In all truth, when I went to bed last night I was looking forward to preordering the book this Saturday. After this blog post, I think I need some evidence there are actually rules for Tzeentch daemons in Engine War or I guess I'm out.
Boss Salvage wrote: In all truth, when I went to bed last night I was looking forward to preordering the book this Saturday. After this blog post, I think I need some evidence there are actually rules for Tzeentch daemons in Engine War or I guess I'm out.
What a journey
It's not an Engine War article.
Spoiler:
Psychic Awakening articles always have the title of the book present on their thumbnails for the articles. It's not until they go up to the bit up above "Latest News" that you see things like this take their place:
That's very correct, Kan, here's a high five. It's also rather obvious that Warhammer Community established an expectation that Chaos Daemons, the fourth and final faction marketed as taking part in Engine War, would receive a Psychic Awakening rules preview today, given their past posting strategy on other PA books during the run up to their preorder date (which as of writing is tomorrow, May 30, 2020). So when I said 'vaguely related to AOS' my point was 'not the Warhammer 40,000 Psychic Awakening content we were expecting, and indeed led to expect by the company's own marketing department'
AND now with the nonsense Knights article, making four articles in one day (five being a real rarity for Warhammer Community, from what I can tell digging backwards), maybe we get Daemons tomorrow? Or maybe we flat out don't get a Warhammer 40,000 Psychic Awakening preview for the faction?? Bi-fething-zarre. I'll take a WD update with actual rules over these months of expectation.
That's very correct, Kan, here's a high five. It's also rather obvious that Warhammer Community established an expectation that Chaos Daemons, the fourth and final faction marketed as taking part in Engine War, would receive a Psychic Awakening rules preview today, given their past posting strategy on other PA books during the run up to their preorder date (which as of writing is tomorrow, May 30, 2020). So when I said 'vaguely related to AOS' my point was 'not the Warhammer 40,000 Psychic Awakening content we were expecting, and indeed led to expect by the company's own marketing department'
AND now with the nonsense Knights article, making four articles in one day (five being a real rarity for Warhammer Community, from what I can tell digging backwards), maybe we get Daemons tomorrow? Or maybe we flat out don't get a Warhammer 40,000 Psychic Awakening preview for the faction?? Bi-fething-zarre. I'll take a WD update with actual rules over these months of expectation.
I'm with you, I can't tell If they're stalling through embarrassment or because they're amazing and our little minds can't handle it.
I think they do it on purpose because they want to generate web traffic and get people to read all the articles, and they know no one cares about the other silly stuff nearly as much as the rules, so putting the rules stuff last and not announcing when it will get posted helps their web marketing efforts.
Engine War adds new Stratagems, Relics and the ability to make Greater Daemons into Exalted Greater Daemons. Yes, if you ever thought that the reality-murdering awesomeness of a regular Greater Daemon wasn’t worthy of your worship (and immortal soul) then these are for you. Find out why the Grey Knights are about to have their work cut out.
They gave the daemon rule preview around when they put in rule previews. Patience is the key. Daemons don't get earlier in the day than others. Hardly end of the world
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote: Kind of skim read, but it just seems to be "do you like greater daemons? Make one even better with these quasi-warlord trait options".
Which for a command point is *probably* an auto-take, but I'm not sure its going to make the army more interesting as a whole.
They introduced 1(out of likely 6 since you can roll for 2 or pick 1) greater daemon ability, relic and stratagem for all gods.
Tyel wrote: Kind of skim read, but it just seems to be "do you like greater daemons? Make one even better with these quasi-warlord trait options".
Which for a command point is *probably* an auto-take, but I'm not sure its going to make the army more interesting as a whole.
From the preview they're still stuck with greater daemkns being t1 heavy weapons magnet and running as allies for chaos marines rather than anything else, bit disappointed.
Yeah this worries me a bit, I was so hyped for potential T8 greater daemons. I don't know if 1 CP for a special ability of your choice is a good deal or solves any of the issues.
I admit it's better than not having the option, especially since 9th Ed is supposed to make it easier to hide models and to bring models in via board edges with new tactical reserves.
And if hordes are less common, value of smite on greater daemons goes up.
I do think that a Lord of Change with Impossible Robe, Incorporeal Form, and Spell Thief is a solid pick now for the post-Chapter Approved points cost. However, that is your warlord trait, your free warlord relic, and 1 CP for that model.
Nothing stands out as great and no one will bother with greater daemons unless they get something like ghaz's 4 wounds a phase thing.
like ye within 12" roll a a dice+ld does mine beat yours, hurrar now you loose an aura for a turn. So situational meh meh mhe to all of it.
Slaanesh lists probably will, since pretty much the best list they can bring is all in on KoSs. But yeah, kinda underwhelming to me, given the name "Exalted" greater daemons. EDIT: Especially since the Exalted GDs seem to take up 8 pages.
Tyel wrote: Kind of skim read, but it just seems to be "do you like greater daemons? Make one even better with these quasi-warlord trait options".
Which for a command point is *probably* an auto-take, but I'm not sure its going to make the army more interesting as a whole.
From the preview they're still stuck with greater daemkns being t1 heavy weapons magnet and running as allies for chaos marines rather than anything else, bit disappointed.
I think people are stuck with that. The idea of a single greater daemon being the main centre piece of your otherwise mainly horde army is dead - and frankly probably always will be. (A LoC with -1 damage and a 3++ maybe can take the heat a bit longer than most - but meh.)
Really, if you bring one greater daemon, you want to bring three. Rather like Lord Discordants.
If you bring three, maybe bring 6.
The question is whether this will encourage/facilitate you in doing so.
If you can unlock the exalted option numerous times (although once per daemon type) I can imagine a list of say 3 KoS+the named one+Bloodthirster+GUO (or a LoC)+some chaff. Not convinced its a very dynamic list, and question marks how you get it into detachments with loci but could cause some problems.
I really wanted them to do something to encourage/reward bringing multiple gods rather than punish you with the current locus system. Instead we're being funnelled down that path even further it seems. Maybe there's some 9th ed changes that refine thisbhut it feels like some extra stuff for the sakes of it.
Tyel wrote: Kind of skim read, but it just seems to be "do you like greater daemons? Make one even better with these quasi-warlord trait options".
Which for a command point is *probably* an auto-take, but I'm not sure its going to make the army more interesting as a whole.
From the preview they're still stuck with greater daemkns being t1 heavy weapons magnet and running as allies for chaos marines rather than anything else, bit disappointed.
I think people are stuck with that. The idea of a single greater daemon being the main centre piece of your otherwise mainly horde army is dead - and frankly probably always will be. (A LoC with -1 damage and a 3++ maybe can take the heat a bit longer than most - but meh.)
Really, if you bring one greater daemon, you want to bring three. Rather like Lord Discordants.
If you bring three, maybe bring 6.
The question is whether this will encourage/facilitate you in doing so.
