What are the chances that they teasse us like that and then don't deliver *twice*?

chaos0xomega wrote:
What are the chances that they teasse us like that and then don't deliver *twice*?

I mean... not zero.
EDIT: Rereading that, it doesn't say anything about Chaos Space Marines. It says rules for Warhammer 40,000. So maybe just rules in the Guard Codex.

 GiToRaZor wrote:
Good news for CSM:

It looks like the Traitor Guard get a sheet for CSM in the near future:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/08/28/sunday-preview-get-ready-to-breach-kill-team-goes-into-the-dark/

Guess they were waiting for the kit's re-release

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:

 GiToRaZor wrote:
Good news for CSM:

It looks like the Traitor Guard get a sheet for CSM in the near future:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/08/28/sunday-preview-get-ready-to-breach-kill-team-goes-into-the-dark/

Guess they were waiting for the kit's re-release

wanna bet that they will get shafted aswell by mere mortals.

And we're *still* waiting on Kratos rules (which we will never get).

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

God the old Possessed were just God awful.

Could've been worse.

To this day Im still annoyed that I missed out on the chainsword/powerfist guy from the original Possessed.

I might be one of the only people who didnt mind the previous Possessed.

chaos0xomega wrote:
What are the chances that they tease us like that and then don't deliver *twice*?

Decently high? They already did it once, so.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:

 GiToRaZor wrote:
Good news for CSM:

It looks like the Traitor Guard get a sheet for CSM in the near future:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/08/28/sunday-preview-get-ready-to-breach-kill-team-goes-into-the-dark/

Guess they were waiting for the kit's re-release

wanna bet that they will get shafted aswell by mere mortals.

There is a decent chance that they will roll them into the guard codex and then pat each other's back how they brought back traitor guard, similar to how they did it with corsairs.

I was gonna say it wouldn't make sense to put traitor guard in the Astra Militarum book and give reasons why, but it didn't make sense to put Harlequins in the Crafworld Aeldari book either, for many of the same reasons - so you may be on to something.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

Is it possible that you have any Gal Vorbak to make a size comparison with for the Possessed? It would be interesting, considering that they basically have the same stats.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:

 GiToRaZor wrote:
Good news for CSM:

It looks like the Traitor Guard get a sheet for CSM in the near future:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/08/28/sunday-preview-get-ready-to-breach-kill-team-goes-into-the-dark/

Guess they were waiting for the kit's re-release

wanna bet that they will get shafted aswell by mere mortals.

If they're added to the CSM list? Definitely. Gotta keep "Chaos" well ordered, don't they?

blood reaper wrote:And we're *still* waiting on Kratos rules (which we will never get).

And the FAQ for all of our fw units. And still no release for the one model that they made a near auto-include for every CSM army.

 warboss wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

Is it possible that you have any Gal Vorbak to make a size comparison with for the Possessed? It would be interesting, considering that they basically have the same stats.

Spoiler:

Honestly it makes me quite sad every figure got so ... upscaled because the Gal Vorbak felt special in just how big they were.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I was gonna say it wouldn't make sense to put traitor guard in the Astra Militarum book and give reasons why, but it didn't make sense to put Harlequins in the Crafworld Aeldari book either, for many of the same reasons - so you may be on to something.

Makes more sense to group similarly aligned Aeldari than putting what would at most be three Chaos units (two of which are one model units if the Ogryn isn't attached to the Enforcer) in an Imperium Codex.

It would seem to me the easiest way to do Traitor Guard would be IN the Guard codex, so that they can access all the Guard stuff - basically, just make them their own subfaction with the extra condition that they also replace the IMPERIUM keyword with CHAOS.

Pretty much yeah. R&H ain't coming back from FW and GW isn't going to do a full Codex for what currently amounts to 12 models.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
It would seem to me the easiest way to do Traitor Guard would be IN the Guard codex, so that they can access all the Guard stuff - basically, just make them their own subfaction with the extra condition that they also replace the IMPERIUM keyword with CHAOS.

So like proxy army but with a handful of actual rules?

In 5th edition, I made GSC army with a lot of conversions and only used IG rules. I understand nowadays the broodbrothers rules allow you to take Guard allies almost like the 2nd edition Tyranid codex?

For every GSC detachment you can also take a Guard detachment which gets a locked <Regiment> keyword, Brood Brothers.

 blood reaper wrote:
And we're *still* waiting on Kratos rules (which we will never get).

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/dgaIUEhxTojLsvsi.pdf

The rules are right here. You don’t need permission to put them in your CSM army unless your opponent is being a …

They're unusable in any sort of competitive environment and have absolutely no synergy with the CSM Codex. But apart from that sure.

