her and Vahl still represent almost guaranteed 10pts for While We Stand We Fight.
She's had 6 attacks since the 8E codex; there's no change here.
Spreelock wrote: Picked up my codex today, and i'm getting super hyped about order of our martyred lady, also I picked up some paints for the theme.
Something I noticed; miracle dice are only generated by 'Adepta Sororitas' units, and penintent engines dont have that keyword. Maybe a typo, because mortifiers do have that keyword.
Probably not since Penitent Engines are criminals and heretics, while Mortifiers are Repentia who failed to repent (such as fleeing battle instead of dying like the religious zealots they're supposed to be).
Which is honestly like the top end of what battle sisters become repentia for. One of the sisters in Faith and Fire became a repentia because a psyker made her feel sad one time.
It was more that she failed in her duties even momentarily because of the psyker, but sure, let's reduce plot points to nonsense.
yukishiro1 wrote: I dunno, the Acts of Faith one encourages you you to churn your miracle dice instead of actually using them where and when they're most important. If you go SR yeah obviously you'll make it without even trying, but otherwise with the overall nerfs to MD generation I would be pretty hesitant to commit to a secondary that requires you to burn them, especially one that encourages you to burn them on your opponent's turn, which is not generally where you get the most value from them.
The other problem with A Leap of Faith is that it does cap you at 12 VP instead of 15 for a secondary. Slay the Heretic, meanwhile, potentially doubles up with other kill-based secondaries.
If you can actually get it. Even with everything getting +1S flamers still aren't exactly crazy lethal and bolt weapons aren't necessarily a sure thing either.
I tend to prefer secondaries that take my opponent out of the equation. I don't mind losing out on 3VP max if it means nothing my opponent does can stop me.
yukishiro1 wrote: I dunno, the Acts of Faith one encourages you you to churn your miracle dice instead of actually using them where and when they're most important. If you go SR yeah obviously you'll make it without even trying, but otherwise with the overall nerfs to MD generation I would be pretty hesitant to commit to a secondary that requires you to burn them, especially one that encourages you to burn them on your opponent's turn, which is not generally where you get the most value from them.
The other problem with A Leap of Faith is that it does cap you at 12 VP instead of 15 for a secondary. Slay the Heretic, meanwhile, potentially doubles up with other kill-based secondaries.
If you can actually get it. Even with everything getting +1S flamers still aren't exactly crazy lethal and bolt weapons aren't necessarily a sure thing either.
I tend to prefer secondaries that take my opponent out of the equation. I don't mind losing out on 3VP max if it means nothing my opponent does can stop me.
Yeah, maxing on secondaries isn't a sure thing so it's usually better to aim for one you know you can score 10-12 points reliably for than one you can score 15 on when the stars align.
ERJAK wrote: As for Celestine... the idea of her healing to full and resurrecting a geminae every turn for free while in combat is as ridiculous as her -1 damage not having a minimum 1. She's basically unkillable as it is outside of the 1 in 6 chance you have at failing her rez. More annoying is the fact that, judging by what I could tell from the Codex Reviews, she's lost an attack as payment for her mortal wound ability. Her and Vahl still represent almost guaranteed 10pts for While We Stand We Fight.
She's had 6 attacks since the 8E codex; there's no change here.
She has five in the codex I saw. It was a bit blurry so I might be wrong but it really looked like a 5.
ERJAK wrote: As for Celestine... the idea of her healing to full and resurrecting a geminae every turn for free while in combat is as ridiculous as her -1 damage not having a minimum 1. She's basically unkillable as it is outside of the 1 in 6 chance you have at failing her rez. More annoying is the fact that, judging by what I could tell from the Codex Reviews, she's lost an attack as payment for her mortal wound ability. Her and Vahl still represent almost guaranteed 10pts for While We Stand We Fight.
She's had 6 attacks since the 8E codex; there's no change here.
She has five in the codex I saw. It was a bit blurry so I might be wrong but it really looked like a 5.
ERJAK wrote: As for Celestine... the idea of her healing to full and resurrecting a geminae every turn for free while in combat is as ridiculous as her -1 damage not having a minimum 1. She's basically unkillable as it is outside of the 1 in 6 chance you have at failing her rez. More annoying is the fact that, judging by what I could tell from the Codex Reviews, she's lost an attack as payment for her mortal wound ability. Her and Vahl still represent almost guaranteed 10pts for While We Stand We Fight.
She's had 6 attacks since the 8E codex; there's no change here.
She has five in the codex I saw. It was a bit blurry so I might be wrong but it really looked like a 5.
Which brings me to our secondaries. ROD is a guaranteed 12pts with 2 units of Deadly Descent handflamer Seraphim (which is probably why DD doesn't work on inferno pistols anymore)
Deadly Descent got nerfed to only work at the end of the movement phase. You can't use one squad to make room for the other any more. ROD is actually quite difficult to score 12 on against a decent opponent who you aren't tabling, it is very easy for most opponents to screen out deep strikers from a quarter due to the "more than 6" from another table quarter" language making the zone you have to get to to start the action extremely specific. It ends up being a 17"x24" rectangle at the far corner of each quarter - you can screen that out with a single unit of 5 models from a standard 9" deep strike.
Seraphim are still a good choice for it because they are the best thing in the sisters book for realistically getting where they need to go due to their high movement and FLY, but they can still be screened out physically with bodies if there's nowhere you can fly them to that won't be in engagement range.
It's an extremely reliable 8, but getting the full 12 when you aren't in a "win more" situation is often actually pretty tricky.
Which brings me to our secondaries. ROD is a guaranteed 12pts with 2 units of Deadly Descent handflamer Seraphim (which is probably why DD doesn't work on inferno pistols anymore)
Deadly Descent got nerfed to only work at the end of the movement phase. You can't use one squad to make room for the other any more. ROD is actually quite difficult to score 12 on against a decent opponent who you aren't tabling, it is very easy for most opponents to screen out deep strikers from a quarter due to the "more than 6" from another table quarter" language making the zone you have to get to to start the action extremely specific. It ends up being a 17"x24" rectangle at the far corner of each quarter - you can screen that out with a single unit of 5 models from a standard 9" deep strike.
Seraphim are still a good choice for it because they are the best thing in the sisters book for realistically getting where they need to go due to their high movement and FLY, but they can still be screened out physically with bodies if there's nowhere you can fly them to that won't be in engagement range.
It's an extremely reliable 8, but getting the full 12 when you aren't in a "win more" situation is often actually pretty tricky.
edit: Fixed math, hadn't had my coffee yet.
If the terrain is such that you can't easily clear the screeners, chances are you'll have an opporunity to place the Seraphim somewhere safe and move them into position the next turn. Also, as much as people would protest otherwise, only about the top half of players would think to do that and not all of them would successfully execute the block. Chances are your first 2 games at any event you'll get it no problem.
Though I do concede the point that it being quarters rather than thirds does make it quite a bit harder than what 'guaranteed' would suggest. An opponent who knows what they're doing could stifle you with relatively low investment.
ERJAK will hate me for saying this, will probably target me with nasty comments, and might even PM me in anger again, but...I like this one better than the 8th codex. Way more depth than that one.
I also don't feel like I'm soaking the fun out of the room by running Repentia and Retributors in numbers with how terribly balanced they were. Meta-skewing pics, no matter how powerful, are never fun.
Unfortunately I'm feeling like Morvenn Vahl is way too good. It's not hard to use and maximize a character that can contribute as a force multiplier, has solid shooting, and rocks in melee. No real difficult in making her a star in every match.
Though I do concede the point that it being quarters rather than thirds does make it quite a bit harder than what 'guaranteed' would suggest. An opponent who knows what they're doing could stifle you with relatively low investment.
Not just quarters, quarters with a 6"x6" cross going through the center of the table blocking out all that space. That rider is what makes the difference, without that it would be much easier and probably would be close to a guaranteed 12.
It's one of those things you don't really appreciate till you play a few games with it. It's a very reliable 8 for almost any list, but getting the full 12 is sometimes surprisingly difficult depending on your opponent. So you can't really bank on more than 8 from it when you're building your list, unless you really go heavy into mobility, which is not something sisters are very suited towards.
ClockworkZion wrote: I've emailed GW about raising Vahl's points and I assume others will as well. We won't see an update until at least July though
Why not write them about 10th edition being too melee centric while you're at it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vilgeir wrote: Played with the Codex now a few more matches.
ERJAK will hate me for saying this, will probably target me with nasty comments, and might even PM me in anger again, but...I like this one better than the 8th codex. Way more depth than that one.
I also don't feel like I'm soaking the fun out of the room by running Repentia and Retributors in numbers with how terribly balanced they were. Meta-skewing pics, no matter how powerful, are never fun.
Unfortunately I'm feeling like Morvenn Vahl is way too good. It's not hard to use and maximize a character that can contribute as a force multiplier, has solid shooting, and rocks in melee. No real difficult in making her a star in every match.
I have never PMed anyone in my entire life on any forum platform. I don't write them and I don't read them. I have like 30k unread messages on reddit. Way to open with a bold face lie. An incredibly conceited lie too. Who are you again?
Also, your entire point is 'my army is worse now, yay!' which like...go off I guess?
I mean I wrote feedback about tanks being too fragile, but I don't think melee is entirely at fault. It's basically the same as it was last edition, just with more terrain on tables.