If you can unlock the exalted option numerous times (although once per daemon type) I can imagine a list of say 3 KoS+the named one+Bloodthirster+GUO (or a LoC)+some chaff. Not convinced its a very dynamic list, and question marks how you get it into detachments with loci but could cause some problems.
This is my issue, 750+ points in hqs with no synergy beyond being big and fast + needing other daemons of their gods for the detachment bonus is... crap. Just cements them as 4 allies codex in 1 book imo.
If you can keep anything you want in reserves for 9th then greater daemons might be helped. Though you would need to be able to also charge and GW is usually skiddish around making deployment rules useful for assault these days
I seem to roll lot's of 7's with my GUO when casting spells so for 1CP to get something for all those 7's I seem to roll seems like a worthy use (for me in particular) of that 1 measly CP..
Flesh hounds are going to be faster. 1CP to advance and charge plus 2" if any enemy models were killed that same turn. For mono Khorne it's not going to be easy killing in the shooting phase but if you have Tzeentch and/or Nurgle Daemons in your force they should be able to kill something between psychic and shooting, especially Flamers causing mortal wounds in addition to regular damage on 6's.
The Archaeopter datasheets have leaked and the Transvector can transport SECUTARII, so I'm somewhat excited that they've finally integrated the rules for FW units (unless the leak is a fake).
- Can turn twice like a Craftworld flyer
- T7 like a heavy Marine flyer
- Option to hover
- minus one damage like a Wave Serpent / in-built Iron Stone
- Cover thanks to Canticles
I guess we have to be thankful the -2 combo with Stygies won`t be around for long, lol
beast_gts wrote: The Archaeopter datasheets have leaked and the Transvector can transport SECUTARII, so I'm somewhat excited that they've finally integrated the rules for FW units (unless the leak is a fake).
Skorpius Dunerider has the ability to transport Secutarii as well, but fun fact:
The minimum unit size for Peltasts or Hoplites is 10 models.
beast_gts wrote: The Archaeopter datasheets have leaked and the Transvector can transport SECUTARII, so I'm somewhat excited that they've finally integrated the rules for FW units (unless the leak is a fake).
Skorpius Dunerider has the ability to transport Secutarii as well, but fun fact:
The minimum unit size for Peltasts or Hoplites is 10 models.
I was just thinking that unless that changes in the re-written forgeworld books that they have done.
beast_gts wrote: The Archaeopter datasheets have leaked and the Transvector can transport SECUTARII, so I'm somewhat excited that they've finally integrated the rules for FW units (unless the leak is a fake).
Skorpius Dunerider has the ability to transport Secutarii as well, but fun fact: The minimum unit size for Peltasts or Hoplites is 10 models.
I was just thinking that unless that changes in the re-written forgeworld books that they have done.
It's interesting that people seem so laser focused on how 'bad' these flyers are...but I'm liking that the Stratoraptor(gunship) variant actually makes you choose between being harder to hit all the time, or being able to hit reliably.
I think the Bomber is going to be the star of the fleet. Just need 4s to pile mortal wounds on a unit you pass over. The transport dosent really carry enough bodies to be more than a late game objective graber.Gunship is a waste to me. I can hit well or not get hit well. Plus with the tech available to AdMech, I can not understand the insistence of stubber weapons. Why couldnt it have had Arc Rifles?
If you thought the transport was 125, and the other two 150, I'm not sure you are leaping up and down in horror. They are going to be weirdly difficult to kill (assuming Stygies) - but... at least for the transport and bomber its still just 12 heavy stubber shots, potentially on BS4+. We are in an edition which doesn't value that very highly.
Agreed. Do about 5 mortal wounds a turn to 10+ model infantry units or 1.5 to a vehicle or monster, until the bomber gets blown up.
It doesn't surprise me that it took about three tries to work through the rubbish clauses strung together in no particular order and rearrange them into functional English.
Apparently it also carries an infinite number of bombs. The deathstrike and manticore feel bad.
The chaff launcher is weird, too. I'd expect a limited use 'auto-miss' effect, not 'all damage is reduced forever.'
The pre-order page collage of supplement pages is too small to figure out what it says is "in this book" for daemons or to make out anything about about chaos knights, hrmmm.
If you thought the transport was 125, and the other two 150, I'm not sure you are leaping up and down in horror. They are going to be weirdly difficult to kill (assuming Stygies) - but... at least for the transport and bomber its still just 12 heavy stubber shots, potentially on BS4+. We are in an edition which doesn't value that very highly.
Maybe. But they can ignore the heavy weapon penalty with Mars canticle, once the Stygies combo dies, have the Eldar manouverability to snipe characters with those stubbers and just generally add up to the pre-nerf Iron Hands Flyer list, except every flyer takes their personal Iron Stone with them, can turn twice for much better angles and gain canticles-Cover where other flyers (currently) cannot.
They can make the Bloodthirster strength 70 with 20k attacks but if the bloody thing can't reliably get into combat to use the nice stats and survive a single turn on the board then what's the point?
Kdash wrote: 164 for a Stratoraptor,
110 for Fusilave
100 for transvector
15ppm skystalkers
17ppm(!) sterylizors
14ppm Raiders
16ppm Sulphurhounds
From the Admech Tactics thread.
The Skitarii stuff looks like it'll be cheap per model BUT let's not forget weapons aren't always in that cost and not always free.
These include the weapons cost from the leak. All the fixed weaponry appears to be 0 points. The only ones that cost points are the heavy weapons and specialist melee weapons.
Looks like the Transvector is 92 points before wargear and the Fusilave is 102. Stratoraptor is 70. (if the leaked points cost is correct... We should see some review vids shortly to confirm.)
beast_gts wrote: The Archaeopter datasheets have leaked and the Transvector can transport SECUTARII, so I'm somewhat excited that they've finally integrated the rules for FW units (unless the leak is a fake).
Skorpius Dunerider has the ability to transport Secutarii as well, but fun fact:
The minimum unit size for Peltasts or Hoplites is 10 models.
GW is rewriting the FW units here soon. Seems plausible that they will change the unit size of secutarii to 5-10 or 5-20
beast_gts wrote: The Archaeopter datasheets have leaked and the Transvector can transport SECUTARII, so I'm somewhat excited that they've finally integrated the rules for FW units (unless the leak is a fake).
Skorpius Dunerider has the ability to transport Secutarii as well, but fun fact: The minimum unit size for Peltasts or Hoplites is 10 models.
GW is rewriting the FW units here soon. Seems plausible that they will change the unit size of secutarii to 5-10 or 5-20
GW staff were the ones who wrote the 40k Secutarii rules in the first place by all accounts.
I'm still going with them potentially adding a Secutarii character when we get the updated book...but that's me just setting myself up for disappointment again.
beast_gts wrote: The Archaeopter datasheets have leaked and the Transvector can transport SECUTARII, so I'm somewhat excited that they've finally integrated the rules for FW units (unless the leak is a fake).
Skorpius Dunerider has the ability to transport Secutarii as well, but fun fact:
The minimum unit size for Peltasts or Hoplites is 10 models.
