With the new campaign getting off to a start and armies seeing new models, I feel it’s time to address the Necron problem. Sure, there are many things that the Necrons need such as effective anti-armour being more commonplace, but for me they really need something decent to paint.
This may seem a silly suggestion, but from the perspective of the building and painting side of the hobby, Necrons are just boring! However the appeal of a new model could address this issue with a nice new C’Tan model. This model would give them some great artistic licence, the kind of which is only really seen in AOS and you never know - stick some nice rules with it to make the thing closer to a Primarch and you have got yourself a winner. Think of the story of the CTan. It doesn’t have to be a shard, it could be one of the unknowns or even just redo the Deciever / Nightbringer with some kind of story around a combination of many of its shards.
Whatever the outcome though, for the love of god, give us something decent and challenging to paint.
This might offend some people, but Necrons are one of "the big three" (Tyranids, Necrons, Orks) who are simply always going to languish compared to other races. These are the races that GW struggles to write decent fluff for...struggles to write novels involving them (often for good reason), struggles to justify including them in random campaigns - where they frequently feel wildly out of place, etc.
One of the GW authors said a few years ago "no one wants to write Ork novels..." and I suspect there are simply races in 40K which are not primary movers/shakers for GW. Necrons are almost old enough now to get a full army revisit...but will they? How high are they on the priority list? It'd be nice if you get at least something more than the single-character you've gotten in the last...3-4 years? I mean, Eldar got a kit in plastic for crying out loud...so everyone stands a chance!
Elbows wrote: This might offend some people, but Necrons are one of "the big three" (Tyranids, Necrons, Orks) who are simply always going to languish compared to other races. These are the races that GW struggles to write decent fluff for...struggles to write novels involving them (often for good reason), struggles to justify including them in random campaigns - where they frequently feel wildly out of place, etc.
One of the GW authors said a few years ago "no one wants to write Ork novels..." and I suspect there are simply races in 40K which are not primary movers/shakers for GW. Necrons are almost old enough now to get a full army revisit...but will they? How high are they on the priority list? It'd be nice if you get at least something more than the single-character you've gotten in the last...3-4 years? I mean, Eldar got a kit in plastic for crying out loud...so everyone stands a chance!
Is it that no one wants to, or that know one is clever enough to?
Given the amount of trash C rate stores the BL puts out, I'm willing to bet they just don't have any clever writers that can tell a story about something not 10 foot tall and clad in powered armor suits.
See, I think all three of those races make for fantastic foes for a novel. Necrons and Tyranids especially can have a real aura of existential doom if written well.
Considering how TFS is currently making a role play series where they play as Orks, and considering how damn good it is, I'll just chalk up Black Library's inability to write anything that's not Imperium related to incompetence. TFS doesn't even know the lore all that well. I think only a couple of them play 40k, and they still do a better job covering orks than GW.
Also, Xenology was a thing. Necrons are the monsters and villains, imo, and you can write good villains and monsters. They don't just have to be cannon fodder.
Sumilidon wrote: Yeah I can imagine how boring many of those books would be.
Tyranids
Hive Mind: Eat
Hive Mind: Yes, eat
Necrons
Human: cool, he looks like one of those things from those films 40,000 years ago - I love those films
Necron: what is love?
You don't write from their perspective, obviously. Or if you do, you keep it minimal and do it well.
"what is love?" baby don't hurt me
don't hurt me
no more
devestation of Bhaal had some great tyranid stuff, but yeah IMHO 'nids wouldn't work as a protagionist. they're pure antagionists. they'd no more work in a novel series then Jaws would work if written from the shark's POV
Asking for something interesting to paint sure sounds unique as a request
Even though I'm not collecting them, I would love to get more lore about the remaining C'tans in the galaxy. Maybe something to give them the menacing aura back that they had in their 3rd edition Codex.
Xenology was a great book by the way, I wish I could remember where I put my copy
a_typical_hero wrote: Asking for something interesting to paint sure sounds unique as a request
Even though I'm not collecting them, I would love to get more lore about the remaining C'tans in the galaxy. Maybe something to give them the menacing aura back that they had in their 3rd edition Codex.
Xenology was a great book by the way, I wish I could remember where I put my copy
Yeah, I'm not a fan of the dynasty Necron / C'tan Slave route and basically canning the old 3rd ed lore.
I think it would have been better if there were more possibilities. Like, you have your Dynastic Necrons, but you also have rogue C'tan shards controlling Necrons like they used to and renegade AIs like the Empire of the Severed.
The necrons could be engaged in a huge civil war, with the Dynastic Necrons trying to contain C'tan and AIs, the C'tan trying to reclaim their errant slaves and the AI just running amok. It would explain why they Necrons, for all their power and advanced tech, just haven't steam rolled the galaxy yet.
I was hoping to see faction traits that would represent the Severed, but unfortunately no. In fact, I think the last time the Severed was mentioned was in the 5th ed book, which is a pity.
Insectum7 wrote: See, I think all three of those races make for fantastic foes for a novel. Necrons and Tyranids especially can have a real aura of existential doom if written well.
I quite like how the Necrons are portrayed in the Cain books, especially Caves of Ice - the protagonist will face most opponents equally unhappily, but bricks it any time Necrons are mentioned, or even if a green glow is referenced...
Insectum7 wrote: See, I think all three of those races make for fantastic foes for a novel. Necrons and Tyranids especially can have a real aura of existential doom if written well.
I quite like how the Necrons are portrayed in the Cain books, especially Caves of Ice - the protagonist will face most opponents equally unhappily, but bricks it any time Necrons are mentioned, or even if a green glow is referenced...
Yeah, the Ciaphas Cain books are good. Probably not entirely fluffy, but they are a fun read, and I don't recall there being space marines getting their chainswords oiled by the author.
Insectum7 wrote: See, I think all three of those races make for fantastic foes for a novel. Necrons and Tyranids especially can have a real aura of existential doom if written well.
I quite like how the Necrons are portrayed in the Cain books, especially Caves of Ice - the protagonist will face most opponents equally unhappily, but bricks it any time Necrons are mentioned, or even if a green glow is referenced...
... something?
... a better treatment by GW?
Marines are in the focus of GW - more than ever.
Xenos bring less sales I guess and so have to wait until there is enough time between two Marine releases.
Crons at this point are the xenos race with the least attention given to them, assuming the eldar and dark eldar box is a precursor to a wave of new minis for them. since th starts 6th edition every xenos army has gotten a decent number (more then a single unit or something) of minis. except necrons. given that necrons through blackstone are set to be an important element of the setting I suspect we'll see 'crons take center stage down the line. my gut is they'll be front and center in part of PA.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Considering how TFS is currently making a role play series where they play as Orks, and considering how damn good it is, I'll just chalk up Black Library's inability to write anything that's not Imperium related to incompetence. TFS doesn't even know the lore all that well. I think only a couple of them play 40k, and they still do a better job covering orks than GW.
Who or what is TFS? Link to the product where they cover Orks well?
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, I'm not a fan of the dynasty Necron / C'tan Slave route and basically canning the old 3rd ed lore. I think it would have been better if there were more possibilities. Like, you have your Dynastic Necrons, but you also have rogue C'tan shards controlling Necrons like they used to and renegade AIs like the Empire of the Severed. The necrons could be engaged in a huge civil war, with the Dynastic Necrons trying to contain C'tan and AIs, the C'tan trying to reclaim their errant slaves and the AI just running amok. It would explain why they Necrons, for all their power and advanced tech, just haven't steam rolled the galaxy yet.
I was hoping to see faction traits that would represent the Severed, but unfortunately no. In fact, I think the last time the Severed was mentioned was in the 5th ed book, which is a pity.
The Severed still appear in the fluff and it has actually gone from one from several if I remember 5th correctly it was only 1 Tomb World AI. Make Spyders HQ Characters and you can represent the Severed, they don't really need a unique Chapter Tactic IMO. I think Dynasty Necrons are the most interesting, I'd like maybe one or two C'tan based Dynasties and maybe rules for a Severed Dynasty, but the old fluff was a little too close to the Nid theme IMO. Something very old and powerful waking up and something very powerful and alien coming from another galaxy, those two fears aren't really that different IMO. Dynasty Necrons are one of the most unique factions in the game now, not just Tyranid wannabes.
Sumilidon wrote: Yeah I can imagine how boring many of those books would be. Tyranids Hive Mind: Eat Hive Mind: Yes, eat
Necrons Human: cool, he looks like one of those things from those films 40,000 years ago - I love those films Necron: what is love?
You don't write from their perspective, obviously. Or if you do, you keep it minimal and do it well.
"what is love?" baby don't hurt me don't hurt me no more
I haven't seen it yet but my sister said the new Joker movie is good. You can do villain centric stories well, my favourite web novel Worm is villain centric as well. Code Geass and Death Note are some of the most popular manga and anime and they are both villain-centric. We also have shows like Lucifer, Legion, The Boys and Preacher which all seem villain centric although I haven't finished any of them and Game of Thrones is villain centric more often than not for the simple fact that most of the cast are villains in some form.