 Gert wrote:
They're unusable in any sort of competitive environment and have absolutely no synergy with the CSM Codex. But apart from that sure.

Fair enough. I often forget people play in environments where house rules are a no go.

its almost like people expect the game designers to actually do the job they are being paid for when customers shell out 50 bucks for rulebooks and 100 for minis. Imagine that.

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Gert wrote:
They're unusable in any sort of competitive environment and have absolutely no synergy with the CSM Codex. But apart from that sure.

Fair enough. I often forget people play in environments where house rules are a no go.

Do you often spring house rules on your opponent in the middle of a game? "You don't need permission to put them in your CSM army [...]" sounds like you and your opponents don't agree on house rules before the game, which is astounding to me. How far does this go? What do I need permission to do in your group? How big of a change does it have to be before somebody raises an eyebrow and you'd need to ask permission?

 Rihgu wrote:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Gert wrote:
They're unusable in any sort of competitive environment and have absolutely no synergy with the CSM Codex. But apart from that sure.

Fair enough. I often forget people play in environments where house rules are a no go.

Do you often spring house rules on your opponent in the middle of a game? "You don't need permission to put them in your CSM army [...]" sounds like you and your opponents don't agree on house rules before the game, which is astounding to me. How far does this go? What do I need permission to do in your group? How big of a change does it have to be before somebody raises an eyebrow and you'd need to ask permission?

If you honestly think that’s what I meant then I’m not going to disabuse you of it. Have an internet *win* point on me

 Gert wrote:
They're unusable in any sort of competitive environment and have absolutely no synergy with the CSM Codex. But apart from that sure.

Yup. And it's the same story for all of our fw stuff. Of course, you and I know that most of those have better rules in better games.

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
And we're *still* waiting on Kratos rules (which we will never get).

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/dgaIUEhxTojLsvsi.pdf

The rules are right here. You don’t need permission to put them in your CSM army unless your opponent is being a …

I can't tell if this is GW simping or just plain ignorance. These rules don't line up with the CSM codex. You can say "House rule, house rule, house!' all you want but I'm not the game designer - and I'm certainly not the company which said a model would have rules but then not provide them.

chaos0xomega wrote:
its almost like people expect the game designers to actually do the job they are being paid for when customers shell out 50 bucks for rulebooks and 100 for minis. Imagine that.

But muh small indie model company

 blood reaper wrote:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
And we're *still* waiting on Kratos rules (which we will never get).

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/dgaIUEhxTojLsvsi.pdf

The rules are right here. You don’t need permission to put them in your CSM army unless your opponent is being a …

I can't tell if this is GW simping or just plain ignorance. These rules don't line up with the CSM codex. You can say "House rule, house rule, house!' all you want but I'm not the game designer - and I'm certainly not the company which said a model would have rules but then not provide them.

It’s plain ignorance. I already admitted I was wrong.

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Gert wrote:
They're unusable in any sort of competitive environment and have absolutely no synergy with the CSM Codex. But apart from that sure.

Fair enough. I often forget people play in environments where house rules are a no go.

However this is the primary reason I am critical of GW's rules and encourage everyone to do so: a game SHOULD work without needs of house rules. House rules should be for fun, not function.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Gert wrote:
They're unusable in any sort of competitive environment and have absolutely no synergy with the CSM Codex. But apart from that sure.

Fair enough. I often forget people play in environments where house rules are a no go.

However this is the primary reason I am critical of GW's rules and encourage everyone to do so: a game SHOULD work without needs of house rules. House rules should be for fun, not function.

Agreed, more importantly - I'm not getting paid to fix GWs rules for them. If I'm going to put time and effort into fixing GWs rules for them via house rules, then I might as well just write my own ruleset from scratch.

I'm with MonkeyBallistic. For all the well-deserved GW bashing that goes on (especially after THIS codex), it always surprises me at how hostile people are to the concept of houserules. You wanna use a Chaos Kratos in a casual setting? Swap Angels of Death for Let the Galaxy Burn, swap the faction keywords to Chaos, Heretic Astartes, Traitoris Astartes, <Legion>. Maybe disallow the Hunter-Killer Missile because CSM can't have Nice Things. As long as you talk about it with your opponent before the game I would be willing to bet most people would be cool with it (always bring some points filler in case they're not). Granted, big caveat here, I haven't even played since late 7th. Maybe this is totally busted, maybe it needs a points tweak. But that can be fixed because it's a houserule. Your opponent has a problem with it? Talk about what the problem is and see if you can compromise. Houserules don't mean "I bring whatever I want," it means balance becomes a collaborative effort between the players rather than a tyrannical crapshoot from GW.