GW is rewriting the FW units here soon. Seems plausible that they will change the unit size of secutarii to 5-10 or 5-20
GW staff were the ones who wrote the 40k Secutarii rules in the first place by all accounts.
I'm still going with them potentially adding a Secutarii character when we get the updated book...but that's me just setting myself up for disappointment again.
IIRC at the time the secutarii rules were written, the only transport for Admech was the terrax. I doubt there will be a secutarii HQ entry until GW makes a Skitarii character first. Or FW makes an actual model for HH.
That said, 6 is far, far better than 5 as a capacity, and I would love for some other transports to get bumped slightly- Venoms to 6 and Raiders to 11 or 12 would be huge.
That's a lot to unpack. Winners to me include the Lucius Dogma and Stygies Dogma (neither of which you will really want to leave, although if the opponent has no melee then the Stygies one is slightly less useful), the exploding hits part of one of those Warlord Traits (Cawlstar back anyone?), Katas getting a 5+++ from a Warlord Trait...yep there is quite a bit.
I'm back on "all hail our glorious Ad Mech overlords".
This is bonkers.
A clear example of GW going "buff X, buff Y, buff Z" - won't all these buffs compound together - "uh... maybe?"
Whoah. That's a lot of unit specific strategems. Guess gw's moving even further away from giving units abilities on the actual data sheet. No wonder 9th is expanding everyone's access to cp. If this is the direction they're going armies won't be able to function without it.
Tiberius501 wrote: It’s a shame he leaked everything other than the Sulphurhounds :(
Did they...
Spoiler:
Sulphurhounds are okay, but I am loving the Raiders. That's the kind of thing I always envisioned Rough Riders bringing to the table rather than "LaNcE!!1!!".
Suddenly the good old 3++ doomchicken is rocking a -1 to hit or 6+ fnp, which has wierd 9th ed style (assumingly) wording.
I'm more worried about the t8 GUOtbh but the greater daemon tables are good, some of the strats are solid (wbb nurglings and instant cast on 9 horrors?!) But they still haven't addressed the core issues of the book imo, just given all units situational buffs.
Tiberius501 wrote: It’s a shame he leaked everything other than the Sulphurhounds :(
Did they...
Spoiler:
Sulphurhounds are okay, but I am loving the Raiders. That's the kind of thing I always envisioned Rough Riders bringing to the table rather than "LaNcE!!1!!".
Oh cool. And yeah I think I’m liking the raiders more too after looking at these dudes, though that Flamer nose is pretty sweet and the ability to advance and still shoot it all. But unfortunately I won’t be getting any of this new stuff regardless. I just can’t afford $100AUD for 3 fething models...
So, as it stands, it appears you can use the strat more than once on the same Greater Daemon. Some are also saying that you can pick the same trait more than once as a result (which i think will get faq'd quickly), but if they leave the more than once alone, for 3CP you would end up with all 6 traits....
Suddenly the good old 3++ doomchicken is rocking a -1 to hit or 6+ fnp, which has wierd 9th ed style (assumingly) wording.
I'm more worried about the t8 GUOtbh but the greater daemon tables are good, some of the strats are solid (wbb nurglings and instant cast on 9 horrors?!) But they still haven't addressed the core issues of the book imo, just given all units situational buffs.
Yeah I won't argue with any of that. I don't play Nurgle and I'd be more than happy to just play pure TS in 9th if they give me more CP for sticking to 1 book. The 7 new TS strats make them immensely better, just gotta have the CP (im not interested in spamming cheap brims to get CP)
Gadzilla666 wrote: Whoah. That's a lot of unit specific strategems. Guess gw's moving even further away from giving units abilities on the actual data sheet. No wonder 9th is expanding everyone's access to cp. If this is the direction they're going armies won't be able to function without it.
Agree. They should just move to putting these as abilities onto datasheets with CP costs attached to them.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Whoah. That's a lot of unit specific strategems. Guess gw's moving even further away from giving units abilities on the actual data sheet. No wonder 9th is expanding everyone's access to cp. If this is the direction they're going armies won't be able to function without it.
Agree. They should just move to putting these as abilities onto datasheets with CP costs attached to them.
It would certainly make them easier to keep up with as they'd all be right there on the units data sheet instead of on separate pages (or books). Especially a 0cp strategem like the one for the Skorpius Dunerider.
If you order either the collector’s edition or the standard hardback, we’ll even throw in a pair of datasheet cards for Syll’Esske, the Vengeful Allegiance and Shalaxi Helbane!
I'm starting to think that the leaks are all GW employes, and this is a clever tactic to promote the book, but most importantly... the new kits.
I mean look around. Outside of the leaks on reddit there's nothing else. I guess they couldnt give the usual early copies due to the pandemic, so they're doing it by themselves.
strigops wrote: I'm starting to think that the leaks are all GW employes, and this is a clever tactic to promote the book, but most importantly... the new kits.
I mean look around. Outside of the leaks on reddit there's nothing else. I guess they couldnt give the usual early copies due to the pandemic, so they're doing it by themselves.
Well gw has long been leaking stuff(especially blurry pictures) so wouldn't surprise
strigops wrote: I'm starting to think that the leaks are all GW employes, and this is a clever tactic to promote the book, but most importantly... the new kits.
I mean look around. Outside of the leaks on reddit there's nothing else. I guess they couldnt give the usual early copies due to the pandemic, so they're doing it by themselves.
Most of it is coming from independent game stores, seemingly. One guy got not only Engine War and the new Skitarii Start Collecting--they also got Pteraxii.
GW shops don't usually get their stock until the Wednesday of the week of the release at the earliest, but usually on Thursdays(so if they were open, it wouldn't be until June 3rd or 4th).
Independents get their stuff in weird allotments depending on if it's from a 3rd party distributor or GW trade.
Bit bummed that aomeone clearly has the book to leak but hasn't even shown so much as a hint of the knights stuff.
Though those admech points are cheap, strategums being units specific is odd especially as one is 0CP like that has to be a first isnt it?
And yeah that demon stuff sadly looks like it either needs an FAQ or the pregame strategums are going to be limited by core rules in 9th by the look of it.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Whoah. That's a lot of unit specific strategems. Guess gw's moving even further away from giving units abilities on the actual data sheet. No wonder 9th is expanding everyone's access to cp. If this is the direction they're going armies won't be able to function without it.
Looks like a decent tactic to stop people spamming units with some loophople OP treat GW didnt think of (because GW still design rules thinking people build old FoC based on variation to take all comers and the occasional cool centerpiece unit as izing on the cake).
Actually a pretty good mechanic to try to make the game more fun rather than spam competetive.(spampetetive?)
Gadzilla666 wrote: Whoah. That's a lot of unit specific strategems. Guess gw's moving even further away from giving units abilities on the actual data sheet. No wonder 9th is expanding everyone's access to cp. If this is the direction they're going armies won't be able to function without it.