The Zerg were controlled by the Overmind and yet the Zerg missions in Starcraft 2 were my favourite story-wise, transferring control over to a mostly human protagonist helped, but you can still give the Tyranids semblances of human emotions, like annoyance when your food is denied to you or loss when an important piece of biological engineering is lost and has to be recreated at a loss for the fleet. The horror at all the food being burned when the Imperium uses exterminatus.
Necrons aren't really bigger gits than the protagonists of Code Geass and Worm, they just have different ideas of what is right and wrong. Is it okay to rule through fear caused by the threat of extermination? To eat people's crotch off with insects or to control people's bodies? Am I talking about Necrons or the protagonists of these two stories?
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Considering how TFS is currently making a role play series where they play as Orks, and considering how damn good it is, I'll just chalk up Black Library's inability to write anything that's not Imperium related to incompetence.
TFS doesn't even know the lore all that well. I think only a couple of them play 40k, and they still do a better job covering orks than GW.
Who or what is TFS? Link to the product where they cover Orks well?
Team Four Star, or at least a few of their members, are doing a ork RPG campaign using wrath and glory, they did a fantasy flight game a few years back for the same deal, first of their recent episodes here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXegPU0MQcQ
But it boils down to guys having fun being stupid and violent while putting on bad accents in the grim darkness, which is really the majority of being an ork.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Considering how TFS is currently making a role play series where they play as Orks, and considering how damn good it is, I'll just chalk up Black Library's inability to write anything that's not Imperium related to incompetence.
TFS doesn't even know the lore all that well. I think only a couple of them play 40k, and they still do a better job covering orks than GW.
Who or what is TFS? Link to the product where they cover Orks well?
I like the Necrons visual style, but a lot of their models are such a ballache to build/paint. Doomsday Arks, Tomb Blades etc.
Our look is fine, we just need a complete rules overhaul because we're so hilariously bad compared to everyone else (except Grey Knights). Maybe the silver armies have to suck, it's like a law of 8th edition?
From a gameplay perspective, I think they need indirect fire; they simply don’t have a good way outside of melee to deal with stuff out of LOS. The other change they need is a way to make Gauss good against vehicles again; I think either 6’s to wound causing additional damage to vehicles or even a mortal wound would make them terrifying again to vehicles. Also giving Scarabs some kind of anti-vehicle tech as well would be good.
Mortal wound to everything would be better rather than just vehicles. Keep in mind they had to use small guns when first introduced to attack anything above T6.
Another idea would be to steal what Infiltrators have, and hits of 6+ score auto wounding. It would be a start and less broken than mortal wound mechanics.
As far as I can remember, gauss never had anything special against monsters or stuff like terminators. It was strictly against vehicles, and was highly effective depending on the edition.
greyknight12 wrote: As far as I can remember, gauss never had anything special against monsters or stuff like terminators. It was strictly against vehicles, and was highly effective depending on the edition.
It used to auto wound on a 6, which most people forget because, granted, it didn't pop up a lot.
I think gauss weapons and scarabs need unique rules again. Scarabs shredding wounds of vehicles in combat out side of attacks would work, like a MW per base in contact.
Prob have to be MW for gauss too. But need something like that. Other than that plastic flayed ones and a nice new C’tan and we are good. Love playing my necrons in 8th.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I think gauss weapons and scarabs need unique rules again. Scarabs shredding wounds of vehicles in combat out side of attacks would work, like a MW per base in contact.
Prob have to be MW for gauss too. But need something like that. Other than that plastic flayed ones and a nice new C’tan and we are good. Love playing my necrons in 8th.
Yeah, gauss need a unique gimmick again. GW thought they were giving necrons something unique in the form of "extra" AP, but then they started to give everything extra AP and damage, so its not that special anymore.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, gauss need a unique gimmick again. GW thought they were giving necrons something unique in the form of "extra" AP, but then they started to give everything extra AP and damage, so its not that special anymore.
Yeah if they want it to be special it needs to a lot of AP but that changed them too much. I always liked that they could mess up vehicles. So maybe something like haywire, D3 Damage vs vehicles.
Pyrothem wrote: Also something needs to be done with the Monolith. That Poor model deserves some unique rules to bring that Iconic unit back to the table.
on that I agree, IMHO a lot of the older iconic centerpieces are suffering and GW needs to try to bring them back a bit. Land Raiders are in the same boatr. them and Monoliths are some of the most iconic "big tanks" in the GAME (let alone for their faction) but they're seldom worth taking.
Pyrothem wrote: Also something needs to be done with the Monolith. That Poor model deserves some unique rules to bring that Iconic unit back to the table.
on that I agree, IMHO a lot of the older iconic centerpieces are suffering and GW needs to try to bring them back a bit. Land Raiders are in the same boatr. them and Monoliths are some of the most iconic "big tanks" in the GAME (let alone for their faction) but they're seldom worth taking.
Land Raiders need to be able to push infantry and bikers out of the way for their movement. Suddenly they would make some sense.
I'd like c'tan to go back to being Lovecraftian horrors rather than pokemon. I know expecting a third reboot of necron fluff is a bit much but I wouldn't mind if c'tan shards were more like the spawn of their parent c'tan (like Starspawn are to Cthulhu for example) and necrons are basically mindless henchmen anyway with overlords serving as priests. I dunno, I prefered necrons as unknowable soul harvesters instead of retired Team Rocket members yelling at the younger trainers to get out of their long grass.
As far as rules go I think the whole army need a rethink. GW obviously stuggles with making Reanimation Protocols work in a way thats not just FnP by a different name and then costing appropriatly.
Orks, Necrons and Tyranids are ripe material for cool short stories.
I always thought that a short story from the Ork perspective where they talk normally, even perhaps with great eloquence, and the humans they interact with are written to have ridiculously weedy, pompous, foppish speech would be great. You could also do the same with the Orks encountering Eldar, Necrons, Tau etc. Really put across the Orkish mindset by giving the reader a funny direct view into how they perceive the world.
Tyranids would be amazing for something really putting across their Hive nature. Something like what Jerry Holkins manages to do in the DnD game he runs where the players are experiencing what it is like to be a myconid colony
Spoiler:
This is the kind of thing that should be in white dwarf, periodical short stories, comic strips etc.
What Necrons need? this comes up often in my local meta where we do have a lot of necron players (most of which use the OLD old Necron Lord with the silly hat!) I also played Necrons a lot in 5th because I fell in love with the Monolith and the old metal wraiths.
We always thought the following would of helped with NEcrons -
Retool the monolith. Like seriously. 2+ 5++ and maybe optional repair scarab upgrade where start of your turn roll d6 for each lost wound, 6+ regain that wound (5+ is a spyder is within 6"). Plus the tanks guns need an upgrade but I believe that's an issue with fixing gauss aswell.
Maybe a stratagem (2/3cp? depending on PL) that allows at the end of a phase a necron infantry unit was wiped out, you can perform resurrection protocols as normal (return first model within 1" of where the last model in the unit was killed, models that fled due to battleshock may not ressurect).
Gauss needs a straight retool, it's probably been said hundreds of times but auto wound on unmodified hit rolls of 6 (Sorry MWBD), maybe a stratagem to allow units with Gauss weapons within X" of a crpytek to increase either str, ap or damage? Or just make it a flat cryptek variant or upgrade.
Bring back Pariahs or a Lychguard equiv to allow denies of enemy psychic powers.
I'm not sure if any of those would be good or over the top however, but certainly would help with the whole undying recusion theme.
There was a great bit in Caves Of Ice where Cain and his squad nearly lose their mind from just being in the general vicinity of pariahs. It was great, I was sad they got axed.
The thing I most hate about Necrons right now is how few of their rules actually make them feel like the technologically advanced horror they're supposed to be. I think Quantum Shielding and maybe Wraiths in general kind of do, but nothing else makes them feel like they're a particularly advanced race.
Gauss probably needs a rework of some type, maybe to make it better against vehicles. The Monolith went from an iconic unit to a giant waste of space and probably needs an overhaul from the ground up. Reanimation Protocols are a good idea in principle but in practice they're too easy to circumvent so maybe some way to roll for completely removed units (probably once only) would be welcome. Necron characters need to be more dangerous too. I don't mind them not being able to clear out entire squads at once but if you're going to only give them 3 attacks they better be good at killing...something.
I feel that the Necrons suffer from having a lot of pretty interesting design decisions implemented in their army that were then completely nullified by GW's inability to balance the game as a whole. So, while I like the idea of Necrons having more selective buffs and shorter ranges on those buffs, the fact most other armies get 6" auras makes the Necrons just feel needlessly weak. Similarly, the characters were obviously meant to be slow but powerful in close combat but the Warscythe is just terrible compared to almost every other army's weapons.