Just sat down with the codex today. For me, 9th edition is a serious love/hate relationship. I'm mostly a casula player, but I have a lot of armies. The complexity in each new codex is a real headache, not so bad if it's your only army, but damn. This one has so many options and routes, probably just pick a single order for now and just run it a few times. Although never optimal, I'll probably mix and match some weapons...so Spear, 2 halberds, 2 maces in sacresants, and Mace/MM/rockets plus 2 HB/sword/SB in my paragons.
bullyboy wrote: Just sat down with the codex today. For me, 9th edition is a serious love/hate relationship. I'm mostly a casula player, but I have a lot of armies. The complexity in each new codex is a real headache, not so bad if it's your only army, but damn. This one has so many options and routes, probably just pick a single order for now and just run it a few times. Although never optimal, I'll probably mix and match some weapons...so Spear, 2 halberds, 2 maces in sacresants, and Mace/MM/rockets plus 2 HB/sword/SB in my paragons.
I have to say I rather like the depth and complexity of the book since it means we should see a wider range of viable army lists instead of everyone gravitating to the same build, which will be nice.
bullyboy wrote: Just sat down with the codex today. For me, 9th edition is a serious love/hate relationship. I'm mostly a casula player, but I have a lot of armies. The complexity in each new codex is a real headache, not so bad if it's your only army, but damn. This one has so many options and routes, probably just pick a single order for now and just run it a few times. Although never optimal, I'll probably mix and match some weapons...so Spear, 2 halberds, 2 maces in sacresants, and Mace/MM/rockets plus 2 HB/sword/SB in my paragons.
I have to say I rather like the depth and complexity of the book since it means we should see a wider range of viable army lists instead of everyone gravitating to the same build, which will be nice.
This right here. I wouldn't be surprised if there turns out to be competitively viable builds for all of the major Orders, and perhaps with certain combos of the Minor Order traits as well. The only true "loser" units in the book seem to be the tanks, and I'm not sure there isn't a build out there that could make use of a single Exorcist as a non-LOS harassment platform. Pretty much everything else seems to be at least worth a look.
bullyboy wrote: Just sat down with the codex today. For me, 9th edition is a serious love/hate relationship. I'm mostly a casula player, but I have a lot of armies. The complexity in each new codex is a real headache, not so bad if it's your only army, but damn. This one has so many options and routes, probably just pick a single order for now and just run it a few times. Although never optimal, I'll probably mix and match some weapons...so Spear, 2 halberds, 2 maces in sacresants, and Mace/MM/rockets plus 2 HB/sword/SB in my paragons.
I have to say I rather like the depth and complexity of the book since it means we should see a wider range of viable army lists instead of everyone gravitating to the same build, which will be nice.
This right here. I wouldn't be surprised if there turns out to be competitively viable builds for all of the major Orders, and perhaps with certain combos of the Minor Order traits as well. The only true "loser" units in the book seem to be the tanks, and I'm not sure there isn't a build out there that could make use of a single Exorcist as a non-LOS harassment platform. Pretty much everything else seems to be at least worth a look.
I'd argue our metal boxes are fine (they could be better, but they're fine), so it's just the Exorcist and Castigator that need desperate help.
bullyboy wrote: Just sat down with the codex today. For me, 9th edition is a serious love/hate relationship. I'm mostly a casula player, but I have a lot of armies. The complexity in each new codex is a real headache, not so bad if it's your only army, but damn. This one has so many options and routes, probably just pick a single order for now and just run it a few times. Although never optimal, I'll probably mix and match some weapons...so Spear, 2 halberds, 2 maces in sacresants, and Mace/MM/rockets plus 2 HB/sword/SB in my paragons.
I have to say I rather like the depth and complexity of the book since it means we should see a wider range of viable army lists instead of everyone gravitating to the same build, which will be nice.
This right here. I wouldn't be surprised if there turns out to be competitively viable builds for all of the major Orders, and perhaps with certain combos of the Minor Order traits as well. The only true "loser" units in the book seem to be the tanks, and I'm not sure there isn't a build out there that could make use of a single Exorcist as a non-LOS harassment platform. Pretty much everything else seems to be at least worth a look.
I'd argue our metal boxes are fine (they could be better, but they're fine), so it's just the Exorcist and Castigator that need desperate help.
Rhinos are decent; for 80 points, you get a safe(r) way to move units up the board more quickly than walking. Immolators are horribly overpriced for what they do, and now the Jihad-tank stratagem (auto explode) only works on Immos with the flamers. Although, now that you can move them up with Dominions, maybe there's some play there. But I doubt it's worth the points.
GW's approach to transports is so weird. Compare a raider to an immolator, it's literally comical. The raider transports 5 more models, it flys, it moves faster, it's open topped, it has a better gun, and a better invuln. It even fights a little bit in melee!
Meanwhile, the only advantages the immolator has is +1T and +1 save. And it costs 30 points more.
bullyboy wrote: Just sat down with the codex today. For me, 9th edition is a serious love/hate relationship. I'm mostly a casula player, but I have a lot of armies. The complexity in each new codex is a real headache, not so bad if it's your only army, but damn. This one has so many options and routes, probably just pick a single order for now and just run it a few times. Although never optimal, I'll probably mix and match some weapons...so Spear, 2 halberds, 2 maces in sacresants, and Mace/MM/rockets plus 2 HB/sword/SB in my paragons.
I have to say I rather like the depth and complexity of the book since it means we should see a wider range of viable army lists instead of everyone gravitating to the same build, which will be nice.
This right here. I wouldn't be surprised if there turns out to be competitively viable builds for all of the major Orders, and perhaps with certain combos of the Minor Order traits as well. The only true "loser" units in the book seem to be the tanks, and I'm not sure there isn't a build out there that could make use of a single Exorcist as a non-LOS harassment platform. Pretty much everything else seems to be at least worth a look.
The problem is I don't think we have the legs in terms of long (or even mid) range shooting to realistically forgo Argent Shroud Retributors. The Exorcist is...arguably mediocre at the cost of draining 2CP every time it shoots (why is it 2CP? The old devastating refrain was better for 1CP.) but you still only bring one and that's not going to cut it if you actually need to kill stuff.
So yeah, you could probably build a competitive-ish list with several of the orders as primary detachment, but I don't see a good way to avoid adding and Argent Shroud patrol with 2 units of retributors in outflank or transports (depending on if CP or points are more at a premium in your build).
bullyboy wrote: Just sat down with the codex today. For me, 9th edition is a serious love/hate relationship. I'm mostly a casula player, but I have a lot of armies. The complexity in each new codex is a real headache, not so bad if it's your only army, but damn. This one has so many options and routes, probably just pick a single order for now and just run it a few times. Although never optimal, I'll probably mix and match some weapons...so Spear, 2 halberds, 2 maces in sacresants, and Mace/MM/rockets plus 2 HB/sword/SB in my paragons.
I have to say I rather like the depth and complexity of the book since it means we should see a wider range of viable army lists instead of everyone gravitating to the same build, which will be nice.
This right here. I wouldn't be surprised if there turns out to be competitively viable builds for all of the major Orders, and perhaps with certain combos of the Minor Order traits as well. The only true "loser" units in the book seem to be the tanks, and I'm not sure there isn't a build out there that could make use of a single Exorcist as a non-LOS harassment platform. Pretty much everything else seems to be at least worth a look.
I'd argue our metal boxes are fine (they could be better, but they're fine), so it's just the Exorcist and Castigator that need desperate help.
Absolutely not. Immolators weren't good BEFORE they lost rerolls, their explode strat, and got a 10 point bump. At least the Exorcist has a gimmick.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote: GW's approach to transports is so weird. Compare a raider to an immolator, it's literally comical. The raider transports 5 more models, it flys, it moves faster, it's open topped, it has a better gun, and a better invuln. It even fights a little bit in melee!
Meanwhile, the only advantages the immolator has is +1T and +1 save. And it costs 30 points more.
Which is even more hilarious when you consider that going from T6-T7 is the single least meaningful toughness transition in the game. At least going from T5-T6 gets you above heavy bolters.
yukishiro1 wrote: GW's approach to transports is so weird. Compare a raider to an immolator, it's literally comical. The raider transports 5 more models, it flys, it moves faster, it's open topped, it has a better gun, and a better invuln. It even fights a little bit in melee!
Meanwhile, the only advantages the immolator has is +1T and +1 save. And it costs 30 points more.
Which is even more hilarious when you consider that going from T6-T7 is the single least meaningful toughness transition in the game. At least going from T5-T6 gets you above heavy bolters.
I'm not going to say the Immolator is worth it's current point value, but I think it is safe to say three Heavy Bolters are better than one Dark Lance. I suspect the only target the Dark Lance is better against is ironically T7 3+ Save
So I'm going to just toss it out here, but I think Argent Shroud is worse than people think for one reason: it only works on normal moves and advances. This means it can't work on disembarks as those are not normal moves.
Got my first game (1250 points) in with the new codex. Against the new Ad Mech, we both had a lot to keep track of, haha. They have even more rules than we do. Played a fun list centred around dealing mortal wounds with Ebon Chalice, Brazier on my Canoness, Storm Bolter Dominions and the Triumph. The list was fun and had a quite potent turn 1 damage potential.
Regarding the Triumph, I just wanted to try out in its new form. It's one of my favorite models but really took a hit in the new book I think. Most of its utility is severly limited now, in trade for character protection and a more lenient degradation bracket. Looking at the profile it felt like it's mostly a beat stick and 5 points for WWSWF, but it's not even a particularly strong beatstick. It does some neat things, but at 220 points, that seems just too much. Does anyone have different experiences with it?
Not sure if it was obvious to others btw, but Mortifiers now generate Miracle Dice for Vengeance. It used to be Act of Faith units, but has been changed to Adepta Sororitas units that trigger Vengeance. Quite a relevant change that benefits the Mortifiers in my opinion.