Looks like a decent tactic to stop people spamming units with some loophople OP treat GW didnt think of (because GW still design rules thinking people build old FoC based on variation to take all comers and the occasional cool centerpiece unit as izing on the cake).
Actually a pretty good mechanic to try to make the game more fun rather than spam competetive.(spampetetive?)
Agreed. It makes for a nice balance of multiple units for redundancy but at the same time potentially diminishing returns rather than minmaxxing.
A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
Poor chaos players. I feel somewhat insulated from the disappointing daemons rules since I also play Eldar. But all my chaos friends are pretty salty right now.
Space marines are getting their revenge for being so awful throughout the first half of 8E.
Virules wrote: A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
I guess we can't all be Space Marines.
Agreed, it feels like someone looked over the rules as and went "meh, I like big gribblies, heres some stuff I think is cool while I play power level games and make whooshing noises while I move my stuff."
Virules wrote: A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
I guess we can't all be Space Marines.
Agreed, it feels like someone looked over the rules as and went "meh, I like big gribblies, heres some stuff I think is cool while I play power level games and make whooshing noises while I move my stuff."
100%. I don't know why I am surprised to be so disappointed when the Daemons Codex made it obvious that the GW design studio had no idea what to do with 40k Daemons in 8th edition.
I dunno, past the hype I'm not too excited for the ad mech new units. Some of the rules they got are nice no doubt there.
The new units though don't feel like they add much to the list, most feel like luxury buys but not really power increasing units. The transport/tank was a very needed addition to the force, none of these feel like that for the ad mech. About the most useful feels like it's the bomber flyer, the flamer armed winged guys and that would be about it.
The Cav and Winged guys are just low toughness, low armor and even las rifles will rip them up in short order and don't really add much unless you have a very specific list built to support them.
I like the raiders but more on Army Cav feel of the unit and less because I think they will be great. It isn't hard to keep characters outside 18inch of them until you blast them off the board with ease. The best boon is a maniplus getting put out solo finally as well as the start collecting reshuffle. Though with the costs of the new units it does a good job to make the transport feel cheaper and you'd probably aid most lists more with one of those over 3 cheap cav boys for just a little more cash spent for the transport.
Glad they got new models though, I don't see them shaking up the meta however when Marines will still eat their lunch.
Virules wrote: A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
I guess we can't all be Space Marines.
Agreed, it feels like someone looked over the rules as and went "meh, I like big gribblies, heres some stuff I think is cool while I play power level games and make whooshing noises while I move my stuff."
100%. I don't know why I am surprised to be so disappointed when the Daemons Codex made it obvious that the GW design studio had no idea what to do with 40k Daemons in 8th edition.
Wow. I expected the rules to not be good but damn. Nothing to make the army as a whole function better. But we still have hope for a new codex in a year or two, right? Sigh...
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
It doesnt say that. You can use the exalted stratagem upgrade multiple times, because its not during a phase, the stratagem itself isnt limited to once per battle, or something similar. And there is no limitation that any ability can only be chosen once.
Use this stratagem before the battle. Select one BLOODTHIRSTER model from your army that is not a named character. Until the end of the battle, that model gains the EXALTED keyword, and you can select one of the exalted bloodthirster abilities below for this model for the duration of the battle. Alternatively, you can randomly determine two abilities by rolling two D6 and applying them both to this model for the duration of the battle (if a double is rolled, roll again until two different results are rolled).
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
It doesnt say that. You can use the exalted stratagem upgrade multiple times, because its not during a phase, the stratagem itself isnt limited to once per battle, or something similar. And there is no limitation that any ability can only be chosen once.
Use this stratagem before the battle. Select one BLOODTHIRSTER model from your army that is not a named character. Until the end of the battle, that model gains the EXALTED keyword, and you can select one of the exalted bloodthirster abilities below for this model for the duration of the battle. Alternatively, you can randomly determine two abilities by rolling two D6 and applying them both to this model for the duration of the battle (if a double is rolled, roll again until two different results are rolled).
The only thing that stops this, is that we already know that buffs/debuffs with the same name do not stack. I can't see this disappearing when we cross from 8th to 9th
Given GW want people to buy Greater Daemons, I wouldn't be surprised if you can use it as many times as you like.
I mean if you want to run 3 GUOs all with T8 - I'm not really sure why this should be banned. Its a buff, but I'm not sure its going to wreck the game.
KoS buffs are perhaps more of a concern/interest, given that list was there or thereabouts - but still. (Effectively 3 inches more on that first turn charge? Okay...)
=======
For Admech - not sure if the new units will make it, but that's more a function of how crazy other things will be with these rules.
I can see big destroyer/breacher blobs benefiting from a 5+++ being faintly ludicrous, while also benefiting alongside Disintegrators/bots/whatever from a 6 to hit=2 hits. It might all be a bit slow for top level ITC - but good luck having fun with a friend on a table which doesn't have cityfight level terrain.
Someone posted an image in the admech tactics thread. It shows a rule saying you can't pick the same upgrade for multiple daemons but CAN have the same if you roll for the 2nd one
Virules wrote: A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
I guess we can't all be Space Marines.
Agreed, it feels like someone looked over the rules as and went "meh, I like big gribblies, heres some stuff I think is cool while I play power level games and make whooshing noises while I move my stuff."
100%. I don't know why I am surprised to be so disappointed when the Daemons Codex made it obvious that the GW design studio had no idea what to do with 40k Daemons in 8th edition.
Indeed.
And was that difficult to include a soul grinder datasheet with at last the same kind of rule
it has in AoS, to shoot without penalty when moving?
Better than anything I guess, but I feel the content is lacking...
Virules wrote: A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
I guess we can't all be Space Marines.
Agreed, it feels like someone looked over the rules as and went "meh, I like big gribblies, heres some stuff I think is cool while I play power level games and make whooshing noises while I move my stuff."
100%. I don't know why I am surprised to be so disappointed when the Daemons Codex made it obvious that the GW design studio had no idea what to do with 40k Daemons in 8th edition.
Indeed.
And was that difficult to include a soul grinder datasheet with at last the same kind of rule
it has in AoS, to shoot without penalty when moving?
Better than anything I guess, but I feel the content is lacking...
Daemons needed a significantly bigger boost than this for 8th, but at the very least I don't have to worry about the "You want a game? I brought my Marines today, I wanted to see how the new ... Hey! Where are you going? It's a soft fluff list, I swear!" conversation when I bring them.
Can someone help clarify the exalted daemon rules?
From my understanding, we can still use the stratagem multiple times on the same unit to get more abilities, e.g. spend 2 CP to get 2 different abilities on the same unit?
From my understanding, we can still use the stratagem multiple times on the same unit to get more abilities, e.g. spend 2 CP to get 2 different abilities on the same unit?
From my understanding, we can still use the stratagem multiple times on the same unit to get more abilities, e.g. spend 2 CP to get 2 different abilities on the same unit?
As written, yes. It's quite likely that GW will issue an FaQ to change that, though.
