H.B.M.C. wrote:

Da Butcha wrote:
BTW, HBMC, if this does, in fact, drive you entirely off GW (save Forgeworld), I'll miss your posts on the topic. Even if I disagreed with you on something, I was always interested in seeing what you had written. Not only do I normally agree with your sense of what is good and valuable about Warhammer 40,000, your posts were always intelligently composed, and, unlike mine, short and to the point.

I'll always be around for snarky remarks. It's too entertaining not to. ...

I think of you as the loyal opposition/shadow government, fwiw. I fill the same role for my local WarmaHordes group

MarkyMark wrote:

mercury14 wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
models in ruins are 4+ if you can see them fully or not, still 4+
area terrain is basically diffcult terrain still, but you have to be 25% obsurced to get a 5+ cover save


then you get to use the rules for it from battlefield terrain section, you get a 5+ for standing in it LOL
but it does say composition, Citadel wood....

Do you mean models where LOS goes through ruins? Or based ruins? Can you even be in unbased ruins?

You will have to agree with your opponent if the base counts as the ruin or not.. If you are in a ruin say 2nd floor but not 25% cover you still get the ruin cover save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SeanDrake wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:

mercury14 wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:


So a unit in forest with modeled trees gets no cover save at all except for individual models which happen to be partially obscured? That seems silly.

Yes and no. I think the "Citadel Wood" model gets special rules giving everyone in the area a 5+ cover save. (I.e. the old cover rules; I suspect few groups will have issues using those same rules for their non-Citadel Wood models)

You have a unit of 10 dudes, 5 in the trees and 5 out of the trees. The 5 dudes out of the trees are closest to the enemy unit shooting at them. Those 5 dudes would not benefit from cover saves against enemy shooting, and would be the first 5 casualties removed.


At least in my understanding, keep in mind I don't have my book yet.

Ah, so there's 5+ area cover after all

Someone with the book would have to verify. I tried to search, but either I dreamed the post talking about terrain effects for specific GW terrain or search is broken.

Difficult terrain gives 5+

Only if 25% cover by it.

The terrain rules seem about as clear as mud.

Tangle wire is given as an example of dangerous terrain with a 5+, it also is listed with its own rules and a 6+

It is on the opposite page under difficult terrain mate,

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)
No interaction with Ordnance weapons

I doubt it changed but I'd like to see tank shock be useful again, bring back the 3rd edition tank shock

Im still looking foward to 7th edition. unbound might give some problems at my local gaming club but it will probably limited by them as we ignored the 6th ed double force org too..

 jackblg wrote:
Im still looking foward to 7th edition. unbound might give some problems at my local gaming club but it will probably limited by them as we ignored the 6th ed double force org too..

who needs unbound when you can start forceorg charts in a battleforged list?

Anyone know how units fire out of transports? I hope units can fire at full BS out of fast transports going 12" ...that would be so awesome for DE

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

 son_of_osiris wrote:
Anyone know how units fire out of transports? I hope units can fire at full BS out of fast transports going 12" ...that would be so awesome for DE

Good question.

 Colpicklejar wrote:

jamesk1973 wrote:
So....assault armies are still getting the shaft.

Random assault distance and overwatch fire will continue to cause failed assaults but by golly we get to do TWO hull points of damage if our attack results in a penetrating hit!

smh

Also, looks like 7th is shaping up to be the "psyker" edition.

Overwatch is unchanged and charges are still random, but I think the shape of the game as a whole is lending itself to more aggressive play, which should make assault a more viable option.

Objectives are going to be out in the open (at least in theory); armies are only further incentivized to hoof it to them with the new tac cards.

But I'm a visionless microbe so it could play it out in an entirely different fashion.

No, I think you're definitely on to something about the game dynamics changing. Armies will be meeting in the midfield more often, and also earlier in the game.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

Momentum is mass times velocity!

The new Vortex of doom power says it uses the vortex special rule, can you tell me what this it in the new edition.

who needs unbound when you can start forceorg charts in a battleforged list?

People freaking out about this are wrong. It seems like a misread from the scans of the rulebook that I've seen.

So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

So basically there's not a single positive new rule that benefit assault...ouch

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

I'll be unstoppable! I'll use my newly boosted ram and then vacuum up the survivors!

Has there been any changes to jump packs or was that all garbage the other day?

So it's looking like the new biomancy powers might be a good option for AM armies... thoughts?