Stupid question, when did Warriors go from 3+ to 4+ save?
I remember back when Necrons were first introduced, and they basically had a Marine statline plus 4+ We'll Be Back roll. They were both hard as nails, and capable of shredding even heavy vehicles. They felt appropriately scary- they just kept coming, and even the most basic troops were a serious threat.
Now it seems like they're... more equivalent to Fire Warriors? And you just need to focus fire the squads to totally deny their resurrection? It's very weird to me, they seem less Terminator-in-space and more like a sci-fi interpretation of generic D&D skeleton warriors.
They went to a 4+ save in the 5th edition Codex. Though your point about them being more akin to skeleton warriors seems pretty spot on. Necrons are taking each step towards Tomb Kings in space. They're currently somewhere between the 8th edition fantasy Army Book release, and the long forgotten period of Tomb Kings.
Funnily enough, how they worked in fluff was like WHFB's undead.
Lots of "expendable" units (warriors and scarabs) supported by powerful lords and specialized units. Except they were better than just skeletons, as warriors were really tough.
Right now they don't really play like that, they play more like, idk, inferior marines or something.
Give lychguard back their ability to ricochet shots back at the enemy. Seriously, it was the reason I bought ‘me in 5E, and it is flat insulting that ability was taken away - only to be given to the Tau tidewall piece of terrain.
Stormonu wrote: Give lychguard back their ability to ricochet shots back at the enemy. Seriously, it was the reason I bought ‘me in 5E, and it is flat insulting that ability was taken away - only to be given to the Tau tidewall piece of terrain.
Stormonu wrote: Give lychguard back their ability to ricochet shots back at the enemy. Seriously, it was the reason I bought ‘me in 5E, and it is flat insulting that ability was taken away - only to be given to the Tau tidewall piece of terrain.
But they have that though? Its a stratagem now.
Having to pay a limited resource to reacquire, in a much more limited form, what was an inherent characteristic of a unit doesn't feel great as a player.
This is coming from a Tau player still very salty about how JSJ was removed from all jetpacks and relegated to a relic unique to one Sept.
There was a great bit in Caves Of Ice where Cain and his squad nearly lose their mind from just being in the general vicinity of pariahs. It was great, I was sad they got axed.
Stormonu wrote: Give lychguard back their ability to ricochet shots back at the enemy. Seriously, it was the reason I bought ‘me in 5E, and it is flat insulting that ability was taken away - only to be given to the Tau tidewall piece of terrain.
But they have that though? Its a stratagem now.
Having to pay a limited resource to reacquire, in a much more limited form, what was an inherent characteristic of a unit doesn't feel great as a player.
This is coming from a Tau player still very salty about how JSJ was removed from all jetpacks and relegated to a relic unique to one Sept.
Yeah, I can agree with that. I really don't like this stratagem system, where they take abilities that units had and make you pay a resource for it.
They're just adding strats for the sake of it.
Necron Infantry need to be tougher, and gauss needs to be more killy to give you a reason to take it.
The monolith costs as much as a knight, and isn't half as good as one. Its a sad state of affairs.
Lychguard really just need 2 things to be great. The ability to ride in a ghost ark, and the ability to mix sword/board and warscythes. Do that, and they become a pretty strong unit.
Flayed Ones.....now thats a forgotten unit...they need rerolls to charge natively, an extra attack, an extra point of strength, and a 2-3 point per model drop.
Deathmarks. Cool Concept...Make them range 30, 6s to hit auto wound, 6s cause mortal wounds, and give them AP-1.
Elbows wrote: This might offend some people, but Necrons are one of "the big three" (Tyranids, Necrons, Orks) who are simply always going to languish compared to other races. These are the races that GW struggles to write decent fluff for...struggles to write novels involving them (often for good reason), struggles to justify including them in random campaigns - where they frequently feel wildly out of place, etc.
One of the GW authors said a few years ago "no one wants to write Ork novels..." and I suspect there are simply races in 40K which are not primary movers/shakers for GW. Necrons are almost old enough now to get a full army revisit...but will they? How high are they on the priority list? It'd be nice if you get at least something more than the single-character you've gotten in the last...3-4 years? I mean, Eldar got a kit in plastic for crying out loud...so everyone stands a chance!
Well here's a crazy thought.
Necron - they wont let things go 'just as planned'. They lost once due to warp and old one's mastery over it, so they're going to destroy warp and everything that has to do with it. Story focuses on how necron thinks they're beating tzeench but it was yet again'just as planned' for the benefit of tzeench. Necron vs Tzeench
Tau - Tau eschews personal gains & pleasure for the greater good. The ethereal caste sees the growing warp as the enemy of the greater good, launches a campaign against the warp. Story focuses on ethereals unveiling to the public about the warp and how the society reacts to it. Tau vs. Slaanesh.
Tyranid - they devour to live and live to devour. They don't like nurgle rotting away all their food. Story focuses on tyranids invading an on going nurgle-IoM conflict into a three way battle. Tyranid vs. Nurgle
Orks - they always love a good fight. Khorne likes a good bloodbath. Story focuses on... fights? Orks vs. Khorne.
Elbows wrote: This might offend some people, but Necrons are one of "the big three" (Tyranids, Necrons, Orks) who are simply always going to languish compared to other races. These are the races that GW struggles to write decent fluff for...struggles to write novels involving them (often for good reason), struggles to justify including them in random campaigns - where they frequently feel wildly out of place, etc.
One of the GW authors said a few years ago "no one wants to write Ork novels..." and I suspect there are simply races in 40K which are not primary movers/shakers for GW. Necrons are almost old enough now to get a full army revisit...but will they? How high are they on the priority list? It'd be nice if you get at least something more than the single-character you've gotten in the last...3-4 years? I mean, Eldar got a kit in plastic for crying out loud...so everyone stands a chance!
Well here's a crazy thought.
Necron - they wont let things go 'just as planned'. They lost once due to warp and old one's mastery over it, so they're going to destroy warp and everything that has to do with it. Story focuses on how necron thinks they're beating tzeench but it was yet again'just as planned' for the benefit of tzeench. Necron vs Tzeench
Tau - Tau eschews personal gains & pleasure for the greater good. The ethereal caste sees the growing warp as the enemy of the greater good, launches a campaign against the warp. Story focuses on ethereals unveiling to the public about the warp and how the society reacts to it. Tau vs. Slaanesh.
Tyranid - they devour to live and live to devour. They don't like nurgle rotting away all their food. Story focuses on tyranids invading an on going nurgle-IoM conflict into a three way battle. Tyranid vs. Nurgle
Orks - they always love a good fight. Khorne likes a good bloodbath. Story focuses on... fights? Orks vs. Khorne.
Nice ideas, but you know GW would only be interested in how they would interact with the IoM, specifically Space Marines, so we’d never see any of the above.
Elbows wrote: This might offend some people, but Necrons are one of "the big three" (Tyranids, Necrons, Orks) who are simply always going to languish compared to other races. These are the races that GW struggles to write decent fluff for...struggles to write novels involving them (often for good reason), struggles to justify including them in random campaigns - where they frequently feel wildly out of place, etc.
One of the GW authors said a few years ago "no one wants to write Ork novels..." and I suspect there are simply races in 40K which are not primary movers/shakers for GW. Necrons are almost old enough now to get a full army revisit...but will they? How high are they on the priority list? It'd be nice if you get at least something more than the single-character you've gotten in the last...3-4 years? I mean, Eldar got a kit in plastic for crying out loud...so everyone stands a chance!
Well here's a crazy thought.
Necron - they wont let things go 'just as planned'. They lost once due to warp and old one's mastery over it, so they're going to destroy warp and everything that has to do with it. Story focuses on how necron thinks they're beating tzeench but it was yet again'just as planned' for the benefit of tzeench. Necron vs Tzeench Tau - Tau eschews personal gains & pleasure for the greater good. The ethereal caste sees the growing warp as the enemy of the greater good, launches a campaign against the warp. Story focuses on ethereals unveiling to the public about the warp and how the society reacts to it. Tau vs. Slaanesh. Tyranid - they devour to live and live to devour. They don't like nurgle rotting away all their food. Story focuses on tyranids invading an on going nurgle-IoM conflict into a three way battle. Tyranid vs. Nurgle Orks - they always love a good fight. Khorne likes a good bloodbath. Story focuses on... fights? Orks vs. Khorne.
Nice ideas, but you know GW would only be interested in how they would interact with the IoM, specifically Space Marines, so we’d never see any of the above.
Well that's true. I've never read any of the novels myself - are SM/IoM always the protagonists?
Having said, there has been a trend of putting the antagonists in a new light utilizing the concept of anti-hero. A good example would be the recently released 'Joker', and an older example being 'Wicked'.
To elaborate on my earlier post...and without anything to back this up, I just feel it's entirely possible that none of the Black Library authors give a gak about writing a book about certain races in 40K. Of those, the top three are probably Necrons, Nids, Orks, etc.