I'm assuming that many will just ditch armour and run MSU sister AS squads anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I know most don't like the Minoris traits, but is Raging Fervour/Guided by Emperor's Will the best of the bunch?
ClockworkZion wrote: So I'm going to just toss it out here, but I think Argent Shroud is worse than people think for one reason: it only works on normal moves and advances. This means it can't work on disembarks as those are not normal moves.
It does work fine even if you disembark. Read the actual text of the rules. A disembark doesn't prevent you from making a Normal Move or Advance after disembarking. The AR rule says that if you make a Normal Move or Advance, you count as remaining stationary. Not that the move you make is treated as if you didn't move. Those are the not the same thing. Even if you would have otherwise counted as moving, by making the Normal Move or Advance, you now count as stationary.
The only way you wouldn't get it is if you disembarked then did not make a Normal Move or Advance after disembarking. Which you would never do, because you don't even have to move to do a Normal Move or an Advance, you just declare it and it counts as having happened, even if you don't actually move any distance.
The Triumph is a force multiplier, so you have to lean into what it's doing and work with large units or at least a bubble of several units to get the best effect from it.
ClockworkZion wrote: The Triumph is a force multiplier, so you have to lean into what it's doing and work with large units or at least a bubble of several units to get the best effect from it.
Other than the +1 to hit in combat, what does it multiply? That's a bit my issue. It used to allow for an extra AoF, which was really handy. Now it makes a miracle dice a 6 for CORE only... Such an unnecessary nerf in my opinion.
Speaking of which, I was wondering if people found anything that lets you use multiple miracle dice per phase other than Simulacrums. I haven't found anything myself, but perhaps/hopefully I missed something. I wish the Cherub dice was it's own thing, not just a different kind of dice for the once per phase AoF limit (that's correct, right?).
ClockworkZion wrote: The Triumph is a force multiplier, so you have to lean into what it's doing and work with large units or at least a bubble of several units to get the best effect from it.
Other than the +1 to hit in combat, what does it multiply? That's a bit my issue. It used to allow for an extra AoF, which was really handy. Now it makes a miracle dice a 6 for CORE only... Such an unnecessary nerf in my opinion.
Speaking of which, I was wondering if people found anything that lets you use multiple miracle dice per phase other than Simulacrums. I haven't found anything myself, but perhaps/hopefully I missed something. I wish the Cherub dice was it's own thing, not just a different kind of dice for the once per phase AoF limit (that's correct, right?).
Core is everything other than a character and tanks in the Sisters book.
So it auto-passes morale for units in 6" (great for bricks of Sisters), gives +1 to hit rolls for melee attack (great for 10 or more women sized units), a miracle die of 1 can be used as a 6 which can be helpful for games where you have a lot of mediocre miracle dice, and since it has all the rites of battle it at least gets a better deny the witch test which can help the army as well.
ClockworkZion wrote: The Triumph is a force multiplier, so you have to lean into what it's doing and work with large units or at least a bubble of several units to get the best effect from it.
Other than the +1 to hit in combat, what does it multiply? That's a bit my issue. It used to allow for an extra AoF, which was really handy. Now it makes a miracle dice a 6 for CORE only... Such an unnecessary nerf in my opinion.
Speaking of which, I was wondering if people found anything that lets you use multiple miracle dice per phase other than Simulacrums. I haven't found anything myself, but perhaps/hopefully I missed something. I wish the Cherub dice was it's own thing, not just a different kind of dice for the once per phase AoF limit (that's correct, right?).
It is a VERY hidden rule, but the cherubins do not count toward the limit of AoF per phase.
ClockworkZion wrote: The Triumph is a force multiplier, so you have to lean into what it's doing and work with large units or at least a bubble of several units to get the best effect from it.
A +1 to hit in melee and battleshock protection aura do not a 'force multiplier' make. She's a 6" footslogger that only buffs combat units and can't go in a transport. You lose more trying to stay within 6 than you gain with +1 to hit.
Yeah, Cherubs operate likeAoF, but are notAoF for any rule that applies to AoF such as limitations or Sacred Rose's ability to recycle AoF dice on a 4+.
ClockworkZion wrote: The Triumph is a force multiplier, so you have to lean into what it's doing and work with large units or at least a bubble of several units to get the best effect from it.
Other than the +1 to hit in combat, what does it multiply? That's a bit my issue. It used to allow for an extra AoF, which was really handy. Now it makes a miracle dice a 6 for CORE only... Such an unnecessary nerf in my opinion.
Speaking of which, I was wondering if people found anything that lets you use multiple miracle dice per phase other than Simulacrums. I haven't found anything myself, but perhaps/hopefully I missed something. I wish the Cherub dice was it's own thing, not just a different kind of dice for the once per phase AoF limit (that's correct, right?).
Core is everything other than a character and tanks in the Sisters book.
So it auto-passes morale for units in 6" (great for bricks of Sisters), gives +1 to hit rolls for melee attack (great for 10 or more women sized units), a miracle die of 1 can be used as a 6 which can be helpful for games where you have a lot of mediocre miracle dice, and since it has all the rites of battle it at least gets a better deny the witch test which can help the army as well.
We have more effective ways of dodging morale, you could autohit with any unit that's okay with moving up field as slow as the Triumph does and they would still be bad at melee, a worse miracle dice manipulation than the Dialogus has, 1 33% chance deny the witch and 5 total miracle dice over the course of 5 turns (6 if your opponent bothers to kill it before the end of the game).
She's a force multiplier that doesn't multiply any forces.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ClockworkZion wrote: So I'm going to just toss it out here, but I think Argent Shroud is worse than people think for one reason: it only works on normal moves and advances. This means it can't work on disembarks as those are not normal moves.
A model disembarks within 3" and then may act normally for the rest of the turn, which is how units can still move after disembarking. There isn't a disembark move. Disembarking happens, then moving happens.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: I'm assuming that many will just ditch armour and run MSU sister AS squads anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I know most don't like the Minoris traits, but is Raging Fervour/Guided by Emperor's Will the best of the bunch?
If that's the melta/ Argent shroud one yes. That's the only one that really has a specific use you couldn't do better with one of the stock orders.
Yeah the Triumph went from being an awesome, totally unique model that let you do all sorts of cool stuff to something that costs you a ton of points for very little effect. All the good rules it had got nerfed, and in return it got character protection that doesn't matter any more because it doesn't actually really do anything.
ClockworkZion wrote: Yeah, Cherubs operate likeAoF, but are notAoF for any rule that applies to AoF such as limitations or Sacred Rose's ability to recycle AoF dice on a 4+.
Are you sure this is correct? When I first read through the 9th codex, this is how I thought it worked. But then I checked and the 8th has the same wording. I surely didn't play it like a Cherub allows for an additional Act of Faith back then. The wording on the Simulacrum is also quite specific saying you can use an AoF in addition, whereas the Cherub just allows you to use its dice for an AoF. That implies it would be your "once per phase" AoF that you now use a Cherub dice for instead of a miracle dice. I'd be really happy to be wrong, but I doubt I am.
Yeah, really don't think that interpretation is correct. It says you can perform one AoF using the cherub dice as if it was a miracle dice. The limitation of one per phase is one AoF per phase, not one miracle dice per phase. The cherub rules say that using the cherub dice is performing an AoF, so it would count as your one per phase.
yukishiro1 wrote: Yeah the Triumph went from being an awesome, totally unique model that let you do all sorts of cool stuff to something that costs you a ton of points for very little effect. All the good rules it had got nerfed, and in return it got character protection that doesn't matter any more because it doesn't actually really do anything.
Well, the model is still great and unique . It's rules are kind of unique, but just a lot more meh... A real shame because we'll probably be stuck with this datasheet for quite some years now :(. It's decent for WWSWF, I suppose that's something. With miracle dice generation being limited as it is, that is still one of the best relics that it has. I really hope it turns out to be useful in the long run, but it's just sad that some of the most interesting rules it had will be gone for a while.
ERJAK wrote: We have more effective ways of dodging morale, you could autohit with any unit that's okay with moving up field as slow as the Triumph does and they would still be bad at melee, a worse miracle dice manipulation than the Dialogus has, 1 33% chance deny the witch and 5 total miracle dice over the course of 5 turns (6 if your opponent bothers to kill it before the end of the game).
She's a force multiplier that doesn't multiply any forces.
Incorrect. She is a force multiplier, but her impact on the army has been reduced making her a less efficienct one than before.
ClockworkZion wrote: So I'm going to just toss it out here, but I think Argent Shroud is worse than people think for one reason: it only works on normal moves and advances. This means it can't work on disembarks as those are not normal moves.
A model disembarks within 3" and then may act normally for the rest of the turn, which is how units can still move after disembarking. There isn't a disembark move. Disembarking happens, then moving happens.
Disembark forces you to count as moving though, which isn't overwritten by Deeds Not Words as that only affects Normal Moves and Advancing.
ClockworkZion wrote: Yeah, Cherubs operate likeAoF, but are notAoF for any rule that applies to AoF such as limitations or Sacred Rose's ability to recycle AoF dice on a 4+.
Are you sure this is correct? When I first read through the 9th codex, this is how I thought it worked. But then I checked and the 8th has the same wording. I surely didn't play it like a Cherub allows for an additional Act of Faith back then. The wording on the Simulacrum is also quite specific saying you can use an AoF in addition, whereas the Cherub just allows you to use its dice for an AoF. That implies it would be your "once per phase" AoF that you now use a Cherub dice for instead of a miracle dice. I'd be really happy to be wrong, but I doubt I am.
