Irkjoe wrote:
The planet is not your property being stolen from you and reason for you to get free stuff.

It's as much my planet as it is any other beings. Just as it's also your planet.

Also workers sell their labor for money, nothing is stolen.

They're coerced into selling their labor by a system shaped by the very companies offering money in exchange for time. This is a vicious cycle that has depressed wages and resulted in record profits for companies even through two global financial crises.

Shall we just lock this one up then?

I mean ... unless someone has news RE: Demons and DG’s ability to summon them?

Tycho wrote:
Shall we just lock this one up then?

I mean ... unless someone has news RE: Demons and DG’s ability to summon them?

i havnt seen the full codex yet so i can't really know if summoning is gone or not. Honestly if its still in the game in the same way as in 8th, it might as well be removed since its so bad.

Tycho wrote:
Shall we just lock this one up then?

I mean ... unless someone has news RE: Demons and DG’s ability to summon them?

Pretty sure it doesn't exist. Detachment abilities is where I figure it would land, but that transitions right into Plague Companies.

i havnt seen the full codex yet so i can't really know if summoning is gone or not. Honestly if its still in the game in the same way as in 8th, it might as well be removed since its so bad.

I mean that’s fair - I’m not claiming it was great, but it was a fun reason for me to by a GUO and a Get Started w/Nurgle box that I’d still like to be able to use w/out the need to bring them as a detachment.

Pretty sure it doesn't exist. Detachment abilities is where I figure it would land, but that transitions right into Plague Companies

.

Balls. I was afraid of that ...
If that gets carried through to Tsons and CSM, I may be sitting this edition out ...

Even if it's not in the DG codex, the rule from the CSM codex or Daemons codex is still valid to use with DG armies, as DEATH GUARD CHARACTERS are also CHAOS CHARACTERS.

I would suspect it could still exist, but as part of the upcoming Daemons book.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Even if it's not in the DG codex, the rule from the CSM codex or Daemons codex is still valid to use with DG armies, as DEATH GUARD CHARACTERS are also CHAOS CHARACTERS.

How would that work mechanically? Would you need a detachment of one of them? Can't think of another instance where you can take a pure faction army and then use a rule from a different book to interact with datasheets from a third book mid game.

I would suspect it could still exist, but as part of the upcoming Daemons book

Possibly - you and Baconcatbug both make good points but you would think we’d have seen that change in the most recent FAQ if that were the case ... eh guess we’ll have to wait and see lol

 Eldarain wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Even if it's not in the DG codex, the rule from the CSM codex or Daemons codex is still valid to use with DG armies, as DEATH GUARD CHARACTERS are also CHAOS CHARACTERS.

How would that work mechanically? Would you need a detachment of one of them? Can't think of another instance where you can take a pure faction army and then use a rule from a different book to interact with datasheets from a third book mid game.

The Daemon summoning rule has ALWAYS worked this way. Chaos Knights that become CHARACTERS and RnH Malefic Lords can summon just fine. The rule doesn't care what book the CHAOS CHARACTER comes from, it applies to all CHAOS CHARACTERS regardless.

Fair. Just never gave it much thought beyond it being an option in the CSM book to me. Odd in a new system so obsessed with keyword compliant detachments being how you unlock just about everything else.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Ever wonder why Disney is pushing crummy live action remakes?

No, but if I ever have a desire to watch them I'll ensure the profit mongers don't see a single red cent of my money.

Judge, jury, and executioner eh?

GW has carbon footprint awareness and a policy. They also publish their CEO pay against the employees and he makes 26 times the average worker. Compare to the average American CEO makes 271 times the average worker. They're also a significant employer for the local area when they could easily outsource to China.

They have a policy, that means jack unless the policy makes them carbon-neutral or better. I don't just mean technically carbon neutral either, I mean from the harvesting of raw materials to the point where they ship goods to a store I want 0 net carbon emissions from them and every other company. If they can't do that their policy means jack all and simply isn't doing enough to stop the runaway heating of our planet.

The CEO only makes 26 times more than the average worker. I suppose we should bend the knee and kiss his boots for being such a generous soul. I think not.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well guess he needs to cut his pay to hire some competent designers and editors then.

Well they could stop paying so much to shareholders, but I don't think that would go over well with the board.

Nobody forced them to go public so they have naught but themselves to blame for any issues that may cause.

So your logic is extremely forgiving towards corporations; one that does nothing to control its carbon footprint and pollutes completely without concern is no worse than one which actively makes an effort to reduce theirs, and a company which pays its CEO hundreds or even thousands of times more than the average worker is only as bad as one that pays its CEO 26 times more. TBH this viewpoint is pretty big on the corporate apologist track which seems at odds with your general sentiment.

Also FYI; even if you buy nothing from GW you help their business by playing Warhammer because you add to a community which does purchase their models. Even by driving discussion on a forum like this you add engagement and community activity that GW's business would not survive without. You are playing a vital role in supporting the company.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
So your logic is extremely forgiving towards corporations; one that does nothing to control its carbon footprint and pollutes completely without concern is no worse than one which actively makes an effort to reduce theirs, and a company which pays its CEO hundreds or even thousands of times more than the average worker is only as bad as one that pays its CEO 26 times more. TBH this viewpoint is pretty big on the corporate apologist track which seems at odds with your general sentiment.

A 'good' company is still an evil to be struck down the same as a bad one. Capitalism is awful even if the CEO only makes 26 times more than his average employee and the company makes claims that they're doing something vaguely green.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
So your logic is extremely forgiving towards corporations; one that does nothing to control its carbon footprint and pollutes completely without concern is no worse than one which actively makes an effort to reduce theirs, and a company which pays its CEO hundreds or even thousands of times more than the average worker is only as bad as one that pays its CEO 26 times more. TBH this viewpoint is pretty big on the corporate apologist track which seems at odds with your general sentiment.

A 'good' company is still an evil to be struck down the same as a bad one. Capitalism is awful even if the CEO only makes 26 times more than his average employee and the company makes claims that they're doing something vaguely green.

Right, so you are saying that a company with no green initiatives, or hell even actively works to dismantle them, is not worse in moral quality than a company which does make an effort, even an insufficient one. It is like saying a person who steals a million dollars in credit fraud is no worse than a random shoplifter, so I am pretty shocked by your degree of forgiveness towards corporations that you seem to dislike. I have met corporate apologists less dedicated to defending them than that.

This thread has gone wildly off topic, and I do not have the time to prune it, so I'm going to close it at the point.