It's not hard to imagine a Black Library author looking at all of the races and options in 40K and putting those three immediately to the bottom of the list. I'm quite sure, if we could ever have a completely off-the-record chat with any author or sculptor, or game-designer who works for GW we'd have a whole lot of strong opinions about factions they didn't like or couldn't care less about.
Do the Black Library authors have the skill to write a solid book about one of those? I've no idea. Haven't read much beyond a dozen HH novels. Could someone feasibly write an engaging and interesting novel featuring one of these races? Sure. I just think it's not an interest or priority.
Thusly, I think there are absolutely red-headed step child factions in 40K, and for the people who are adamant fans of those factions...it's a rough road.
BrianDavion wrote: Crons at this point are the xenos race with the least attention given to them, assuming the eldar and dark eldar box is a precursor to a wave of new minis for them.
That's a hell of an assumption right there.
Sim-Life wrote: I'd like c'tan to go back to being Lovecraftian horrors rather than pokemon. I know expecting a third reboot of necron fluff is a bit much but I wouldn't mind if c'tan shards were more like the spawn of their parent c'tan (like Starspawn are to Cthulhu for example) and necrons are basically mindless henchmen anyway with overlords serving as priests. I dunno, I prefered necrons as unknowable soul harvesters instead of retired Team Rocket members yelling at the younger trainers to get out of their long grass.
Yeah, I'd also like to at least move closer towards the cosmic horror identity.
Also, not a rules point but could we please cut back on the pointless bling? I want my HQs to look like Terminators, not coral reefs on legs.
In terms of rules, Gauss really needs a rethink. I get what they were going for but -1AP just isn't enough to make a difference. They're also currently far too reliant on Doomsday Arks, since they have so few options when it comes to powerful, long-range firepower. It's a role that Heavy Destroyers should be able to fill but always end up sucking at. Reanimation Protocols could really do with being more reliable in exchange for not being repeatable when failed. I'd personally like to avoid a return to 7th, when the flavour of the rule was basically removed entirely, but the current rules are just too binary.
A couple ideas for Necrons. Mostly to keep re-doing the codex to a minimum:
- Have Ressurection Orbs allow you to roll re-animation for a destroyed unit once the last model is destroyed and within 6". You roll immediately, and counts as using the Res Orb, so it can't be used later
- Gauss unmodified 6 to hit wounds automatically. Better for Warriors than Destroyers.
- Additional rule for Living Metal. Models with Living Metal and the Titanic keyword reduce the damage characteristic of weapons against it by 1. Most Titanic vehicles in the main codex are pretty bad. There's also the plus that this won't cause confusion with Quantum Shielding and which order the rules are applied in, as there are no vehicles with Living Metal, Quantum Shielding and Titanic.
- On the Monolith, I think it should be able to Deepstrike on turn 1. Similar to how drop pods can arrive on turn 1.
- Annihilation Barges can Double Shoot their Tesla Destructor if they only move half their movement value in the movement phase (similar to a few other factions out there)
Darsath wrote: A couple ideas for Necrons. Mostly to keep re-doing the codex to a minimum:
- Have Ressurection Orbs allow you to roll re-animation for a destroyed unit once the last model is destroyed and within 6". You roll immediately, and counts as using the Res Orb, so it can't be used later
- Gauss unmodified 6 to hit wounds automatically. Better for Warriors than Destroyers.
- Additional rule for Living Metal. Models with Living Metal and the Titanic keyword reduce the damage characteristic of weapons against it by 1. Most Titanic vehicles in the main codex are pretty bad. There's also the plus that this won't cause confusion with Quantum Shielding and which order the rules are applied in, as there are no vehicles with Living Metal, Quantum Shielding and Titanic.
- On the Monolith, I think it should be able to Deepstrike on turn 1. Similar to how drop pods can arrive on turn 1.
- Annihilation Barges can Double Shoot their Tesla Destructor if they only move half their movement value in the movement phase (similar to a few other factions out there)
Bolded the one I want to change:
Add "To a minimum of 1" to the damage modification.
Darsath wrote: A couple ideas for Necrons. Mostly to keep re-doing the codex to a minimum:
- Have Ressurection Orbs allow you to roll re-animation for a destroyed unit once the last model is destroyed and within 6". You roll immediately, and counts as using the Res Orb, so it can't be used later
- Gauss unmodified 6 to hit wounds automatically. Better for Warriors than Destroyers.
- Additional rule for Living Metal. Models with Living Metal and the Titanic keyword reduce the damage characteristic of weapons against it by 1. Most Titanic vehicles in the main codex are pretty bad. There's also the plus that this won't cause confusion with Quantum Shielding and which order the rules are applied in, as there are no vehicles with Living Metal, Quantum Shielding and Titanic.
- On the Monolith, I think it should be able to Deepstrike on turn 1. Similar to how drop pods can arrive on turn 1.
- Annihilation Barges can Double Shoot their Tesla Destructor if they only move half their movement value in the movement phase (similar to a few other factions out there)
Bolded the one I want to change:
Add "To a minimum of 1" to the damage modification.
Oh yeah, forgot about that part. I intended it to be to a minimum of 1.
I hate the idea that Warriors should be more elite, they should have never been elite in the first place. It takes away from Marines when not only are there 25 different flavours, there is also a race that is Marines, but better. What happened to their number is legion and their name is death? If I see 40 models in a Necron army then that's not much of a legion is it? More like a platoon. Their number is platoon, their name is Space Marines.
Elbows wrote: This might offend some people, but Necrons are one of "the big three" (Tyranids, Necrons, Orks) who are simply always going to languish compared to other races. These are the races that GW struggles to write decent fluff for...struggles to write novels involving them (often for good reason), struggles to justify including them in random campaigns - where they frequently feel wildly out of place, etc.
One of the GW authors said a few years ago "no one wants to write Ork novels..." and I suspect there are simply races in 40K which are not primary movers/shakers for GW. Necrons are almost old enough now to get a full army revisit...but will they? How high are they on the priority list? It'd be nice if you get at least something more than the single-character you've gotten in the last...3-4 years? I mean, Eldar got a kit in plastic for crying out loud...so everyone stands a chance!
Well here's a crazy thought.
Necron - they wont let things go 'just as planned'. They lost once due to warp and old one's mastery over it, so they're going to destroy warp and everything that has to do with it. Story focuses on how necron thinks they're beating tzeench but it was yet again'just as planned' for the benefit of tzeench. Necron vs Tzeench
Tau - Tau eschews personal gains & pleasure for the greater good. The ethereal caste sees the growing warp as the enemy of the greater good, launches a campaign against the warp. Story focuses on ethereals unveiling to the public about the warp and how the society reacts to it. Tau vs. Slaanesh.
Tyranid - they devour to live and live to devour. They don't like nurgle rotting away all their food. Story focuses on tyranids invading an on going nurgle-IoM conflict into a three way battle. Tyranid vs. Nurgle
Orks - they always love a good fight. Khorne likes a good bloodbath. Story focuses on... fights? Orks vs. Khorne.
Nice ideas, but you know GW would only be interested in how they would interact with the IoM, specifically Space Marines, so we’d never see any of the above.
Except for the first Psychic Awakening book which was Eldar, Eldar and more Eldar right?
Darsath wrote: A couple ideas for Necrons. Mostly to keep re-doing the codex to a minimum:
- Additional rule for Living Metal. Models with Living Metal and the Titanic keyword reduce the damage characteristic of weapons against it by 1. Most Titanic vehicles in the main codex are pretty bad. There's also the plus that this won't cause confusion with Quantum Shielding and which order the rules are applied in, as there are no vehicles with Living Metal, Quantum Shielding and Titanic.
- On the Monolith, I think it should be able to Deepstrike on turn 1. Similar to how drop pods can arrive on turn 1.
I feel like your suggested change to Living Metal for Titanic models would split the faction's vehicles into three (Flyers, QS and Titanic) and would be hard to balance for the units with good weapons/abilities (Seraptek, Pylon, Vault) and those that are currently useless but would become little more than bullet sponges (Monolith, Obelisk).
The reason why I don't like the current split of the different vehicles is that it makes it hard to make an army combining those different elements. The reason why Doomsday Arks and Doom Scythes go well together is because having a unit that can somewhat block movement and a unit that doesn't want units to come forward too quickly is synergistic, but at the same time their defensive properties make them anti-synergistic. My opponent is always just going to point their lascannons into my Doom Scythes and their heavy bolters into my Doomsday Arks if they have those two options. Doom Scythes and Annihilation Barges could never become popular in the same way that Doomsday Arks and Annihilation Barges theoretically could. Why would anyone design three such drastically types of defence for their vehicles?