Fair catch. Cherubs give extra dice that don't count as Miracle Dice for MD related effects, not let you do extra AoF.
yukishiro1 wrote: Yeah the Triumph went from being an awesome, totally unique model that let you do all sorts of cool stuff to something that costs you a ton of points for very little effect. All the good rules it had got nerfed, and in return it got character protection that doesn't matter any more because it doesn't actually really do anything.
Makes me happy I used mine to make terrain, and support characters.
ClockworkZion wrote: So I'm going to just toss it out here, but I think Argent Shroud is worse than people think for one reason: it only works on normal moves and advances. This means it can't work on disembarks as those are not normal moves.
A model disembarks within 3" and then may act normally for the rest of the turn, which is how units can still move after disembarking. There isn't a disembark move. Disembarking happens, then moving happens.
Disembark forces you to count as moving though, which isn't overwritten by Deeds Not Words as that only affects Normal Moves and Advancing.
Wrong; Deeds Not Words does overwrite disembarking, as long as you make a Normal Move or Advance after disembarking (which you always will). I explained this in detail above.
ClockworkZion wrote: So I'm going to just toss it out here, but I think Argent Shroud is worse than people think for one reason: it only works on normal moves and advances. This means it can't work on disembarks as those are not normal moves.
A model disembarks within 3" and then may act normally for the rest of the turn, which is how units can still move after disembarking. There isn't a disembark move. Disembarking happens, then moving happens.
Disembark forces you to count as moving though, which isn't overwritten by Deeds Not Words as that only affects Normal Moves and Advancing.
Wrong; Deeds Not Words does overwrite disembarking, as long as you make a Normal Move or Advance after disembarking (which you always will). I explained this in detail above.
Nope. Still don't agree. Deeds not Words is too specific to Normal Moves and Advancing while Disembarking says you ALWAYS count as having moved until the end of the turn.
You're free to disagree, but you're wrong. As long as you make a Normal Move or Advance, then you count as stationary per the rule. Did you make a Normal Move or Advance? If yes, Deeds Not Words kicks in. It does not say "when you make a Normal Move or Advance, do not consider that particular move as being a move, but you still count as moving if you had any other reason to be considered moving." It says if you trigger it, you then count as stationary, period.
The disembark rule, unlike the reinforcements rule, does not say that it overrides any other rule that would allow you to count as Remaining Stationary, it just says you count as moving, even if you do not otherwise move. If it was included in the FAQ on Remains Stationary like Reinforcements and Redeployed units are, you would be right, but it isn't, so you are not right.
bullyboy wrote: I'm assuming that many will just ditch armour and run MSU sister AS squads anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I know most don't like the Minoris traits, but is Raging Fervour/Guided by Emperor's Will the best of the bunch?
I'm not expecting the list to be good, but I've been toying with a triple detachment list that runs Raging Fervor/Guided, Unshakable Vengeance/Guided, and Rites of Fire/Guided just to see what I can come up with.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: We have more effective ways of dodging morale, you could autohit with any unit that's okay with moving up field as slow as the Triumph does and they would still be bad at melee, a worse miracle dice manipulation than the Dialogus has, 1 33% chance deny the witch and 5 total miracle dice over the course of 5 turns (6 if your opponent bothers to kill it before the end of the game).
While I agree with most of what you said, where are you getting a 1.33% chance of denying? We auto-deny on a 6 now regardless of what their roll actually is, and the Sacred Rite makes the Triumph deny on 5s. Irrespective of what our opponent's roll is, that's always a 1/6 or 1/3 chance whereas before we only denied on a 6 and only if they rolled a 5.
I want to point out that with how rare Miracle Dice have become, much less ones not tied to anything like being only used by a character with Beacon of Faith that the Miracle Die generation is more important than before, even if we get less of them over all. Probably worth considering if you want to go for Leap of Faith.
Leap of Faith is a trap unless you're using using SR IMO, miracle dice are too valuable to have to churn to score secondary points, especially when you basically have to churn them on your opponent's turn when they're generally far less valuable.
yukishiro1 wrote: Leap of Faith is a trap unless you're using using SR IMO, miracle dice are too valuable to have to churn to score secondary points, especially when you basically have to churn them on your opponent's turn when they're generally far less valuable.
I obviously haven't tested it, but I feel like it's not a bad pick for OML since you can get access to more dice (less than SR, but it's not hard to have more).
Question for the rules aficionados here. Could the Miracle dice generated with Beacon of Faith be discarded to turn another Miracle dice into a 6 for the Ebon Chalice or Perverfid Belief trait? Beacon of Faith says the dice can "only be used when your warlord performs an Act of Faith or uses a Miraculous ability." As written, it prevents me from using it for anything else, but does that include discarding the dice (which is never referred to as using a Miracle dice)? I highly doubt this loophole is intended, but with GW you almost never really know for sure what's an error and what is intentional. With miracle dice being limited as they are now, I was looking through the codex to see if there was anything more I could get out of my units and I found this. Curious to know what you guys think.
Even if you can't discard it, I don't see anything that would stop you discarding the _other_ dice and turning the rolled one into a 6. The result is the same in the end.
shabadoit wrote: Even if you can't discard it, I don't see anything that would stop you discarding the _other_ dice and turning the rolled one into a 6. The result is the same in the end.
It's not.
If the Beacon of Fatih Miracle dice cannot be discarded, then they are limited utility to only the warlord, whereas if they can be used to convert "normal" Miracle dice to 6's then those 6's can benefit the rest of the army.
Now if it is the other way round and you can only discard the normal Miracle dice to boost the Beacon of Fatih to 6's, then that is still less useful, as only the Warlord can take advantage of those 6's.
I suppose you can use always 6's for Beacon of Faith for a warlord that never misses or misfires with their plasma pistol. For the 40K universe, surviving one's own plasma weapon may be miraculous after all.
'Discard (Miracle dice): If a rule says you must discard one or more miracle dice... Dicarding a Miracle dice does not count as having used a miracle dice for the purposes of any rules that are triggered by using a miracle dice to perform an act of faith.'
Now, it's up to you whether a limitation on who the dice can be used for counts as one of those rules?
So the 40k app updated Paragons (courtesy of the Sisters Discord):
If you go into the unit entry proper it says "0" for points but the army builder costs the unit.
shabadoit wrote: Even if you can't discard it, I don't see anything that would stop you discarding the _other_ dice and turning the rolled one into a 6. The result is the same in the end.
It's not.
If the Beacon of Fatih Miracle dice cannot be discarded, then they are limited utility to only the warlord, whereas if they can be used to convert "normal" Miracle dice to 6's then those 6's can benefit the rest of the army.
Now if it is the other way round and you can only discard the normal Miracle dice to boost the Beacon of Fatih to 6's, then that is still less useful, as only the Warlord can take advantage of those 6's.
Ah yeah - you're right. I can see where the confusing comes in, I think the Glossary actually supports discard being a 'use' in all the non-mentioned scenarios though, and the wording of Beacon seems to suggest that too, so that would prevent it being used to boost a dice on another unit (but allow it to boost one for the warlord herself).
Not saying that it couldn't be read the other way, but I think it's a stretch.
yukishiro1 wrote: If the app conflicts with the codex, doesn't the codex still prevail? I demand I still get my 240 points per model, immune to damage 1 nonsense!
There is no FAQ change at this point. Are you saying the app is the actual real source of the rules, not the codex (with any FAQs)? Can you point me to some statement that says that? The app has been "wrong" a lot in the past in terms of it having typos and errors, should we have been playing with the app's version of the rules all along instead of assuming they were errors and going by what the actual documents themselves say?
yukishiro1 wrote: There is no FAQ change at this point. Are you saying the app is the actual real source of the rules, not the codex (with any FAQs)? Can you point me to some statement that says that?
Oh knock it off. There is no point in engaging in pointless cheesedickery when we have clear proof of actual intent.
I'm not arguing about this particular point, I'm genuinely curious about which is the real source of rules since you seemed to say it's the app. If you don't know the answer to the question that's fine, just say so (or don't answer at all if you prefer).
yukishiro1 wrote: I'm not arguing about this particular point, I'm genuinely curious about which is the real source of rules since you seemed to say it's the app. If you don't know the answer to the question that's fine, just say so (or don't answer at all if you prefer).
I'm saying that the codex is not the final source of rules. Yes, we don't have an FAQ yet but the app has been pretty good about reflecting the FAQ. Besides, non-English copies of the codex reportedly list Paragons as 80ppm which means any hope for them to cost more than a landraider in exchange for being immune to D1 is a lost cause.
It's GW's official app, not a third party source, just get over it already and accept that the way we assumed it will work is the the way it works.
What part of "I'm not arguing this particular example" didn't you get? Of course they're 80 points, of course they don't ignore 1 damage.
My question was about your claim that the app is the official rules source, not the Codex with its FAQs. It sounds like you don't have any actual support for that claim, which I guess answers my question in a roundabout way.
yukishiro1 wrote: What part of "I'm not arguing this particular example" didn't you get? Of course they're 80 points, of course they don't ignore 1 damage.
My question was about your claim that the app is the official rules source, not the Codex with its FAQs. It sounds like you don't have any actual support for that claim, which I guess answers my question in a roundabout way.
It's sold on the grounds of being an official rules source, so where are you getting thus idea that it's not?
All I said was that the app tends to reflect FAQs and you started trying to debunk the app as being a place to get rules. To quote GW's own site the app is "ALL YOUR RULES IN THE PALM OF YOUR HAND" which is a far cry from your claim that it isn't a source of rules.