From my understanding, we can still use the stratagem multiple times on the same unit to get more abilities, e.g. spend 2 CP to get 2 different abilities on the same unit?
Yes. You can also roll two D6 twice.
EXALTED BLOODTHIRSTER
Use this stratagem before the battle. Select one BLOODTHIRSTER model from your army that is not a named character. Until the end of the battle, that model gains the EXALTED keyword, and you can select one of the exalted bloodthirster abilities below for this model for the duration of the battle. Alternatively, you can randomly determine two abilities by rolling two D6 and applying them both to this model for the duration of the battle (if a double is rolled, roll again until two different results are rolled).
Question is, what happens, when you roll a 1 and 2 the first time, and you roll a 1 or 2 the second time ? Do you get the same ability twice ? Does it stack ? According to the FAQ only aura abilities with the same name dont stack.
Regardless of the bleh writing, assuming at least half the traits aren't garbage, a Supreme Command Detachment with one of each Greater Daemon and rolling for the traits could be randumb fun. Kinda like how we had that old formation with the 4 different Daemon Princes in 7th. That said...it probably wouldn't be good. Fun for CSM to ally in though at least.
Losing no more than 8 wounds per phase isn't all that bad. Let's say first unit chosen has 4 lascannons. You get hit, fail your saves. Opponent rolls more than 8 on their Damage roll. It's reduced to 8. The rest of that shooting phase nothing else really has no reason to shoot at it as it can't be damaged any further that shooting phase.
Give it that new relic that converts kills into wounds on a 5+ and unless you whiff your hits/wound rolls you might get some back. I know it's slim chance and not ideal but at least the BT won't get killed on Turn 1 (unless it gets psychically blasted enough in the psychic phase to bring down to 8 wounds or less).
Until they FAQ it, the optimum strategy for a single Exalted (per god) would be to spend 1 CP and roll 2d6 to get two traits, then spend 1 more CP to pick a third trait.
The wording on the relics is painful, e,g, for the Khorne relics, your warlord has to be a Khorne Daemon and then you can take one new relic on an Exalted. So, it looks like you can only make use of 1 of the 12 new relics per game.
I noticed a similar issue with the new Chaos Knight rules. There are some decent house bonds, warlord traits, relics and strategems but they are spread out so far that each individual house choice tends to only give you one good thing and three meh things.
Keep in mind that you need to kill multiple models with the talisman. You get one dice for every model you kill. It doesnt matter if you kill one model with 10 wounds, you only get one roll for the talisman.
Virules wrote: A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
I guess we can't all be Space Marines.
Agreed, it feels like someone looked over the rules as and went "meh, I like big gribblies, heres some stuff I think is cool while I play power level games and make whooshing noises while I move my stuff."
Not much sympathy to be had, sorry. Ya'll were the only army more busted than Eldar for all of 7th. Phoning it in is better than risking something like 2++2+++ dog star again.
From my understanding, we can still use the stratagem multiple times on the same unit to get more abilities, e.g. spend 2 CP to get 2 different abilities on the same unit?
Yes. You can also roll two D6 twice.
EXALTED BLOODTHIRSTER
Use this stratagem before the battle. Select one BLOODTHIRSTER model from your army that is not a named character. Until the end of the battle, that model gains the EXALTED keyword, and you can select one of the exalted bloodthirster abilities below for this model for the duration of the battle. Alternatively, you can randomly determine two abilities by rolling two D6 and applying them both to this model for the duration of the battle (if a double is rolled, roll again until two different results are rolled).
Question is, what happens, when you roll a 1 and 2 the first time, and you roll a 1 or 2 the second time ? Do you get the same ability twice ? Does it stack ? According to the FAQ only aura abilities with the same name dont stack.
Like with SoB sacred rites, if you roll doubles twice, you only get one ability.
I think they will FAQ more or less immediately the idea you can use exalted daemon stratagem on the same greater daemon multiple times - if there isn't a rule to that effect that just hasn't been leaked anyway. Usual "but with GW you never know tho" - but I can't believe its intentional.
As I see it the rule above is saying that say option 1 is the best one for a Bloodthirster. You can select it on your first bloodthirster.
You can then use Exalted Daemon roll 2 dice on the second bloodthirster in the hope one of the random abilities comes up with a 1. If you get a double on that dice roll, reroll until you don't (i.e. you always get two abilities, unlike certain things we have seen elsewhere.)
Virules wrote: A warning to any fellow Chaos Daemon players who are excited about this release:
- Adds Exalted upgrade to give Greater Daemons a long-needed boost, except it costs 1 CP to pick only 1 upgrade and you can never pick the same upgrade more than once in matched play (and can't give it to named characters).
- Adds 12 new relics, except you can only ever have 1 of them in the army, it's only for an Exalted Greater Daemon, and only if your warlord is of the same Chaos god.
- Adds new stratagems, but almost all of them are terrible.
- Does not add any new army-wide rules, still only loci (which force your whole detachment to be mono-God).
- No new datasheets except those already released elsewhere previously.
In other words, same old lazy third-rate treatment from the GW Design Studio that Chaos Daemon players have been used to for all of 8th Ed.
I guess we can't all be Space Marines.
Agreed, it feels like someone looked over the rules as and went "meh, I like big gribblies, heres some stuff I think is cool while I play power level games and make whooshing noises while I move my stuff."
Not much sympathy to be had, sorry. Ya'll were the only army more busted than Eldar for all of 7th. Phoning it in is better than risking something like 2++2+++ dog star again.
From my understanding, we can still use the stratagem multiple times on the same unit to get more abilities, e.g. spend 2 CP to get 2 different abilities on the same unit?
Yes. You can also roll two D6 twice.
EXALTED BLOODTHIRSTER
Use this stratagem before the battle. Select one BLOODTHIRSTER model from your army that is not a named character. Until the end of the battle, that model gains the EXALTED keyword, and you can select one of the exalted bloodthirster abilities below for this model for the duration of the battle. Alternatively, you can randomly determine two abilities by rolling two D6 and applying them both to this model for the duration of the battle (if a double is rolled, roll again until two different results are rolled).
Question is, what happens, when you roll a 1 and 2 the first time, and you roll a 1 or 2 the second time ? Do you get the same ability twice ? Does it stack ? According to the FAQ only aura abilities with the same name dont stack.
Like with SoB sacred rites, if you roll doubles twice, you only get one ability.
Good so marines, eldar and tau all to be crap for 9th in a penance tour yeah? Players bias shouldn't stop them making balanced rules.
£60 for the flier seems eye wateringly expensive...
Having said that, the £35 for 3x cavalry is expensive also. However, looking at comparisons in AoS, they are in line, or even cheaper than 3x cavalry sets in that game, I was expecting them to be more expensive...
Even with 20% discounts from third party, I think its at a point where I cannot feasibly justify buying any longer, especially if this is an indication of the new prices after the increases.
Kanluwen wrote: It was posted in other region prices, not USD.
$60 for Pteraxii is stupid. It's just stupid.