You could improve Living Metal for all vehicles, make it -1 to damage to a minimum of 2 (so it's good against melta and lances like in the 3rd ed codex) and change Quantum Shielding to be +1 Sv if you have more than 25% wounds remaining and +2 Sv if you have more than 50% wounds remaining (so it provides anti-light like in the 5th ed codex) which opens up for vehicle-filled armies having positive synergy because they all have that same anti-melta/lance rule and they all have a good Sv characteristic.
- Have Ressurection Orbs allow you to roll re-animation for a destroyed unit once the last model is destroyed and within 6". You roll immediately, and counts as using the Res Orb, so it can't be used later
- Gauss unmodified 6 to hit wounds automatically. Better for Warriors than Destroyers.
Good suggestions, but I think maybe Gauss should either be 6+ or Tesla should be changed to unmodified 6 as well so it isn't just one that benefits from MWBD and not the other. The one benefit of Tesla being improved by MWBD is that Tesla Immortals are better for Overlords than Warriors, it makes sense from a thematic standpoint that royalty would prefer not to have to go with the plebian Warriors. It kind of depends on how much independent thought Necrons should be able to do in your opinion, in 3rd edition they were very independent a group of Warriors could independently go out on a mission and identify and possibly deal with intruders, should that be the case or should they need an officer to be effective? Should MWBD buff Warriors or Immortals more? What do you want to say with the rules, do you want to say that Warriors are mindless automatons that can't do anything unless they're told to do so, or do you want to say that the unit with MWBD likes to find higher quality units instead of just going with a big blob of Warriors because MWBD will benefit twice as many models as a 10-man Lychguard/Immortal unit.
Speaking of Lords, removing the wound rolls for some of Gauss weapons makes the Lord's Will ability less useful, good or bad rules interaction? I have written several times that Overlord should have the Lord's Will and Lords should have My Will Be Done to encourage spamming Lords and taking a single Overlord instead of spamming Overlords and taking a single Lord.
- Annihilation Barges can Double Shoot their Tesla Destructor if they only move half their movement value in the movement phase (similar to a few other factions out there)
I love this idea, I never really thought of how speedy this little thing is and how little sense that makes. I would kind of love for the Ghost Ark's repair ability to be tied to moving half as well. Annihilation Barges were static defences in the 5th edition fluff, not assault platforms. Changing Tesla Destructors to Heavy weapons would do more or less the same thing, but it could only be implemented along with a change to Tesla. You could also change the Movement characteristic of Annihilation Barges to 3, 5, 8 or 10".
Elbows wrote: To elaborate on my earlier post...and without anything to back this up, I just feel it's entirely possible that none of the Black Library authors give a gak about writing a book about certain races in 40K. Of those, the top three are probably Necrons, Nids, Orks, etc.
It's not hard to imagine a Black Library author looking at all of the races and options in 40K and putting those three immediately to the bottom of the list. I'm quite sure, if we could ever have a completely off-the-record chat with any author or sculptor, or game-designer who works for GW we'd have a whole lot of strong opinions about factions they didn't like or couldn't care less about.
Do the Black Library authors have the skill to write a solid book about one of those? I've no idea. Haven't read much beyond a dozen HH novels. Could someone feasibly write an engaging and interesting novel featuring one of these races? Sure. I just think it's not an interest or priority.
Thusly, I think there are absolutely red-headed step child factions in 40K, and for the people who are adamant fans of those factions...it's a rough road.
I understand that this is something you believe and is therefore not based at all on fact but it is also completely wrong.
There was a huge Ork omnibus, you must have heard of it? The Beast series?
Further and more recently black library pushed speed freak audio books out to us.
There are definitely multiple authors who are comfortable writing Ork stories and I’m sure the same exists for other Xenos factions.
skchsan wrote: Would it be OP if monoliths gain quantum shielding but remains at current point cost?
I can totally picture firing at a monolith being similar to how the initial missile barrage from 'Independence Day' worked out.
It's either that or an invuln, and QS is basically a reverse invuln the way it works anyways, so I would say it deserves QS to reflect how it used to completely ignore the melta and lance rule way back then.
skchsan wrote: Would it be OP if monoliths gain quantum shielding but remains at current point cost?
I can totally picture firing at a monolith being similar to how the initial missile barrage from 'Independence Day' worked out.
I would adore Monoliths to get QS, hell I'd also want them to have better self regen.
Their damage output is beyond anaemic for anything near their cost and in which case let's try and have it live the supposedly Necron dream of, "never-dying-ever-just-stop-trying". If they did address it's firepower then yes the toughness of both QS and another regen mechanic may be too much but honestly in a meta where putting down a knight in a opening salvo is considered near mandatory for most lists, what chance does our Monolith have?
Elbows wrote: To elaborate on my earlier post...and without anything to back this up, I just feel it's entirely possible that none of the Black Library authors give a gak about writing a book about certain races in 40K. Of those, the top three are probably Necrons, Nids, Orks, etc.
It's not hard to imagine a Black Library author looking at all of the races and options in 40K and putting those three immediately to the bottom of the list. I'm quite sure, if we could ever have a completely off-the-record chat with any author or sculptor, or game-designer who works for GW we'd have a whole lot of strong opinions about factions they didn't like or couldn't care less about.
Do the Black Library authors have the skill to write a solid book about one of those? I've no idea. Haven't read much beyond a dozen HH novels. Could someone feasibly write an engaging and interesting novel featuring one of these races? Sure. I just think it's not an interest or priority.
Thusly, I think there are absolutely red-headed step child factions in 40K, and for the people who are adamant fans of those factions...it's a rough road.
I understand that this is something you believe and is therefore not based at all on fact but it is also completely wrong.
There was a huge Ork omnibus, you must have heard of it? The Beast series?
Further and more recently black library pushed speed freak audio books out to us.
There are definitely multiple authors who are comfortable writing Ork stories and I’m sure the same exists for other Xenos factions.
I think he was talking about a story with the Orks as protagionists, the Orks where ANTAGIONISTS in the beast arises. still I appreciated what they did with the Orks, they made them out to be a real threat, with a bit of mystery to em. Orks tend to be depicted as kind of a one note joke race. and when they are well.. it's funny but it's hard to appreciate them. In the beast arises Orks where DANGEROUS. Hell Orks wiped out a first founding chapter, Chaos, Tyranids and Necrons have all failed to do that and not for lack of trying.
BTW Englishman, you'll appreciate that the Imperial Fists supplement does NOT downplay that defeat and notes that the Imperial Fists lost a TON of their heresy era relics as a result.
The monolith needs -100 pts, or 4++, or T9. I dont see large vehicles getting quantum shielding. Furthermore, the re-rolls 1s for RP stratagem needs to be changed to +1 to the roll. Then necrons need a 2CP strat to roll RP for a unit which has just been destroyed. And lastly necrons need a 10% point drop for everything.
More than points drop they need a enhancement of theirs profils, they really show their age. Compared to primaris marines 2.0, every Lord, etc. should get +1a and +1w to stay as powerful as before. The poor necrons warriors too need something. They look like index profiles compared to what's played now.
But I strongly disagree about "something to paint" if you lack creativity it's not GW fault: I have seen some truly amazing paint scheme that could stand any other army easily, they don't have to be painted plain grey.
The problem Necrons have is that their codex was written before several beta rules came in that made turn one deepstrikes impossible (except for drop pods now).
The way the wording on the Monolith works you can only disembark the turn after the Monolith has deep struck, i.e turn 3.
So on top of having thin defenses and weak offensive capabilities, it sucks as a transport.
The eternity gate rules MUST be rewritten before the unit can have any valid use, regardless of point changes.
If there were to be further changes I would make the Particle Whip flat 3 damage, the gauss flux arrays Rapid Fire and give the a 2+ Sv and reduce damage inflicted by 1 to a minmum of 1.
skchsan wrote: Would it be OP if monoliths gain quantum shielding but remains at current point cost?
I can totally picture firing at a monolith being similar to how the initial missile barrage from 'Independence Day' worked out.
It's either that or an invuln, and QS is basically a reverse invuln the way it works anyways, so I would say it deserves QS to reflect how it used to completely ignore the melta and lance rule way back then.
In addition to making it tougher somehow, it ought to be able to do more teleportation shenanigans the way it used to as well. It was crazy fun in 3rd and 4th Ed. Pulling units out of combat, regen-ing them and dumping them against a different front on the table.
Elbows wrote: To elaborate on my earlier post...and without anything to back this up, I just feel it's entirely possible that none of the Black Library authors give a gak about writing a book about certain races in 40K. Of those, the top three are probably Necrons, Nids, Orks, etc.
It's not hard to imagine a Black Library author looking at all of the races and options in 40K and putting those three immediately to the bottom of the list. I'm quite sure, if we could ever have a completely off-the-record chat with any author or sculptor, or game-designer who works for GW we'd have a whole lot of strong opinions about factions they didn't like or couldn't care less about.
Do the Black Library authors have the skill to write a solid book about one of those? I've no idea. Haven't read much beyond a dozen HH novels. Could someone feasibly write an engaging and interesting novel featuring one of these races? Sure. I just think it's not an interest or priority.