The question isn't whether it's official, the question is how you resolve a case where the app says one thing and the Codex + FAQ says something else. Does the app prevail, or does the Codex with any FAQs prevail?
There have been multiple instances of the app not having complete info, not allowing legal combinations from the Codex, etc. We've always resolved that as the app being wrong, with the Codex + FAQs being the official rules. I was curious if we were wrong to do that, and if we should have been treating those things as illegal choices until the app was updated to allow them. It sounds like the answer is you don't know, which is fine, though it would have saved everybody a bunch of time if you had just said so the first time.
yukishiro1 wrote: The question isn't whether it's official, the question is how you resolve a case where the app says one thing and the Codex + FAQ says something else. Does the app prevail, or does the Codex with any FAQs prevail?
There have been multiple instances of the app not having complete info, not allowing legal combinations from the Codex, etc. We've always resolved that as the app being wrong, with the Codex + FAQs being the official rules. I was curious if we were wrong to do that, and if we should have been treating those things as illegal choices until the app was updated to allow them. It sounds like the answer is you don't know, which is fine, though it would have saved everybody a bunch of time if you had just said so the first time.
Sounded more like you were trying to attack me for bring up that the app had updated rules and debunk it as legitimate source of rules which was why I was up in arms.
Look, I shared this because it clearly communicates intent and confirms something we assumed. If you want to wait for the FAQ it'll be out in July.
I can't control if you interpret a question as an attack, but it certainly wasn't my intent.
I do think the app is questionable as a reliable rules source, and except in a case like this where it's obvious which is correct, I would not take the app's word over what the Codex and FAQs actually say if there is a conflict.
Looking over the updated point costs the Immolator has me scratching my head. I have one since I've always liked the idea of a transport with a mighty flamer but it seems very expensive.
When would you recommend taking the Immolator over a Rhino?
The Red Hobbit wrote: Looking over the updated point costs the Immolator has me scratching my head. I have one since I've always liked the idea of a transport with a mighty flamer but it seems very expensive.
When would you recommend taking the Immolator over a Rhino?
Not really, but I have never have given a lot of stock to the Immolator.
It's amazing how people are holding up the app as some form of holy grail of rules. It's not even close to BS, and that's a free app done by half the staff on their time off!
The Red Hobbit wrote: Looking over the updated point costs the Immolator has me scratching my head. I have one since I've always liked the idea of a transport with a mighty flamer but it seems very expensive.
When would you recommend taking the Immolator over a Rhino?
Honestly to me the order goes: Rhino, then Outflank everything, then footslog, then Immolator.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: It's amazing how people are holding up the app as some form of holy grail of rules. It's not even close to BS, and that's a free app done by half the staff on their time off!
One is a first party product, the other is third party and is also inaccurate at times. But let's not making this about slagging on the app.
Honestly all tanks are overcosted, but the Immolator is one of the worst in the book. We pay too much for what is supposed to be durable platform across the book, but adding a transport surcharge on top only makes it worse.
Rhino is 80 points, has 10 person transport capacity, same statline. Immolator has 4 less transport, gets 40 points more guns even if you weigh the HB and flamers at 15 points each rather than the 10 they cost on infantry (and subtract for missing the storm bolter), yet costs 45 more points. Doesn't make any sense - it's paying 5 more points than it should even if it had a 10 man transport capacity, even with the vehicle tax.
yukishiro1 wrote: Rhino is 80 points, has 10 person transport capacity, same statline. Immolator has 4 less transport, gets 40 points more guns even if you weigh the HB and flamers at 15 points each rather than the 10 they cost on infantry (and subtract for missing the storm bolter), yet costs 45 more points. Doesn't make any sense - it's paying 5 more points than it should even if it had a 10 man transport capacity, even with the vehicle tax.
Yeah, it's a bit of a mess. I think GW is trying to put a surcharge onto platforms that have heavy weapons and transport capacity (much like how they over charge for the Land Raider) which would make sense if it didn't come with a trade off of being forced to fit less in side already. 10-15 points over the Rhino would have been fine. 20 tops.
yukishiro1 wrote: Rhino is 80 points, has 10 person transport capacity, same statline. Immolator has 4 less transport, gets 40 points more guns even if you weigh the HB and flamers at 15 points each rather than the 10 they cost on infantry (and subtract for missing the storm bolter), yet costs 45 more points. Doesn't make any sense - it's paying 5 more points than it should even if it had a 10 man transport capacity, even with the vehicle tax.
Yeah, it's a bit of a mess. I think GW is trying to put a surcharge onto platforms that have heavy weapons and transport capacity (much like how they over charge for the Land Raider) which would make sense if it didn't come with a trade off of being forced to fit less in side already. 10-15 points over the Rhino would have been fine. 20 tops.
Even then, that still puts the MM version at 140 which is just too high. The baseline chassis is worse than a rhino, so it should be worth less. Then add the heavy bolter and subtract the stormbolter and the chassis should end up being 85 at the max with the MM version clocking in at 125.
HBs/flamers on vehicles seem to be costed at 15 points in 9th, with multimelta at 25, and no discount for twin-linked any more. So a base cost of 85 + weapon choice would end up at 115 for the flamer version, or 135 for the MM, which still feels too high.
I think the end values should be 105 for the flamer version, or 125 for the melta version. Even that's on the edge IMO, which shows how truly absurdly overcosted it is right now.
yukishiro1 wrote: Rhino is 80 points, has 10 person transport capacity, same statline. Immolator has 4 less transport, gets 40 points more guns even if you weigh the HB and flamers at 15 points each rather than the 10 they cost on infantry (and subtract for missing the storm bolter), yet costs 45 more points. Doesn't make any sense - it's paying 5 more points than it should even if it had a 10 man transport capacity, even with the vehicle tax.
Yeah, it's a bit of a mess. I think GW is trying to put a surcharge onto platforms that have heavy weapons and transport capacity (much like how they over charge for the Land Raider) which would make sense if it didn't come with a trade off of being forced to fit less in side already. 10-15 points over the Rhino would have been fine. 20 tops.
Even then, that still puts the MM version at 140 which is just too high. The baseline chassis is worse than a rhino, so it should be worth less. Then add the heavy bolter and subtract the stormbolter and the chassis should end up being 85 at the max with the MM version clocking in at 125.
I said 20 points max over the Rhino. The Rhino is 80 that means it'd be 100 points total before upgrades. That's 20 points cheaper than it is now. That'd make a MM Immolator 130 points which is 5 points more than what you suggest.
yukishiro1 wrote: Rhino is 80 points, has 10 person transport capacity, same statline. Immolator has 4 less transport, gets 40 points more guns even if you weigh the HB and flamers at 15 points each rather than the 10 they cost on infantry (and subtract for missing the storm bolter), yet costs 45 more points. Doesn't make any sense - it's paying 5 more points than it should even if it had a 10 man transport capacity, even with the vehicle tax.
Yeah, it's a bit of a mess. I think GW is trying to put a surcharge onto platforms that have heavy weapons and transport capacity (much like how they over charge for the Land Raider) which would make sense if it didn't come with a trade off of being forced to fit less in side already. 10-15 points over the Rhino would have been fine. 20 tops.
Even then, that still puts the MM version at 140 which is just too high. The baseline chassis is worse than a rhino, so it should be worth less. Then add the heavy bolter and subtract the stormbolter and the chassis should end up being 85 at the max with the MM version clocking in at 125.
I said 20 points max over the Rhino. The Rhino is 80 that means it'd be 100 points total before upgrades. That's 20 points cheaper than it is now. That'd make a MM Immolator 130 points which is 5 points more than what you suggest.
Is the MM only 30? My bad then. Thought it was still 40.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CleansingFire wrote: Immolators are fielded under the rule of cool. Roll forward, flambe the enemy, ram whats left, then explode.
Unless you go second, then they skip the first 3 steps.
yukishiro1 wrote: If the app conflicts with the codex, doesn't the codex still prevail? I demand I still get my 240 points per model, immune to damage 1 nonsense!
As far as I'm concerned the App isn't an official document. Once an actual FAQ comes out then I'll change.
Space Marine Razorbacks are in pretty much the same boat as the Immolator, except not quite as bad. And nobody takes those either. I guess Geedubs doesn't want us to buy their expensive vehicle model kits.
ZergSmasher wrote: Space Marine Razorbacks are in pretty much the same boat as the Immolator, except not quite as bad. And nobody takes those either. I guess Geedubs doesn't want us to buy their expensive vehicle model kits.
I doubt that's the case. It's more likely they don't want to put the points into a freefall since continual points drops are worse for the game.
There are other ways to fix the problem but that requires playtesting and a massive overhaul game wide.
GW loves cutting prices as the edition goes on. That way they can raise them by 15% again when the new edition comes out to great fanfare about how it'll make the hobby cheaper and create less clutter on the board.
yukishiro1 wrote: GW loves cutting prices as the edition goes on. That way they can raise them by 15% again when the new edition comes out to great fanfare about how it'll make the hobby cheaper and create less clutter on the board.
Trick never fails.
Eh, they seem to do more point raises in response to the community feedback than they used to.
yukishiro1 wrote: GW loves cutting prices as the edition goes on. That way they can raise them by 15% again when the new edition comes out to great fanfare about how it'll make the hobby cheaper and create less clutter on the board.
Wanted to make sure I'm understanding the Ecclesiarchy Battle Conclave correctly.
So if the army contains a Ministorum Priest such as a Missionary or Preacher than certain models do not take up a slot in your detachment such as Crusaders and Death Cult Assassins. I want to make sure I have this right for the BSF models.