It's Electropriests level of stupid. I have zero Electropriests and it looks like I will have zero Pteraxii.
The SC is $95 rather than $100, which is legitimately a great deal as the Skorpius and Techpriest alone are $105, the Skitarii bring it up to $149 once the price bump hits. So you save $50.
Those prices are freaking steep. The flyer is a bit expensive for what it is. For comparison razorwing jetfighters were 45 and are currently 50 USD while void ravens are 80 USD. The ad mech flyer is 100 USD. It's not too bad. What bugs me the most is the price of those cavalry. 60 USD which is 20 USD more than my dark eldar reaver jet bikes in the same numbers and I don't know if the firepower is worth it.
The Pteraxii are definitely expensive but if you compare them to scourge even if it sounds expensive understand they get a full squad of the same weapon in one pack. Yes scourge get more weapon types but they only get one per box set meaning you need 12 box sets just to outfit 3 full units (which is bs). Also gw increased the cost of scourge from 25 USD to 30 USD and now 34 USD. 12 sets of scourge just to get 3 full units of a unit that doesnt even get faction traits is pure garbage and not worth the current cost of over 400 USD. I only have to buy 3 pteraxii box sets (180 USD) and to outfit the same amount of models as 12 scourge box sets. Scourge weapon options mostly don't matter because they're a suicide anti tank unit in an edition where vehicles are far too durable against such things.
Suddenly the good old 3++ doomchicken is rocking a -1 to hit or 6+ fnp, which has wierd 9th ed style (assumingly) wording.
I'm more worried about the t8 GUOtbh but the greater daemon tables are good, some of the strats are solid (wbb nurglings and instant cast on 9 horrors?!) But they still haven't addressed the core issues of the book imo, just given all units situational buffs.
I don't think it's weird 9th ed wording. I think it's a new part of the ability: For every wound you block with it, he regains an extra wound later. That's...pretty sweet.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Overall, I'd say this is about an average power boost from a PA book. Nothing spectacular, nothing particularly terrible. Good to see attention paid to the lackluster and cool greater daemons, but they're the only units IMO that are significantly boosted with these new rules.
I will give them credit where credit is due understanding that DURABILITY IS A PROBLEM for pretty much everyone, and a significant number of the exalted buffs are durability buffs. That's very good.
But these new stratagems are faiiiiirly meh, and oddly the best ones are on units that are already good, rather than targeting units that need real help. There's nothing particularly great for struggling units like Daemonettes, bloodletters, soul grinders, etc. The Slaanesh Cav -1 to hit strat seems good for 8th but if -1 to hit mods are easier to obtain in 9ths terrain rework in a world without stacking mods it'll be pretty unimpressive. Scent of Blood seems fairly solid, advance+charge with +2 to charge for hounds seems like you could feasibly pull off a turn 1 charge with them if you plunk a model off the board with a skull cannon or something, but I think the Brass Stampede and Bound in Brass and Bone both sound a whole lot better than they'd work in practice. Halving damage from shooting on a unit that's got as few wounds as a khorne chariot I doubt would be particularly effective, and the problem with Crushers has never been doing damage once you're in combat, it's always getting stomped flat before you get in.
As someone who only uses Tzeentch stuff, I seem to have gotten the best of the bunch. IMO, there's no reason not to roll 2 random benefits for all your Lords of Change, and between the LOC himself, Ahriman, DPTz, and Magnus you've got plenty of options for a competitive Tzeentch Daemons warlord to easily unlock the relics. And 3/4 of the strats seem like stuff I'd gladly use on the units in question - a guaranteed smite on a unit of horrors even after your LoCs and Heralds do their smiting first, +1 to wound for Screamers, the ability for a unit of 6 flamers to dish out ~4 mortal wounds in addition to their regular damage on the drop, all those are solid. Khorne got done worst by, for sure, but whether that's because the rules are necessarily the worst or because Khorne started in the worst position I'm not sure.
Crimson wrote: Isn't there that dedicated price whine thread? From now on couldn't we take all the price whining there and let other threads be about actual content?
At least daemons are getting some real flavour rules, even if they might not be the most competitive buffs. The polar opposite of the Deathwatch White Dwarf update (which was strong, of course, simply because Doctrines and vanilla SM strats).
Do remember that 9th ed means a new codex might not be as far away as you think, as well. Hard to say, though.
Some of these stratagems have me ordering redundant units that so far I've ran only one of.
Cover is going to change a lot so perhaps cover will mean more now. Cover is absolutely useless for models with ZERO armor save. +1 to an armor save that doesn't exist doesn't do jack for most daemons.
I think cover should modify the invul save as well. The +1 assume the shot doesn't hit at full force, like it ricochets of hits a tree branch thus slowing velocity. Invul saves for Daemons is their natural resilience to harm either through thick tough hide, near immunity to pain or magic/psychic ability. So that same bullet, shell, lasbolt is going to be effected by that wall or tree branch the same way as if it were a fully armored terminator behind that wall.
I know invul saves are NEVER modified but cover should do SOMETHING in regards to invulnerable saves.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think it is strange that cover affects armor and is not a -1 to hit penalty.
Likely to give the off player something to do. If it adds to their cover, then they get to participate in their opponent's turn beyond just removing casualties.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think it is strange that cover affects armor and is not a -1 to hit penalty.
It fits into cover vs concealment. Concealment would be staying unseen or poorly seen and be the -1 to hit. cover is something actually blocking the shot like a wall or rubble. A strong enough shot will just punch through the cover anyways, so making it an armor modifier makes sense,.
Things like camo cloaks and similar ought to be on the concealment - to hit side though, rather than + to cover saves. Or they could go the opposite of a lot of the reroll auras and do something like "when using a ranged weapon to target this unit with camouflage, unmodified 6s must be rerolled.
And daemons are still screwed because cover is absolutely pointless except in the rare circumstance you can hide an entire unit.
Not advocating for actual armor for daemons but I think daemons in cover should be harder to kill than daemons out in the open like anything else.
I hope that 9th incorporates the ITC rule making all the first floors of building LOS blocking regardless of windows and crap, either that or improve the inv save of ALL daemon units by 1 (in the 9th ed codex of course).
jivardi wrote: And daemons are still screwed because cover is absolutely pointless except in the rare circumstance you can hide an entire unit.
Not advocating for actual armor for daemons but I think daemons in cover should be harder to kill than daemons out in the open like anything else.
I hope that 9th incorporates the ITC rule making all the first floors of building LOS blocking regardless of windows and crap, either that or improve the inv save of ALL daemon units by 1 (in the 9th ed codex of course).
You really think that a unit of 30 pink horrors should have a 3+ inv when in cover ?
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think it is strange that cover affects armor and is not a -1 to hit penalty.
Likely to give the off player something to do. If it adds to their cover, then they get to participate in their opponent's turn beyond just removing casualties.
Ultimately I'm not sure whether it's a 100% good thing or not. On one hand, reducing the To Hit does make more sense, but it means you play less of a role in your opponent's turn. I'd rather have something to do beyond just taking my minis off the table, and I feel that 8th is very similar to 2nd Ed in this regard - it's mostly removing casualties as things are so much more deadly.