Thusly, I think there are absolutely red-headed step child factions in 40K, and for the people who are adamant fans of those factions...it's a rough road.
I understand that this is something you believe and is therefore not based at all on fact but it is also completely wrong.
There was a huge Ork omnibus, you must have heard of it? The Beast series?
Further and more recently black library pushed speed freak audio books out to us.
There are definitely multiple authors who are comfortable writing Ork stories and I’m sure the same exists for other Xenos factions.
skchsan wrote: Would it be OP if monoliths gain quantum shielding but remains at current point cost?
I can totally picture firing at a monolith being similar to how the initial missile barrage from 'Independence Day' worked out.
It's either that or an invuln, and QS is basically a reverse invuln the way it works anyways, so I would say it deserves QS to reflect how it used to completely ignore the melta and lance rule way back then.
In addition to making it tougher somehow, it ought to be able to do more teleportation shenanigans the way it used to as well. It was crazy fun in 3rd and 4th Ed. Pulling units out of combat, regen-ing them and dumping them against a different front on the table.
It can already pull a unit from anywhere on the battlefield not in melee to it for 1CP. I think it should be able to teleport like it could in DOW, that was a replacement for DS, but it was pretty cool. I introduced a Stratagem allowing that, as well as a healing stratagem and a defensive aura stratagem as part of the specialist detachments I wrote for Necrons.
Spoiler:
SPECIALIST DETACHMENTS
If your army is Battle-forged, you can use the Specialist Detachment Stratagems below:
LIVING TOMB (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Living Tomb Specialist Detachment. MONOLITH and OBELISK units in that Detachment gain the LIVING TOMB keyword and Monoliths are treated as Lords of War choices rather than Heavy Support choices when taken as part of this Detachment.
TOMB NEXUS (3CP)
Use this Stratagem up to once per game at the end of the Movement phase, remove a LIVING TOMB model from the table and place it anywhere on the table more than 12" away from enemy models with its full starting number of wounds.
NODAL GRID (3CP)
Use this Stratagem at the end of your turn. Until the start of your next Shooting phase friendly NECRON units within 3" of a LIVING TOMB model gain a 5+ Invulnerable save against Shooting attacks and add +1 to their Reanimation Protocol rolls and add 1 to the number of wounds they gain from the Living Metal ability.
RESURGENCE (1CP)
Use this Stratagem at the end of your Movement phase by choosing a LIVING TOMB MONOLITH. All <DYNASTY> WARRIOR and IMMORTAL units within 3" can immediately roll for their Reanimation Protocols again unless they have already done so, but cannot do so later again this turn.
ROYAL COURT (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Royal Court Specialist Detachment. CHARACTER units in that Detachment gain the ROYAL COURT keyword.
WARLORD TRAIT
If a ROYAL COURT CHARACTER is your Warlord, you can give them the following Warlord Trait.
NEMESOR
At the start of the battle, you gain D3 Command Points.
ARTEFACT OF THE AEONS
If your army includes any Royal Court Specialist Detachments, you can give the following relic to a ROYAL COURT CHARACTER in your army.
THE GOD SHACKLE
Add +1 to the Toughness and Strength Characteristics of all <DYNASTY> C'TAN SHARDS while they are within 3" of the bearer.
STAR PULSE (3CP)
This Stratagem can be used once per battle, in the Shooting phase, if you have a ROYAL COURT CHARACTER with the NEMESOR Warlord Trait that did not move during your Movement phase. Instead of shooting with the CHARACTER's weapons, select a visible point on the battlefield and roll a D6 for every unit within D6" of that point. Subtract 1 from the result if the unit being rolled for is a CHARACTER. On a 4+, the unit being rolled for suffers D3 mortal wounds.
ENTROPIC PLAGUE (2CP)
Use this Stratagem after causing an unsaved wound with a ROYAL COURT model to an enemy VEHICLE, until the end of the phase the target suffers a -1 to all saving throws made for that VEHICLE.
RED HARVEST (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Dark Harvest Specialist Detachment. FLAYED ONES, DEATHMARK and DESTROYER units in that Detachment gain the RED HARVEST keyword.
WARLORD TRAIT
If a RED HARVEST CHARACTER is your Warlord, you can give them the following Warlord Trait.
HARVESTER PROTOCOLS
Whenever a RED HARVEST unit within 6" of your Warlord destroys a unit you gain 1CP if it was a TITANIC unit destroyed by a DESTROYER unit or if it was a CHARACTER destroyed by a DEATHMARKS unit or if it was an INFANTRY unit destroyed by a FLAYED ONES unit.
ARTEFACT OF THE AEONS
If your army includes any Red Harvest Specialist Detachments, you can give the following relic to a RED HARVEST CHARACTER in your army.
HEART OF DARKNESS
If the bearer destroys an enemy unit and you do not currently control a C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer you may place C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer within 1" of the bearer and more than 1" away from enemy models, if you do, the bearer is slain and cannot benefit from the Ressurection Protocols Stratagem. You do not have to pay Reinforcement points to bring in the C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer with this effect. Randomly generate two Powers of the C'tan unless you previously controlled the C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer, in which case you should use the powers it had earlier.
GAUSS OBLITERATOR (1CP)
Use this Stratagem when a RED HARVEST DESTROYER unit targets an enemy TITANIC unit with all their attacks in the Shooting phase, you may re-roll damage rolls for the remainder of this phase for that unit.
OMNIDIMENSIONAL TARGETING DATA (1CP)
Use this Stratagem during your Shooting phase by targeting an enemy unit. For the remainder of the Shooting phase RED HARVEST DEATHMARKS do not require line of sight to shoot the target.
HARBINGERS OF DESPAIR (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Harbingers of Despair Specialist Detachment. Cryptek and CANOPTEK units in that Detachment gain the HARBINGERS OF DESPAIR keyword.
WARLORD TRAIT
If a HARBINGERS OF DESPAIR CHARACTER is your Warlord, you can give them the following Warlord Trait.
PSYCHOMANCER
Subtract 1 from the Leadership of enemy units within 6" of your Warlord. In addition, each time your opponent uses a Stratagem roll a D6 if you haven't already regained any CP this turn, on a roll of 5+ you gain 1 CP.
ARTEFACT OF THE AEONS
If your army includes any Harbingers of Despair Specialist Detachments, you can give the following relic to a HARBINGERS OF DESPAIR CHARACTER in your army.
PARIAH SKULL
The bearer can never be targeted or affected by psychic powers in any way. PSYKERS that are within 18" of the bearer must subtract 2 from Psychic tests they take.
MINDFLAY (1CP)
Use this Stratagem after a unit of HARBINGERS OF DESPAIR Canoptek Scarabs from your army piles in, but before they make their close combat attacks. Select a Canoptek Scarab Swarm model in your unit and then pick an enemy INFANTRY unit within 1" of it. Your Canoptek Scarab Swarm model is destroyed. Remove it from the battlefield and roll a D6; on a 2+ the enemy unit you picked suffers D3 mortal wounds and if one or more enemy models with a Leadership characteristic of 7 or less are destroyed every enemy unit within 3" of the Canoptek Scarabs suffer 1 mortal wound.
DESPAIR AMPLIFIER (1CP)
Use this Stratagem when you deploy a HARBINGERS OF DESPAIR unit armed with one or more gloom prisms, add 1 to morale tests for enemy units within 24" of one or more of these units and subtract 1 from morale tests made for friendly units for each of these units within 24".
HARBINGERS OF DESTRUCTION (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Harbingers of Destruction Specialist Detachment. Cryptek and CANOPTEK units in that Detachment gain the HARBINGERS OF DESTRUCTION keyword.
WARLORD TRAIT
If a HARBINGERS OF DESTRUCTION CHARACTER is your Warlord, you can give them the following Warlord Trait.
PLASMANCER
Increase the damage of the bearer's weapons by 1 and the range of the bearer's ranged weapons by 6".
ARTEFACT OF THE AEONS
If your army includes any Harbingers of Destruction Specialist Detachments, you can give the following relic to a HARBINGERS OF DESTRUCTION CHARACTER in your army.
GAZE OF FLAME
Friendly units within 3" of the bearer hit on 5+ while firing Overwatch. In addition, the bearer can re-roll failed hit rolls.
IMMOLATE (1CP)
Use this Stratagem after a unit of HARBINGERS OF DESTRUCTION Canoptek Scarabs from your army piles in, but before they make their close combat attacks. Select a Canoptek Scarab Swarm model in your unit and then pick an enemy VEHICLE unit within 1" of it. Your Canoptek Scarab Swarm model is destroyed. Remove it from the battlefield and roll a D6; on a 2+ the enemy unit you picked suffers D3 mortal wounds and if one or more enemy models are destroyed every enemy unit within 3" of the Canoptek Scarabs suffer D3 mortal wounds.