Taddeus the Purifier - Is a Priest and Ministorum so he should satisfy the requirement.
Gotfred de Montbard - A Crusader and does not take up a slot provided the EBC is in effect.
Pious Vorne - Does not have EBC rules and still takes up a slot.
Please let me know if I understood that correctly. Thanks
Correct on all fronts since Gotfred has the EBC rule. However, these models currently do not have the Cult Imperials, Unaligned, or Agent of the Imperium keywords so their presence breaks detachment rules now. They also don't get access to Hymns of Battle .
Additional point: you can make Taddeus using the regular Missionary and Vorne can be built using the Preacher dataslate so you can run them in your army more easily now.
So I was listening to the Forge the Narrative podcast cover part 2 of their look into the Sisters codex and hearing some discussion about the rhino rush that Dominions used to perform had me thinking that there is a not insignificant chance that we're paying a surcharge on our vehicles due to the buffing affect Argent Shroud has on them.
Taikishi wrote: Correct on all fronts since Gotfred has the EBC rule. However, these models currently do not have the Cult Imperials, Unaligned, or Agent of the Imperium keywords so their presence breaks detachment rules now. They also don't get access to Hymns of Battle .
Ah shoot, that's a shame since I really like the BSF models. Do you think thats an oversight or intentional? If it's an oversight I hope it doesn't wind up like Valerian and Aleya where it doesn't get fixed for an extremely long period of time.
The rules for the condemnor boltguns' mortal wounds say something along the lines of "when an attack is allocated to a psyker" (away from books right now so I don't remember the exact phrasing).
-Guardsman- wrote: The rules for the condemnor boltguns' mortal wounds say something along the lines of "when an attack is allocated to a psyker" (away from books right now so I don't remember the exact phrasing).
At what stage is an attack "allocated"?
It says 'Psyker model,' so just before saves are made. It's not well said though.
ClockworkZion wrote: So I was listening to the Forge the Narrative podcast cover part 2 of their look into the Sisters codex and hearing some discussion about the rhino rush that Dominions used to perform had me thinking that there is a not insignificant chance that we're paying a surcharge on our vehicles due to the buffing affect Argent Shroud has on them.
I think Argent Shroud is a sleeper hit. Average 15" of movement (16" if you take the +1 to advance sacred rite) on our vehicles and jump pack infantry and can still fire all weapons without penalty? Throw some Dominions into an Immolator for 22" of twin multi-melta goodness? I've got some things I want to try.
-Guardsman- wrote: The rules for the condemnor boltguns' mortal wounds say something along the lines of "when an attack is allocated to a psyker" (away from books right now so I don't remember the exact phrasing).
At what stage is an attack "allocated"?
After the attack succeeds - hit roll, wound roll, successful attacks are allocated.
Lammia wrote: It says 'Psyker model,' so just before saves are made. It's not well said though.
Okay, yeah, they definitely didn't phrase it as clearly as they could have. I first read "when an attack is allocated to a psyker model" as "when a psyker model is selected as a target", but I knew that couldn't possibly be the meaning. Maybe they should have said "when a successful wound is rolled against a psyker model".
Thanks.
Edit: Wow, people have actually been arguing over the "240 pts/model" thing? Unbelievable.
Lammia wrote: It says 'Psyker model,' so just before saves are made. It's not well said though.
Okay, yeah, they definitely didn't phrase it as clearly as they could have. I first read "when an attack is allocated to a psyker model" as "when a psyker model is selected as a target", but I knew that couldn't possibly be the meaning. Maybe they should have said "when a successful wound is rolled".
That's not right either though. It's after that, when the model is chosen to be the one to make the save.
Taikishi wrote: Correct on all fronts since Gotfred has the EBC rule. However, these models currently do not have the Cult Imperials, Unaligned, or Agent of the Imperium keywords so their presence breaks detachment rules now. They also don't get access to Hymns of Battle .
Ah shoot, that's a shame since I really like the BSF models. Do you think thats an oversight or intentional? If it's an oversight I hope it doesn't wind up like Valerian and Aleya where it doesn't get fixed for an extremely long period of time.
Are any of the Elite-slot characters (Imagifier, Hospitaller, etc.) actually worth taking? Most of them seem fairly overpriced, IMO. The new Dogmata is the price of a fully kitted-out Canoness.
-Guardsman- wrote: Are any of the Elite-slot characters (Imagifier, Hospitaller, etc.) actually worth taking? Most of them seem fairly overpriced, IMO. The new Dogmata is the price of a fully kitted-out Canoness.
Dogmata can make Smashmata if you're feeling silly, but honestly she has a wide range of buff utility (plus she can let a unit perform an action and still shoot) so being cheap makes sense. The Dialogus has a lot of utility in letting you change Faith Dice and has access to all the prayers like the Dogmata. Imagifier still has good utility since she hands out +1S, and the Hospitaller returns D3 dead infantry core for 1CP which is great for units like Sacrosancts or Retributors. Plus she hands out a FNP bubble.
All the characters are there to enhance anything you're building around towards though and aren't a combo by themselves.
-Guardsman- wrote: Are any of the Elite-slot characters (Imagifier, Hospitaller, etc.) actually worth taking? Most of them seem fairly overpriced, IMO. The new Dogmata is the price of a fully kitted-out Canoness.
Even if the 3+ has a chance to let you down, Hymns are pretty hot. Trading those, Shoot-while-Actioning Aura, and ObSec Aura for Re-roll 1's to hit Aura, +1W, and a bit better melee potential is pretty solid.
The Red Hobbit wrote: Yeah but it unfortunately took several FAQs and a bout a year before they finally fixed the keyword issue for Valerian and Aleya.
Hopefully it takes less than a year for these models.
Tadeous is still playable in a second detatchment but him in a patrol with him and another priest
Sure you lose miracle dice and 1 battle sister squad loses order convictions and obsec it ain't that bad him and the priest then gain 6" auras of +1a. And you have slots for things that weren't getting bonuses anyway
Entertaingly you lose decree passive as a bonus so help yourself to extra priests
The wargear options for a Battle Sisters Squad are a bit confusingly phrased. Am I to understand that a 10-woman squad can carry 0-3 special weapons and 0-2 heavy weapons, not to exceed 3 weapons in both categories put together?
edit: Oh hey, you're right, it does look like technically you can still use acts of faith even if you aren't pure, you just can't gain the dice from the normal sources. That's really odd, and interesting.
Still wouldn't make taking those models viable, but it's interesting for souping that you can still use some acts of faith if you generate them other ways.
yukishiro1 wrote: You can't use acts of faith at all unless your army is pure. The whole system goes away. Even if you can get miracle dice from other sources, you can't actually use them.
" acts of faith
Once per phase one unit from your army with this ability can perform one act of faith to do so you will use miracle dice"
"Gaining miracle dice
If every unit from your army has the adepta soriortas keyword excluding.... "
Acts of faith are not contingent on being a sororitas keyword just on the unit having the ability on it's datasheet
-Guardsman- wrote: The wargear options for a Battle Sisters Squad are a bit confusingly phrased. Am I to understand that a 10-woman squad can carry 0-3 special weapons and 0-2 heavy weapons, not to exceed 3 weapons in both categories put together?
You are not to understand that.
0-9 1 heavy or special.
10-19 1 special and 1 heavy or special
29 2 special and 2 heavy or special.
-Guardsman- wrote: The wargear options for a Battle Sisters Squad are a bit confusingly phrased. Am I to understand that a 10-woman squad can carry 0-3 special weapons and 0-2 heavy weapons, not to exceed 3 weapons in both categories put together?
No. 1 special or heavy from 1-9, a second special weapon at 10, and then a special or heavy and another special at 20.
Actually now that I'm reading the entry (codex litterally showed up after I hit post), yeah, 3 weapons at 10 looks like it's correct. That's a buff to 10 model units.
The reason for this is that the first 9 models unlocks 1 special or heavy and then there are TWO entries that kick in for "every 10 models" in the unit: 1 for special weapons, 1 for special or heavy weapons. That means at 10 models there would be three options available.
-Guardsman- wrote: Are any of the Elite-slot characters (Imagifier, Hospitaller, etc.) actually worth taking? Most of them seem fairly overpriced, IMO. The new Dogmata is the price of a fully kitted-out Canoness.
Even if the 3+ has a chance to let you down, Hymns are pretty hot. Trading those, Shoot-while-Actioning Aura, and ObSec Aura for Re-roll 1's to hit Aura, +1W, and a bit better melee potential is pretty solid.
Taking both as besties, though...
tbf, you're probably going to be using fiery orator for your prayers the majority of the time.
-Guardsman- wrote: The wargear options for a Battle Sisters Squad are a bit confusingly phrased. Am I to understand that a 10-woman squad can carry 0-3 special weapons and 0-2 heavy weapons, not to exceed 3 weapons in both categories put together?
No. 1 special or heavy from 1-9, a second special weapon at 10, and then a special or heavy and another special at 20.
Actually now that I'm reading the entry (codex litterally showed up after I hit post), yeah, 3 weapons at 10 looks like it's correct. That's a buff to 10 model units.
The reason for this is that the first 9 models unlocks 1 special or heavy and then there are TWO entries that kick in for "every 10 models" in the unit: 1 for special weapons, 1 for special or heavy weapons. That means at 10 models there would be three options available.
Isn't it "up to 9 models you get 1 special or heavy"?
You don't have access to that specific option if your 10 or more.