The other side of the coin is what we had in 3rd-7th, with cover saves and the AP system. Looking at the two in comparison, I'd prefer the AP system (despite its inherent flaws) because it meant that a 3+ save was a 3+ save. The armour Marines wore actually meant something, and I've never been so shocked as the demo 3rd Ed game where the Marines got to make their saves. This is after years of 2nd Ed were Bolter Marines might as well have not existed their armour was so pointless. Of course, you could argue that that applies to only certain armies, meaning that for Guard, Orks or 'Nids, you were just removing casualties as well - no different to now. But then again there were cover saves, so, that mitigated that somewhat.
I don't think either system is perfect, and it's hard to advocate for one over the other given that they both have glaring flaws. If I had to choose, I'd take the one that makes things more durable, which is, IMO, the AP/cover save system from 3rd-7th. This would lessen the damage of the Alpha Strike 1st turn. That's not to say that 1st turn wasn't important in previous editions, but with damage rolls and endless sources of mortal wounds, and AP-x up the wazoo, things don't last as long as they used to.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think it is strange that cover affects armor and is not a -1 to hit penalty.
It fits into cover vs concealment. Concealment would be staying unseen or poorly seen and be the -1 to hit. cover is something actually blocking the shot like a wall or rubble. A strong enough shot will just punch through the cover anyways, so making it an armor modifier makes sense.
Things like camo cloaks and similar ought to be on the concealment - to hit side though, rather than + to cover saves. Or they could go the opposite of a lot of the reroll auras and do something like "when using a ranged weapon to target this unit with camouflage, unmodified 6s must be rerolled.
I think you largely illustrated the issue with blocking vs concealment, in that an armor modifier is being applied in situations where it does not make sense. On the other hand one can far more commonly reason that intervening objects make a target more difficult to hit. Having it modify armor also leads to situations like daemons, genestealers, or anything with a similar/better invul save to its armor being exactly as difficult to harm when it is behind so-called cover; those concrete barricades may as well be invisible tissue paper.
jivardi wrote: And daemons are still screwed because cover is absolutely pointless except in the rare circumstance you can hide an entire unit.
Not advocating for actual armor for daemons but I think daemons in cover should be harder to kill than daemons out in the open like anything else.
I hope that 9th incorporates the ITC rule making all the first floors of building LOS blocking regardless of windows and crap, either that or improve the inv save of ALL daemon units by 1 (in the 9th ed codex of course).
You really think that a unit of 30 pink horrors should have a 3+ inv when in cover ?
What do you propose to make daemons more survivable? I wouldn't mind a -1 to hit while in cover but with the rumored -1 MAX to hit roll penalties taking 20 plaguebearers to get the -1 to hit is pointless..take 19 of them, save some points and still get the -1 to hit while in cover (which is where 99% of the time my PB's are).
jivardi wrote: What do you propose to make daemons more survivable? I wouldn't mind a -1 to hit while in cover but with the rumored -1 MAX to hit roll penalties taking 20 plaguebearers to get the -1 to hit is pointless..take 19 of them, save some points and still get the -1 to hit while in cover (which is where 99% of the time my PB's are).
Without knowing how cover will work in 9th, i cant propose anything.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't think either system is perfect, and it's hard to advocate for one over the other given that they both have glaring flaws. If I had to choose, I'd take the one that makes things more durable, which is, IMO, the AP/cover save system from 3rd-7th. This would lessen the damage of the Alpha Strike 1st turn. That's not to say that 1st turn wasn't important in previous editions, but with damage rolls and endless sources of mortal wounds, and AP-x up the wazoo, things don't last as long as they used to.
Lessen the damage of Alpha Strike?
Let's see, GEQ unit vs flamers in old system: no armor save, no cover, opponent just takes his models off table without getting to do anything.
GEQ unit vs flamers in new system: 5+ armor save, 4+ in cover, flamers have 0 AP in the first turn so nyah.
GEQ unit vs bolters in old system: no armor save, sudden 5+ in cover unless enemy has common ignore cover rule, drastic change in durability depending on small change in placement (that often led to arguments) is not that good game design.
GEQ unit vs bolters in new system: 5+ armor save, 4+ in cover. Less durable you say?
GEQ unit vs heavy bolters and such in old system: now even expensive units with carapace 4+ save have no armor save, making the upgrade worse than useless.
GEQ unit vs heavy bolters and such in new system: 6+ armor save still, 5+ in cover. 5+/4+ with carapace. Better than old system in all cases, unless enemy stacks AP bonuses, then equal to old system. Still not seeing it.
Tanks in old system: zero armor save, high chance of being blown up with first shot or just being glanced to death with a couple of mid str shots. Add to that AV10 most vehicles had on some facings (or all facings if you had broken Tau rules) making them as durable as wet paper and, well...
Tanks in new system: actual armor save vs everything but strongest weapons, big HP pool, no being instantly made useless with immobilized or weapon blown up damage roll even if the tank was otherwise fine, mid str weapons wounding on 6+ is more of a meme than actual threat. You were saying?
Funny how you mention mortal wounds as the sources of these are pretty rare and often either blockable or require opportunity costs - they are nothing like endless torrents of D shots Eldar and Tau could spew from every orifice in 7th edition from common guns (thanks Kelly for making something that was unique infantry handgun into cheap as chips titan killers). You'd have a point if we were talking about start of 8th edition when Forge World broke the rules in their "totes balanced" usual way with endless cheap chaos psyker spam throwing dozens of mortal wounds every turn but that thankfully had been fixed in weeks from multiple angles. Certainly nothing like Tau and Eldar getting more and more broken garbage (culminating in outright untargetable armies by the end of it) whole edition without a single fix.
Granted, Marines have problems with durability - but they are outlier, not the norm. SM, Sisters and such could be fixed with a rule saying say "Power Armour: reroll failed armor saves unless S of enemy gun is larger than your T" or "Power Armour: ignore first point of AP unless S of enemy gun is 6 or higher" without needing to change the rest of the system.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't think either system is perfect, and it's hard to advocate for one over the other given that they both have glaring flaws. If I had to choose, I'd take the one that makes things more durable, which is, IMO, the AP/cover save system from 3rd-7th. This would lessen the damage of the Alpha Strike 1st turn. That's not to say that 1st turn wasn't important in previous editions, but with damage rolls and endless sources of mortal wounds, and AP-x up the wazoo, things don't last as long as they used to.
Lessen the damage of Alpha Strike?
Let's see, GEQ unit vs flamers in old system: no armor save, no cover, opponent just takes his models off table without getting to do anything.
GEQ unit vs flamers in new system: 5+ armor save, 4+ in cover, flamers have 0 AP in the first turn so nyah.
GEQ unit vs bolters in old system: no armor save, sudden 5+ in cover unless enemy has common ignore cover rule, drastic change in durability depending on small change in placement (that often led to arguments) is not that good game design.