DESTRUCTION = DAMAGE SQUARED (2CP)
Use this Stratagem at the end of your Shooting phase, one of your HARBINGERS OF DESTRUCTION units can shoot again.
HARBINGERS OF ETERNITY (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Harbingers of Eternity Specialist Detachment. Cryptek and CANOPTEK units in that Detachment gain the HARBINGERS OF ETERNITY keyword.
WARLORD TRAIT
If a HARBINGERS OF ETERNITY CHARACTER is your Warlord, you can give them the following Warlord Trait.
CHRONOMANCER
Subtract 2" from charge rolls made against friendly units within 6" of your Warlord. In addition, subtract 1 from hit rolls that target your Warlord in the Shooting phase.
ARTEFACT OF THE AEONS
If your army includes any Harbingers of Destruction Specialist Detachments, you can give the following relic to a HARBINGERS OF ETERNITY CHARACTER in your army.
AEONSTAVE
The bearer always fights first in the Fight phase, even if he didn’t charge. If your opponent has units that have charged, or that have a similar ability, then alternate choosing units to fight with, starting with the player whose turn is taking place. In addition, at the start of each Fight phase, select an enemy unit within 6" of the bearer. That unit cannot fight until all other units that are able to have done so. If the unit has an ability that allows it to fight first in the Fight phase, it instead fights as if it did not have this ability. If both players have units that cannot fight until all other unit have done so, then alternate choosing which of those units to fight with, starting with the player whose turn is taking place.
STUTTERING STASIS (1CP)
Use this Stratagem at the beginning of your opponent’s Movement phase. Choose an enemy unit within 1" of a HARBINGERS OF ETERNITY Canoptek Scarabs unit from your army. Select a Canoptek Scarab Swarm model in your unit. Remove the Scarab Swarm from the battlefield and roll a D6; on a 2+ the enemy unit you picked cannot be fall back this turn.
TEMPORAL SNARES (2CP)
If you control a HARBINGERS OF ETERNITY Cryptek on the battlefield you may use this Stratagem at the beginning of your opponent's first turn. Reduce the Movement characteristic of all enemy models by 1 this turn and reduce Charge rolls by 2 this turn. Units with the FLY keyword are not affected.
HARBINGERS OF THE STORM (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Harbingers of the Storm Specialist Detachment. Cryptek and CANOPTEK units in that Detachment gain the HARBINGERS OF THE STORM keyword.
WARLORD TRAIT
If a HARBINGERS OF THE STORM CHARACTER is your Warlord, you can give them the following Warlord Trait.
ETHERMANCER
Enemy units that are set up on the battlefield as reinforcements cannot be set up within 12" of your Warlord.
ARTEFACT OF THE AEONS
If your army includes any Harbingers of Destruction Specialist Detachments, you can give the following relic to a HARBINGERS OF THE STORM CHARACTER in your army.
ETHER CRYSTAL
Add 2" to the bearer's Movement characteristic and the bearer gains the FLY keyword. Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that was moved across by the bearer in the Movement or Charge phase. On a 4+, that unit suffers D3 mortal wounds.
STORMCELL (2CP)
Use this Stratagem when a friendly HARBINGERS OF THE STORM Canoptek Wraiths unit is targeted by a ranged or melee weapon. Subtract 1 from all hit rolls made against that unit for the rest of the phase.
COMMAND THE SKIES (3CP)
This Stratagem can be used once per battle, in your Shooting phase, if a HARBINGERS OF THE STORM Cryptek from your army is on the battlefield. Select one point on the battlefield and roll one D6 for each unit within 6" of that point. Add 1 to the result if the target is a VEHICLE. Add 1 to the result if the target has FLY. On a 6+ the unit being rolled for suffers D3 mortal wounds.
HARBINGERS OF TRANSMOGRIFICATION (1CP)
Specialist Detachment Stratagem Use this Stratagem when choosing your army. Pick a NECRON Detachment from your army to be a Harbingers of Transmogrification Specialist Detachment. Cryptek and CANOPTEK units in that Detachment gain the HARBINGERS OF TRANSMOGRIFICATION keyword.
WARLORD TRAIT
If a HARBINGERS OF TRANSMOGRIFICATION CHARACTER is your Warlord, you can give them the following Warlord Trait.
GEOMANCER
Friendly units within 6" of your Warlord ignore the benefits of cover when making a shooting attack.
ARTEFACT OF THE AEONS
If your army includes any Harbingers of Destruction Specialist Detachments, you can give the following relic to a HARBINGERS OF TRANSMOGRIFICATION CHARACTER in your army.
TREMORSTAVE
The bearer can never be targeted or affected by psychic powers in any way. PSYKERS that are within 18" of the bearer must subtract 2 from Psychic tests they take.
HARP OF DISSONANCE (1CP)
Use this Stratagem at the beginning of your Shooting phase. Choose a HARBINGERS OF TRANSMOGRIFICATION Canoptek Scarabs unit from your army. Select a Canoptek Scarab Swarm model in your unit. Remove the Scarab Swarm from the battlefield and roll a D6; on a 2+ reduce the Toughness of the closest enemy unit by 1 until the end of the phase.
SEISMIC CRUCIBLE (3CP)
This Stratagem can be used once per battle, in your Shooting phase, if a HARBINGERS OF TRANSMOGRIFICATION Cryptek from your army is on the battlefield. Select one point on the battlefield and roll one D6 for each unit without FLY within 6" of that point. Subtract 1 from the result if the unit being rolled for is a CHARACTER with a Wounds characteristic of 9 or less. On a 4+ the unit being rolled for suffers D3 mortal wounds.
skchsan wrote: Would it be OP if monoliths gain quantum shielding but remains at current point cost?
I can totally picture firing at a monolith being similar to how the initial missile barrage from 'Independence Day' worked out.
It's either that or an invuln, and QS is basically a reverse invuln the way it works anyways, so I would say it deserves QS to reflect how it used to completely ignore the melta and lance rule way back then.
In addition to making it tougher somehow, it ought to be able to do more teleportation shenanigans the way it used to as well. It was crazy fun in 3rd and 4th Ed. Pulling units out of combat, regen-ing them and dumping them against a different front on the table.
It can already pull a unit from anywhere on the battlefield not in melee to it for 1CP.
Sure, but that seems a bit weak imo. Being able to pull units out of combat meant that you could wait for the opponent to commit to an attack before pulling your units out and then re-committing them in a different area. The ability to bring back even more of the casualties you just sustained was incredibly cool, too. Not to mention the fact that if you ran two Monoliths you could do it twice per round, while a Strat limits you to only once.
It can already pull a unit from anywhere on the battlefield not in melee to it for 1CP.
Sure, but that seems a bit weak imo. Being able to pull units out of combat meant that you could wait for the opponent to commit to an attack before pulling your units out and then re-committing them in a different area. The ability to bring back even more of the casualties you just sustained was incredibly cool, too. Not to mention the fact that if you ran two Monoliths you could do it twice per round, while a Strat limits you to only once.
It depends on how much of the Monolith's power budget should be put into that ability. Units like Bloodletters or Destroyers have a large portion of their power budget assigned to Stratagems that are relatively undercosted. I don't think there is anything wrong with the Monolith's main power laying other places than its ability to pull units out of combat and redeploy units already on the battlefield. The power budget of the Monolith is only half-filled so you could give it several different buffs and OP Stratagems and it still wouldn't break the meta. I think 1 CP for a re-deploy ability is decent even if it cannot pull a unit out of combat.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Yeah Necrons aren't swimming in CP so that would almost never be used.
All the Specialist Detachments I designed are meant to be fairly weak, so you can use them in actual play with anyone that'll allow just a little bit of homebrew, they were not designed for competitive play since relatively few communities will allow homebrew rules in a competitive setting and in any case it'd be unfair for Necrons to get a buff without DA and GK getting a buff. I don't know if you've tried to use a Monolith or two, but it's really bad, you're not going to be set back a meaningful amount by using the first Detachment in my last post.
While we’re wishlisting, I don’t think Living Metal should make the unit tougher—quite the opposite. It should be weaker, fluff-wise, with rapid regenerative properties.
Balancing this is tricky in an alpha strike meta, but that’s less important than fluff, honestly.
What if Living Metal gets stronger the lower the health of a unit is? Like, if its below X number of wounds, it regens 1 if it s below Y, it regens D3 If its below Z, it regens D6 If its down to a single wound, it regends 2D6.
I think a simple d3 at the beginning of each player’s turn would be a less admin-intensive solution. Super-Heavy and Cryptek-influence could be d6 instead.
But either way, it’s why I think our vehicle toughness and saves should stay at the oddly low values they are currently (I.e., 6 toughness and 4+).
Except that never made sense. You'd think the robotic race who's supposed to be really durable and were obsessed with immortality in the fluff would make tough vehicles with actual armor plating instead of flimsy looking flying boats that would snap in half if you so much as push on them. Necrons need more heavy vehicles, not less.