-Guardsman- wrote: The wargear options for a Battle Sisters Squad are a bit confusingly phrased. Am I to understand that a 10-woman squad can carry 0-3 special weapons and 0-2 heavy weapons, not to exceed 3 weapons in both categories put together?
No. 1 special or heavy from 1-9, a second special weapon at 10, and then a special or heavy and another special at 20.
Actually now that I'm reading the entry (codex litterally showed up after I hit post), yeah, 3 weapons at 10 looks like it's correct. That's a buff to 10 model units.
The reason for this is that the first 9 models unlocks 1 special or heavy and then there are TWO entries that kick in for "every 10 models" in the unit: 1 for special weapons, 1 for special or heavy weapons. That means at 10 models there would be three options available.
Isn't it "up to 9 models you get 1 special or heavy"?
You don't have access to that specific option if your 10 or more.
Looking again "9 or fewer".
So looks like 10 models aren't as good. Must have been too distracted by new book smell to notice the wording properly.
-Guardsman- wrote: The rules for the condemnor boltguns' mortal wounds say something along the lines of "when an attack is allocated to a psyker" (away from books right now so I don't remember the exact phrasing).
At what stage is an attack "allocated"?
It says 'Psyker model,' so just before saves are made. It's not well said though.
Actually it is. Problem is just differing wording to 8e. 9e rules has this step "3. allocate attack". So it actually is very clear...if you read rules with zero pre-ideas based on old editions which is very hard(I failed this one as well).
Wording is clear. It's just subtly different to 8e with wording even if actual steps are same.
-Guardsman- wrote: The wargear options for a Battle Sisters Squad are a bit confusingly phrased. Am I to understand that a 10-woman squad can carry 0-3 special weapons and 0-2 heavy weapons, not to exceed 3 weapons in both categories put together?
No. 1 special or heavy from 1-9, a second special weapon at 10, and then a special or heavy and another special at 20.
Actually now that I'm reading the entry (codex litterally showed up after I hit post), yeah, 3 weapons at 10 looks like it's correct. That's a buff to 10 model units.
The reason for this is that the first 9 models unlocks 1 special or heavy and then there are TWO entries that kick in for "every 10 models" in the unit: 1 for special weapons, 1 for special or heavy weapons. That means at 10 models there would be three options available.
You don't take them by steps. You take X amount of models and then go through options.
"If this unit contains 9 or fewer models". Well...your unit of 10 contains 10 models. It does not fit to that category.
So, what do we think is the best melee option for Paragon Warsuits (setting aside, for the moment, whether or not they are worth playing)? Reason I ask is because it doesn't look like it'll be easy to magnetize at all, in fact probably impossible to do so, ergo I want the best option for my suits. I'm leaning toward the maces actually; yes they suffer a hit penalty but 3 damage is very nice, and usually when I play them Morvenn will be around to give them the reroll buff, mitigating said penalty.
The other weapons look as though they should be pretty straightforward to magnetize, so no problems there.
yukishiro1 wrote: Losing miracle dice is not only "not that bad," it's basically a "why would you play this army any more?" sort of thing.
It doesnt stop you useing them or gaining them from non standard sources.
Battle Sanctum, repentia our martyred lady order conviction , beacon of faith
yukishiro1 wrote:edit: Oh hey, you're right, it does look like technically you can still use acts of faith even if you aren't pure, you just can't gain the dice from the normal sources. That's really odd, and interesting.
No, it breaks it from all sources. Keep reading after the Vengeance and Sacrifice: "Note that Miracle dice can also be gained via other rules. No matter the source, you can only gain Miracle dice from such a rule if every..." and then the exact same restrictions as on Vengeance and Sacrifice.
Soup doesn't break Acts of Faith, but it does break Miracle Dice from every source. The only way around this I see is Incensor Cherubs, who provide dice that aren't Miracle Dice but can be used for an Act of Faith as if they were.
However while you make a good RAI case in true GW style it doesn't work under RAW
The convention is that army wide rules say you can't do something
And model specific rules say you can
Model specific rules override the general rules or they all do nothing.
E.g. the general rule is you can't charge after advancing but the penitent engine has a model specific rule saying it can so it can
Repentia have a specific rule that says when they die you gain a miracle dice this over rules the general rule that says you can only gain miracle dice from another source if you have a sorroritas detatchment
Logically it makes no sense what U02dah4 claims. Why would in the same book explicitly be mentioned you can't gain the miracle dice even through e.g. unit abilities, just for the datasheet of that unit to overrule that clause anyway? I didn't think there could be any confusion about this, but apparently there can be.
I was quite sure that GW has somewhere written that codex rules overrule the core rules. Which would make the Penitent Engines be able to advance and charge. Tried to look it up but no success though.
No there's not been a codex overrules core rule since 7th
Nor is there a blanket can vs cannot
Specific rules overule general in all instances or the game breaks down because their are 100's of instances of it.
I'm not saying it makes sense GW rules quite often don't or don't do what they think they do which is why their are so many faq's. I suspect that RAI they intended it to do what was written and prevent miracle dice being gained unless you have a sororitas detatchment
But RAW it doesn't do that and convention is RAW over RAI unless rai doesn't work.
It puts you in a position of saying that specific rule unlike all other specific rules doesn't overrule the general rules for no reason
Or it does nothing effectively after the first bit (where you don't gain miracle dice or gain the extra ways to gain miracle dice) x
I don't actually agree with your interpretation being RAW. First, you claim model rules override the general rules. Where is that written? How is that RAW? Saying they otherwise "all do nothing" is also an interpretation, not RAW.
Second, the book explicitely states "No matter the source, you can only gain Miracle dice from such a rule if every unit from your army has the Adepta Sororitas keyword (excluding ...)." The Repentia rule says you gain a miracle dice and refers to the page where the previous sentence is stated. Pretty clear, and RAW, that the Adepta Sororitas keyword clause is part of the gaining of a miracle dice.
After having looked up the exact wording, I fail to see how there can be any misinterpretation here.
If a rule says you can charge after advancing why does that overule the general rule that advancing models cannot charge after advancing
Why can assault weapons fire after advancing when the general rule is that they are ineligible to be selected
Why can units targeted by the fire overwatch stratagem fire overwatch when the general rule is you can't fire overwatch
Why does celestine reduce damage characteristics of attacks by 1 when the general rule is weapons deal the damage they specify
Why do repentia gain you a miracle dice when they die in a ministorum detachment when the general rule is they don't
Why do repentia gain miracle dice in a soriatas detatchment when the general rule is only characters that die gain you one
Why can celestial sacresants heroically intervene when the general is that only characters can do so.
I can provide 100s of answers like that no it isn't codified but if you don't do that almost no rules function so if your going to argue specific doesnt overule general by RAW can you explain all those interactions without resorting to specific overrules general and Why one is different to the others.
Yeah, "you can never do X no matter what" always overrides "you can do X" on a datasheet. If your subfaction rule said you can never advance and charge with units from this subfaction, and you have a unit that can normally advance and charge, it can't do so in the subfaction.
Another problem that I have with the rule that limits its application is that gaining miracle dice is part of the acts of faith rules box even accepting its wording as intended.
This is not an army wide rule it only applies to models with the acts of faith ability on their datasheet and some miracle dice generation occurs on units without acts of faith so the gaining miracle dice rule could be deemed not to apply to them e.g. Battle sanctum so these still function they don't have the acts of faith rule so the miracle keeps dice generation restriction doesnt apply to them
You stating that "RAW they can" doesn't make that statement true. I wholeheartedly disagree with your 'interpretation' of RAW. Every instance of gaining a miracle dice on a datasheet refers to page 91. There under "gaining miracle dice" it is explained how and what gaining a miracle dice is. In that section, a clause is included that you can only gain the miracle dice if all of your units are having the Adepted Sororitas keyword, excluding some exceptions. That is RAW. If you would gain a Miracle dice but don't comply with the clause, you do not gain the miracle dice.
You just choose to skip that paragraph and skip straight to the rolling of the dice. That is not RAW. I'll leave the discussion at this, because I for sure won't change my point of view and I doubt you will and it just clutters up this topic needlessly.
I agree that Cherub dice are something else and work just fine in a soup army. They have a different name for a reason after all.
Has anyone had any success bring an Ordo Malleus Inquisitor or Hector Rex in a Sisters Army? If so would you mind sharing how you made use of them in your army? Thanks
Celestians still get to take 2 special weapons in a 5-girl squad, right? I've been struggling to think how they can possibly justify their spot in the crowded elites slot, but 2 special weapons and 2 attacks each for only 1 point more than a Battle Sister isn't too bad if you have the slots to spare. Of course, for only a bit more you can get Dominions instead for twice as much firepower and in a much less contested slot...
Celestians and Dominions are very different units with very different uses. Dominions are for bringing a several special weapons to bear on a target as quickly as possible. Dominions are for protecting your characters along with quality shooting and quantity of melee attacks with some staying power (as opposed to Repentia that have lots of attacks with little staying power).
alextroy wrote: Celestians and Dominions are very different units with very different uses. Dominions are for bringing a several special weapons to bear on a target as quickly as possible. Dominions are for protecting your characters along with quality shooting and quantity of melee attacks with some staying power (as opposed to Repentia that have lots of attacks with little staying power).
I know it's a typo but I kinda think it illustrates the flaws of Celestians. Dominions are better at facilitating offense characters. With the changes to bodyguard making them essentially just ignore snipers(which have fallen out of vogue) dominions protect characters almost as well as celestians. Celestians have better melee, but that only matters in large bloody rose units where the difference isn't .5 wounds vs 1 wound. With the loss of imagifier's rend-1 ignore bubble, saying Celestians have 'staying power' is kind of a stretch.