GEQ unit vs bolters in new system: 5+ armor save, 4+ in cover. Less durable you say?
GEQ unit vs heavy bolters and such in old system: now even expensive units with carapace 4+ save have no armor save, making the upgrade worse than useless.
GEQ unit vs heavy bolters and such in new system: 6+ armor save still, 5+ in cover. 5+/4+ with carapace. Better than old system in all cases, unless enemy stacks AP bonuses, then equal to old system. Still not seeing it.
Tanks in old system: zero armor save, high chance of being blown up with first shot or just being glanced to death with a couple of mid str shots. Add to that AV10 most vehicles had on some facings (or all facings if you had broken Tau rules) making them as durable as wet paper and, well...
Tanks in new system: actual armor save vs everything but strongest weapons, big HP pool, no being instantly made useless with immobilized or weapon blown up damage roll even if the tank was otherwise fine, mid str weapons wounding on 6+ is more of a meme than actual threat. You were saying?
Funny how you mention mortal wounds as the sources of these are pretty rare and often either blockable or require opportunity costs - they are nothing like endless torrents of D shots Eldar and Tau could spew from every orifice in 7th edition from common guns (thanks Kelly for making something that was unique infantry handgun into cheap as chips titan killers). You'd have a point if we were talking about start of 8th edition when Forge World broke the rules in their "totes balanced" usual way with endless cheap chaos psyker spam throwing dozens of mortal wounds every turn but that thankfully had been fixed in weeks from multiple angles. Certainly nothing like Tau and Eldar getting more and more broken garbage (culminating in outright untargetable armies by the end of it) whole edition without a single fix.
Granted, Marines have problems with durability - but they are outlier, not the norm. SM, Sisters and such could be fixed with a rule saying say "Power Armour: reroll failed armor saves unless S of enemy gun is larger than your T" or "Power Armour: ignore first point of AP unless S of enemy gun is 6 or higher" without needing to change the rest of the system.
Mid strengths are 5-7, High is 8+, low is 4 or less, mid strength weapons don't wound on 6+, they wound of 5+, add in rerolls and that goes to the equivalent of 4.x. depending upon the reroll mechanic.
Additionally in the old system you didnt get full rerolls to hit often.
Also your using guard as your reference point for a balanced unit, the army that gained more durability in the edition change than any other.
It seems the limitation on picking the same exalted power for multiple daemons is on those 2 pages (as it wasn't on any of the other pages).
I suspect that the rest of those 2 pages will just be repeating existing daemon rules but share p5freak's interest in confirming it.
The lapdog knights' rules have been leaked on other sites today. Not sure what the rules on linking pictures of them are here?
Summary:
No new relics.
6 warlord traits (3 for questor/mechanicus) - best one is roll an extra dice when working out number of shots discard one after rolling, works on all your guns.
14 strategems (each knight chasis gets a strat, they are all "ok").
Build your own household traits (similar to Chaos).
The big one their own version of the "free" iconoclast/infernal households... For questor (+1 to charge/advance - no stacking). For mechanicus (heal 1 wound per turn).
Looking over the Chaos Knights stuff, does <Dread Household> stack with household ambition? I don't see any reason why not. It adds a new keyword, and gives abilities on that keyword. That being said, Lucaris seems really good for melee spikyknights. +1 to hit, +1 attack and improved AP make melee wardogs much better.
EightFoldPath wrote: It seems the limitation on picking the same exalted power for multiple daemons is on those 2 pages (as it wasn't on any of the other pages).
I suspect that the rest of those 2 pages will just be repeating existing daemon rules but share p5freak's interest in confirming it.
The lapdog knights' rules have been leaked on other sites today. Not sure what the rules on linking pictures of them are here?
Summary:
No new relics.
6 warlord traits (3 for questor/mechanicus) - best one is roll an extra dice when working out number of shots discard one after rolling, works on all your guns.
14 strategems (each knight chasis gets a strat, they are all "ok").
Build your own household traits (similar to Chaos).
The big one their own version of the "free" iconoclast/infernal households... For questor (+1 to charge/advance - no stacking). For mechanicus (heal 1 wound per turn).
That Warlord Trait would be fun with Thunder of Volt or whatever. That's rolling 4D6 and losing the lowest two. Not very practical but there ya go.
StarHunter25 wrote: Looking over the Chaos Knights stuff, does <Dread Household> stack with household ambition? I don't see any reason why not. It adds a new keyword, and gives abilities on that keyword. That being said, Lucaris seems really good for melee spikyknights. +1 to hit, +1 attack and improved AP make melee wardogs much better.
As the named houses are locked to icconoclast or infernal they only stack with their respective questior alligence.
StarHunter25 wrote: Looking over the Chaos Knights stuff, does <Dread Household> stack with household ambition? I don't see any reason why not. It adds a new keyword, and gives abilities on that keyword. That being said, Lucaris seems really good for melee spikyknights. +1 to hit, +1 attack and improved AP make melee wardogs much better.
As the named houses are locked to icconoclast or infernal they only stack with their respective questior alligence.
Lucaris only gives +1 to hit.
Yes. So lucaris has, Virtue through Strength gives +1 to hit, and being iconoclast gives +1 attack and improves ap by 1.
StarHunter25 wrote: Looking over the Chaos Knights stuff, does <Dread Household> stack with household ambition? I don't see any reason why not. It adds a new keyword, and gives abilities on that keyword. That being said, Lucaris seems really good for melee spikyknights. +1 to hit, +1 attack and improved AP make melee wardogs much better.
As the named houses are locked to icconoclast or infernal they only stack with their respective questior alligence.
Lucaris only gives +1 to hit.
Yes. So lucaris has, Virtue through Strength gives +1 to hit, and being iconoclast gives +1 attack and improves ap by 1.
Wow that makes the Imperial buffs look shockingly poor in comparison.
They can have the +1 to hit household but they get a non stacking +1 advance and charge trait and thats it as their equivalent of the +1attack +1ap
p5freak wrote: Still curious what the infinite forms of corruption are. Those havent been leaked yet.
2 pages of fluff I guess (all the rules weee leaked, so I would be very surprised if it was in fact an additional hidden rule..)
I dont think so. Fluff is before datasheets. The infinite forms of corruption is within the rules section.
What about a gallery of painted models or painted armies?
We got full leaks on everything, except for the fluff sections. I also hope like you that these are in fact doctrines style rules (I hope!)
But I fear fluff and painted gallery..
p5freak wrote: Still curious what the infinite forms of corruption are. Those havent been leaked yet.
2 pages of fluff I guess (all the rules weee leaked, so I would be very surprised if it was in fact an additional hidden rule..)
I dont think so. Fluff is before datasheets. The infinite forms of corruption is within the rules section.
What about a gallery of painted models or painted armies?
We got full leaks on everything, except for the fluff sections. I also hope like you that these are in fact doctrines style rules (I hope!)
But I fear fluff and painted gallery..