Seriously, feth doomsday arks. Whoever designed that didn't think it through.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except that never made sense.
You'd think the robotic race who's supposed to be really durable and were obsessed with immortality in the fluff would make tough vehicles with actual armor plating instead of flimsy looking flying boats that would snap in half if you so much as push on them.
Necrons need more heavy vehicles, not less.
Seriously, feth doomsday arks. Whoever designed that didn't think it through.
Agreed. Their iconic vehicle is literally a flying pyramid, essentially a floating slab of metal.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except that never made sense.
You'd think the robotic race who's supposed to be really durable and were obsessed with immortality in the fluff would make tough vehicles with actual armor plating instead of flimsy looking flying boats that would snap in half if you so much as push on them.
Necrons need more heavy vehicles, not less.
Seriously, feth doomsday arks. Whoever designed that didn't think it through.
Agreed. Their iconic vehicle is literally a flying pyramid, essentially a floating slab of metal.
Well keep in mind they're durable to most things that they should be durable to. QS stops hardcore anti-tank weapons from going through, and the Monolith did used to have rules to protect it from Melta and Lance if I remember correctly.
The issue? The classic anti-tank weapons aren't being taken in favor of other weapons to point at tanks (and therefore QS has little value) and the Monolith lost those points that made it intimidating, all on top of a price increase.
sieGermans wrote: While we’re wishlisting, I don’t think Living Metal should make the unit tougher—quite the opposite. It should be weaker, fluff-wise, with rapid regenerative properties.
Balancing this is tricky in an alpha strike meta, but that’s less important than fluff, honestly.
How does that fit with the fluff? Living Metal can act to absorb the power of an attack, it's like a ballistics vest being hard yet pliable, instead of a piece of piece of glass that is hard but brittle. I'd also hate for more of Necrons power budget to be allotted to healing vehicles, 1 wound a turn is awesome, it's fluffy it has an impact in some games but it isn't the main thing Necron vehicles have going for them, they also have high T or QS or they are flyers, they have shooting or whatever.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except that never made sense.
You'd think the robotic race who's supposed to be really durable and were obsessed with immortality in the fluff would make tough vehicles with actual armor plating instead of flimsy looking flying boats that would snap in half if you so much as push on them.
Necrons need more heavy vehicles, not less.
Seriously, feth doomsday arks. Whoever designed that didn't think it through.
Doomsday Arks are the best of all the 5th edition non-Infantry models that were released. Tomb Blades, Ghost Arks, Annihilation Barge and Catacomb Command Barges are IMO a lot worse. Not to mention open-topped flyers which are very silly. You're flying an aircraft not driving a go-kart. Some of the rumours about a cuboid with a portal like the Monolith would have been much cooler than Ghost Arks. I'm not sure if Doomsday Arks fit at all with what Necrons are, it's nice to have a long-range gun though and it'd be more than a little weird for Necrons to not have any such guns. Long-range Monoliths or Stratagems increasing range could have fulfilled the role though so I'm not sure.
They really missed the point when they realised newcrons, design wise, for the units, I agree. It has never made sense and I would really be curious to speak with the guys who took this decision, to know how and why.
godardc wrote: They really missed the point when they realised newcrons, design wise, for the units, I agree. It has never made sense and I would really be curious to speak with the guys who took this decision, to know how and why.
I think they wanted Necrons to be more like Tomb Kings, Space Marines already have the bulky boxy vehicles as well.
sieGermans wrote: While we’re wishlisting, I don’t think Living Metal should make the unit tougher—quite the opposite. It should be weaker, fluff-wise, with rapid regenerative properties.
Balancing this is tricky in an alpha strike meta, but that’s less important than fluff, honestly.
How does that fit with the fluff? Living Metal can act to absorb the power of an attack, it's like a ballistics vest being hard yet pliable, instead of a piece of piece of glass that is hard but brittle. I'd also hate for more of Necrons power budget to be allotted to healing vehicles, 1 wound a turn is awesome, it's fluffy it has an impact in some games but it isn't the main thing Necron vehicles have going for them, they also have high T or QS or they are flyers, they have shooting or whatever.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Except that never made sense.
You'd think the robotic race who's supposed to be really durable and were obsessed with immortality in the fluff would make tough vehicles with actual armor plating instead of flimsy looking flying boats that would snap in half if you so much as push on them.
Necrons need more heavy vehicles, not less.
Seriously, feth doomsday arks. Whoever designed that didn't think it through.
Doomsday Arks are the best of all the 5th edition non-Infantry models that were released. Tomb Blades, Ghost Arks, Annihilation Barge and Catacomb Command Barges are IMO a lot worse. Not to mention open-topped flyers which are very silly. You're flying an aircraft not driving a go-kart. Some of the rumours about a cuboid with a portal like the Monolith would have been much cooler than Ghost Arks. I'm not sure if Doomsday Arks fit at all with what Necrons are, it's nice to have a long-range gun though and it'd be more than a little weird for Necrons to not have any such guns. Long-range Monoliths or Stratagems increasing range could have fulfilled the role though so I'm not sure.
Doomsday Arks look better than the other 5th vehicles, but its still a bastard to assemble. Its as if GW doesn't actually build their own models, because if they did, they would know first hand what a tedious chore the ark vehicles are.
Ghost Arks are fine design wise. The issue is that you can't shoot out of them anymore for no good reason. You give that back, and that's at least a point of incentive to use them and Warriors together.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Ghost Arks are fine design wise. The issue is that you can't shoot out of them anymore for no good reason. You give that back, and that's at least a point of incentive to use them and Warriors together.
That and remove the prohibition on being only able to transport Warriors anymore. If they actually were able to ferry Lychguard and even immortals, they would see a lot more play.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Ghost Arks are fine design wise. The issue is that you can't shoot out of them anymore for no good reason. You give that back, and that's at least a point of incentive to use them and Warriors together.
That and remove the prohibition on being only able to transport Warriors anymore. If they actually were able to ferry Lychguard and even immortals, they would see a lot more play.
I get why you can't shoot out of them (Crons are deactivated inside them, undergoing repairs) but mechanically it leaves the Ghost Ark subpar.
However, I'd say that it should either get open-topped OR transport anything. Not both. Immortals that are protected by Quantum Shielding feels a little too much. (Then again, compared to Space Marines... Maybe not.)
They could just make Ghost Arks pure ambulance / support vehicles. Remove transport, pump its heal ability full of steroids.
Maybe allow it to work as a teleport relay that Night Scythes and Monoliths can use.
Like, if a unit is close to a ghost ark and there's a monolith or night scythe in the army, the unit can "move" instantly to the monolith or night scythe via teleportation.
Sure, but that seems a bit weak imo. Being able to pull units out of combat meant that you could wait for the opponent to commit to an attack before pulling your units out and then re-committing them in a different area. The ability to bring back even more of the casualties you just sustained was incredibly cool, too. Not to mention the fact that if you ran two Monoliths you could do it twice per round, while a Strat limits you to only once.
That worked before as there was unit to pull. 8th ed is so killy and getting killier that you are lucky if unit survives to be pulled. Same reason rp isn't that awesome
Making units more durable could help.
T5 immortals and 3+ sv warriors are a possibility. I dunno why they did that in 5th ed. Its not as if T5 troop units didn't exist in the game already.
sieGermans wrote: While we’re wishlisting, I don’t think Living Metal should make the unit tougher—quite the opposite. It should be weaker, fluff-wise, with rapid regenerative properties.
Balancing this is tricky in an alpha strike meta, but that’s less important than fluff, honestly.
How does that fit with the fluff? Living Metal can act to absorb the power of an attack, it's like a ballistics vest being hard yet pliable, instead of a piece of piece of glass that is hard but brittle. I'd also hate for more of Necrons power budget to be allotted to healing vehicles, 1 wound a turn is awesome, it's fluffy it has an impact in some games but it isn't the main thing Necron vehicles have going for them, they also have high T or QS or they are flyers, they have shooting or whatever.
The “living” part of the “Living Metal” moniker, plus the ubiquitous presence of minute scarabs festooning large models like the Tesseract Vault, plus the existing renegerative in-game abilities taken together suggest to me their conception is more of a living skin of metal (ex. Avengers Iron Man nanite armor). It’s not impossible that they consider it to be what you describe, and indeed, Hardness v. Toughness is absolutely a real physical phenomenon that could be used to describe Flesh v. Metal.
But that would further push me toward expecting that Living Metal equipped models are expected to be less tough and more pliable anyway? Taken together with the “living” part of the name and it definitely suggests regeneration.
I absolutely agree that for Power considerations, the whole Regeneration/Reanimation theme for Necrons is not a recipe for balance success (it’s either too good or terrible)—but that’s not as important as theme coherence when designing a game (though strict thematic adherence is also not a good recipe: exceptions can frequently be used to prove the rule when used correctly).