I'm not disputing that there should be official Chaos Kratos rules, mind you - there absolutely should. But calling houserules "GW simping" when it's clearly born from frustration with the official rules is misguided. There's no need to be fanatical about only playing by the official rules that everyone hates. GW has no business telling you what you can't do at your table with your friends and your models that you paid through the nose for.

For me personally it's more like, if I'm going to spend $125 and 5, 10, however many hours building and painting this thing, it's not worth it if I have to think about if I'd be able to take it to a local tournament or whatever.

Because people making up rules is easily abused and especially among friends it can be hard to say "Hold on a minute".
For example, our game group once had houserules for really custom characters. This led to custom units which then led to an entire homebrew Codex that won every single game. Anecdotal I know but you'll find a lot of people have similar stories or things about people using non-original material for their rules and doing a bit of un/intentional cheating.
Among good friends who have similar mindsets it can be done but at your local with a group of acquaintances it's going to be a lot harder.

Though it's bit different to adding one keyword to gw unit datasheet. As far as house rules that's one of the most reasonable ones.

But yeah no luck for tournaments or random games in flgs you haven't pre-arranged and instead just show up.

tneva82 wrote:
Though it's bit different to adding one keyword to gw unit datasheet. As far as house rules that's one of the most reasonable ones.

But yeah no luck for tournaments or random games in flgs you haven't pre-arranged and instead just show up.

We actually have that very discussion in our group right now, with no result so far.

The chaos knights player wants to add just one keyword so he can use his FW knight which obviously is an abhorrent class properly within his crusade force.

Now the next ones wants proper keywords for FW battlesuits and TS legacy units. Another TS player already starts planning a list around getting access to pre-nerf warptime through legacy.

A player asks to remove martial legacy.

While they were at it, I asked if we could fix biker nobz and give the battlewagon keyword to the kannonwagon and the squig keyword to squiggoths. Someone claims this would be too strong for snakebites (it's not).

One player is confused by all this and suggests not using too many house rules.

A marine player chips in that GW did leave out those keywords for a reason.

Multiple people agree that FW rules are a mess to big to fix.

We are back to square one.

"just use house rules" only works for a very small group of perfectly aligned people or for groups were few can forcibly push their houserules on others.

Yeah, in my experience implementing house rules often requires rules bartering (i.e. "sure you can do that if I can do this"). More often than not one person tables an offer that is less reasonable than the other and the agreement either falls apart because of it or the agreement proceeds and falls apart later due to escalation.

Anybody knows the base size for the new daemon prince? From what I´ve gathered online there seems to be a consensus on 60mm, but it does feel way too small for how the new mini looks.
I´m currently painting a kitbashed one and would´nt like to be stuck with the wrong base size.

IIRC it was confirmed to still be on a 60mm

I'll be very glad if it stays 60mm.

I was hoping for them to go to 100mm like the charater DPs, or at least get to 80mm.

At long last:

Traitor guard

(And Gellerpox)

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:
At long last:

Traitor guard

(And Gellerpox)

Was not expecting rules for Traitor Guard. At least, not before the AM Codex was released.

They seem to be a little better than Cultists.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:
At long last:

Traitor guard

(And Gellerpox)

Was not expecting rules for Traitor Guard. At least, not before the AM Codex was released.

They seem to be a little better than Cultists.

At least the options in the Datasheet are actually in the box this time.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:
At long last:

Traitor guard

(And Gellerpox)

Was not expecting rules for Traitor Guard. At least, not before the AM Codex was released.

They seem to be a little better than Cultists.

1 more points gives them a 5+, which seems worth it.
Do they have any other benefits besides getting other Special Weapons that I'm missing?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:
At long last:

Traitor guard

(And Gellerpox)

Was not expecting rules for Traitor Guard. At least, not before the AM Codex was released.

They seem to be a little better than Cultists.

1 more points gives them a 5+, which seems worth it.
Do they have any other benefits besides getting other Special Weapons that I'm missing?

Getting their special weapons for free.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:
At long last:

Traitor guard

(And Gellerpox)

Was not expecting rules for Traitor Guard. At least, not before the AM Codex was released.

They seem to be a little better than Cultists.

1 more points gives them a 5+, which seems worth it.
Do they have any other benefits besides getting other Special Weapons that I'm missing?

Getting their special weapons for free.

As well as getting longer ranged buffing from the chaos commissar.