Celestians try to be as good at shooting as dominions and as good at supporting melee characters as sacresants at the same time and just end up being bad at both.
alextroy wrote:Celestians and Dominions are very different units with very different uses. Dominions are for bringing a several special weapons to bear on a target as quickly as possible. Dominions are for protecting your characters along with quality shooting and quantity of melee attacks with some staying power (as opposed to Repentia that have lots of attacks with little staying power).
Agree
ERJAK wrote:[...] saying Celestians have 'staying power' is kind of a stretch.
Celestians try to be as good at shooting as dominions and as good at supporting melee characters as sacresants at the same time and just end up being bad at both.
"some" staying power compared to repentia. I don't think anyone is arguing they have great staying power, no more than any other sister apart from Sacresants.
As mentioned they have different use, Dominions deliver more special weapons quickly and there are better units for character melee support.
I think they're better used around a non-melee Canoness/Palatine (eg a support WL you don't want to throw in a fight) to contest the mid-board (with other units). They have +1 to hit around them, so a squad with MM/MG (and possibly combi-flamer for Trinity) has pretty effective shooting while being decent in melee if they get charged. Add in a Dogmata and they can be ObSec if necessary.
Sure, they got downgraded a bit but they are certainly useful if you try to use them for what they can do.
ZergSmasher wrote: So, what do we think is the best melee option for Paragon Warsuits (setting aside, for the moment, whether or not they are worth playing)? Reason I ask is because it doesn't look like it'll be easy to magnetize at all, in fact probably impossible to do so, ergo I want the best option for my suits. I'm leaning toward the maces actually; yes they suffer a hit penalty but 3 damage is very nice, and usually when I play them Morvenn will be around to give them the reroll buff, mitigating said penalty.
The other weapons look as though they should be pretty straightforward to magnetize, so no problems there.
I'd lean towards the swords. The swords also give you +1A, so really the comparison is;
Sword
Str6 ap-3 D2 4A
Mace
Str9 ap-2 D3 3A (-1 hit)
Unless your meta is heavy -1D I think the Sword is better, the Morvenn buff improves the sword loadout too so it's not a great reason to justify the mace.
But to be honest the unit is significantly underpowered and without a strong points decrease(or +1w) they just won't function competitively. Unless you are planning to not face DE or adMech which.. doesn't seem likely.
I'd just model it with whatever you think looks coolest, by the time the unit gets buffed who knows what the meta will look like, so just run rule of cool for them and play them casually.
My loadout for them is swords, 2 MM and 1 HF with stormbolters for a decent holy trinity unit.
ZergSmasher wrote: So, what do we think is the best melee option for Paragon Warsuits? Reason I ask is because it doesn't look like it'll be easy to magnetize at all, in fact probably impossible to do so, ergo I want the best option for my suits.
The other weapons look as though they should be pretty straightforward to magnetize, so no problems there.
They are not actually impossible to magnetize, just difficult, and it will leave a little bit of a gap. The Superior is no issue as you're magnetizing the wrist; the other two you're essentially drilling through the handle of the sword/mace and into the palm of the hand. My first one was a little messy, the other fits (almost) perfectly. I've attached pictures.
For the other main weapon, if you're really careful with the gluing, they stay in place just fine. I dry-fit the gun on the end of the arm, glued the arm into the socket, then dry-fit the shoulder piece on and glued the tubing to the gun. Then you can slip the whole gun assembly off the gun arm pretty easily. I checked repeatedly while it was drying to make sure the fit was tight, and it seems to be holding up.
**Edit: Didn't realize attached pictures showed up like that, my bad for the long post.
ZergSmasher wrote: So, what do we think is the best melee option for Paragon Warsuits? Reason I ask is because it doesn't look like it'll be easy to magnetize at all, in fact probably impossible to do so, ergo I want the best option for my suits.
The other weapons look as though they should be pretty straightforward to magnetize, so no problems there.
They are not actually impossible to magnetize, just difficult, and it will leave a little bit of a gap. The Superior is no issue as you're magnetizing the wrist; the other two you're essentially drilling through the handle of the sword/mace and into the palm of the hand. My first one was a little messy, the other fits (almost) perfectly. I've attached pictures.
For the other main weapon, if you're really careful with the gluing, they stay in place just fine. I dry-fit the gun on the end of the arm, glued the arm into the socket, then dry-fit the shoulder piece on and glued the tubing to the gun. Then you can slip the whole gun assembly off the gun arm pretty easily. I checked repeatedly while it was drying to make sure the fit was tight, and it seems to be holding up.
**Edit: Didn't realize attached pictures showed up like that, my bad for the long post.
That works better than I thought. I'm not going to try magnetizing the melee weapons as I don't like the gap, but I do like the suggestion for gluing the tubing on the main guns so they just dry fit. My original plan was to dry fit the gun piece, but magnetize the part that attaches to the shoulder. I might end up doing a combination of the ideas, using a magnet to hold the shoulder part in place better but gluing the tubing so it looks better. Might help with stability. Cheers for the ideas!
And @Punisher: I had forgotten about the +1 attack from the swords, so that's what I'm going with. Definitely better than the maces as a TAC option.
What's the current thinking on Mortifiers vs. Penitent Engines and loadouts?
Mortifiers can't advance and charge anymore (Penitents gaining the natural ability to do so), but fight after death on a 4+ and have the better WS/BS.
Flails went down a point of Strength, and now only double the number of attacks, making them much less of the obvious choice. Heavy flamers gained a point of strength, and all Ministorum units get access to the max shots with flame weapons stratagem.
My gut tells me Penitents with heavy flamers and saws are the best offensive option to try to get to something meaty, while the Mortifiers are better as a counter-punch with flails and flamers against enemy melee units.
Archebius wrote: What's the current thinking on Mortifiers vs. Penitent Engines and loadouts?
Mortifiers can't advance and charge anymore (Penitents gaining the natural ability to do so), but fight after death on a 4+ and have the better WS/BS.
Flails went down a point of Strength, and now only double the number of attacks, making them much less of the obvious choice. Heavy flamers gained a point of strength, and all Ministorum units get access to the max shots with flame weapons stratagem.
My gut tells me Penitents with heavy flamers and saws are the best offensive option to try to get to something meaty, while the Mortifiers are better as a counter-punch with flails and flamers against enemy melee units.
Thoughts?
I think both have their uses. Pengines are cheaper (though not much) and can advance + charge, although to me that should only be done sparingly as you want all those flamers firing as much as possible. Give them the buzzblades as they can first flame the little gribblies like Ork Boyz and Tyranids, then charge and beat up tougher stuff like vehicles or monsters. Mortifiers are probably good with just about any loadout. With Heavy Bolters they can make decent ranged platforms and can threaten plenty of 2 wound models like Marines, with the melee weapons acting as the counterpunch threat. I personally lean toward flails on them as their melee weapon of choice, as it seems like it combos well with their fight on death ability.
I must admit I kind of like the idea of taking 3x4 of each and just running them at the enemy. Coupled with some ranged threats (Argent Shroud Retributors, Paragons, perhaps even an Exorcist or two) that could be potent for the same reasons as an older build that ran the DKoK pony club together with Retributors was.
Archebius wrote: What's the current thinking on Mortifiers vs. Penitent Engines and loadouts?
Mortifiers can't advance and charge anymore (Penitents gaining the natural ability to do so), but fight after death on a 4+ and have the better WS/BS.
Flails went down a point of Strength, and now only double the number of attacks, making them much less of the obvious choice. Heavy flamers gained a point of strength, and all Ministorum units get access to the max shots with flame weapons stratagem.
My gut tells me Penitents with heavy flamers and saws are the best offensive option to try to get to something meaty, while the Mortifiers are better as a counter-punch with flails and flamers against enemy melee units.
Thoughts?
I think both have their uses. Pengines are cheaper (though not much) and can advance + charge, although to me that should only be done sparingly as you want all those flamers firing as much as possible. Give them the buzzblades as they can first flame the little gribblies like Ork Boyz and Tyranids, then charge and beat up tougher stuff like vehicles or monsters. Mortifiers are probably good with just about any loadout. With Heavy Bolters they can make decent ranged platforms and can threaten plenty of 2 wound models like Marines, with the melee weapons acting as the counterpunch threat. I personally lean toward flails on them as their melee weapon of choice, as it seems like it combos well with their fight on death ability.
I must admit I kind of like the idea of taking 3x4 of each and just running them at the enemy. Coupled with some ranged threats (Argent Shroud Retributors, Paragons, perhaps even an Exorcist or two) that could be potent for the same reasons as an older build that ran the DKoK pony club together with Retributors was.
Don't forget mortifiers have the Adepta Sororitas keyword, so they have access to some strats the P.Engines don't. In addition Mortifiers can generate a Miracle die from destroying enemy units and P.Engines can't. I think it just comes down to if you want heavy flamers or heavy bolters when deciding between the 2. I've found a lot of use from the heavy bolters so I'll stick with mortifiers. For the melee options, I think the flails were over nerfed so I'd just go with buzz blades. Think the flails are only good vs hordes now and if that's your meta you should probably be looking at arcoflags.
. It's rules are kind of unique, but just a lot more meh... A real shame because we'll probably be stuck with this datasheet for quite some years now :(. It's decent for WWSWF, I suppose that's something. With miracle dice generation being limited as it is, that is still one of the best relics that it has. I really hope it turns out to be useful in the long run, but it's just sad that some of the most interesting rules it had will be gone for a while.