Divination looks definitely less appealing what with the WC 2 on prescience

 JGrand wrote:

who needs unbound when you can start forceorg charts in a battleforged list?

People freaking out about this are wrong. It seems like a misread from the scans of the rulebook that I've seen.

Freaking out over what? unbound or multiple FOC's?

Drakmord wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

I'll be unstoppable! I'll use my newly boosted ram and then vacuum up the survivors!

Glaciers can crush mountains and they move only a few inches (if that) a year. Momentum is the product of velocity AND mass.

 gorgon wrote:


No, I think you're definitely on to something about the game dynamics changing. Armies will be meeting in the midfield more often, and also earlier in the game.

And this is a significant buff to assault lists that people aren't recognizing at this point.

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

How is it useless? It gives psykers -3 leadership? Yes it seems that leadership is no longer as relevant to CASTING powers, but it seemed that nearly every result on the perils table involved a leadership check. Also, it's still leadership.

MarkyMark wrote:

 JGrand wrote:

who needs unbound when you can start forceorg charts in a battleforged list?

People freaking out about this are wrong. It seems like a misread from the scans of the rulebook that I've seen.

Freaking out over what? unbound or multiple FOC's?

Probably the multiple Battle-Forged FOC shenanigans

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

Its true and in the book, I have the hard copy...

Havik110 wrote:
Has there been any changes to jump packs or was that all garbage the other day?

No change.

zhutch wrote:
So it's looking like the new biomancy powers might be a good option for AM armies... thoughts?

Divination looks definitely less appealing what with the WC 2 on prescience

Dunno... I think Telepathy is much more interesting for Guard (Divination still is)

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

There is a lot that will need changing with FAQ's.

mercury14 wrote:

 gorgon wrote:


No, I think you're definitely on to something about the game dynamics changing. Armies will be meeting in the midfield more often, and also earlier in the game.

And this is a significant buff to assault lists that people aren't recognizing at this point.

No, it's not a significant buff. Assault is no better OR worse off than it was in 6th. It just hasn't changed much. Some assaulting is still powerful, just as it was in 6th, but you still won't see massive assault based armies.

(Unless you count FMCs in there, they got hit hard on the assault rules)

 Vector Strike wrote:

zhutch wrote:
So it's looking like the new biomancy powers might be a good option for AM armies... thoughts?

Divination looks definitely less appealing what with the WC 2 on prescience

Dunno... I think Telepathy is much more interesting for Guard (Divination still is)

Divination is still solid, but I forsee a lot of invisibility fishing now.

I know someone with the book said that Slow and Purposeful is the same as it was, but can someone confirm if it is exactly the same? i.e. does it still allow everyone in the unit to count as stationary for firing even if only one model has the rule?

MarkyMark wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

There is a lot that will need changing with FAQ's.

Instead of FAQs there will be 8th edition...

 RedFox wrote:
So basically there's not a single positive new rule that benefit assault...ouch

Unless you count the fact that you most likely have to go and fight in CC unless there's 2 gun lines fighting each other. One needs to understand that this games edition is not about killing the enemy from the field but the missions that force you to go up close and personal.

Regarding the jink change, you can only fire snaps on your next shooting phase but... can you assault? I wouldn't mind changing some bolter shots for the 4+ cover

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

It's been 1 year, 1 month and 5 days since the last FAQ.

And the Tzeentch Chariot still can't shoot it's only weapon.

I wouldn't hold out hope on any relevant FAQs.

That being said, I'm liking the sound of 7th, but I remain dissapointed it wasn't a more comprehensive revamp. But then I shouldn't expect GW to take risks, they're not desperate enough yet. I'm very interested in seeing their next financials, and what they have lined up for after them. They come out in, what, late June, early July?

 son_of_osiris wrote:
Anyone know how units fire out of transports? I hope units can fire at full BS out of fast transports going 12" ...that would be so awesome for DE

Short answer no, long answer after my tea.
[list]

 MajorStoffer wrote:
And the Tzeentch Chariot still can't shoot it's only weapon.

*ahem*
From Seandrake earlier in this thread:

So the burning chariot is fixed. Riders always count as stationary when firing weapons.

Did FAST vehicles change in any way, with regards to shooting or passengers or what-have-you?

How exactly does ramming work again? Is it good enough to actually cause some damage?

SeanDrake wrote:

 son_of_osiris wrote:
Anyone know how units fire out of transports? I hope units can fire at full BS out of fast transports going 12" ...that would be so awesome for DE

Short answer no, long answer after my tea.
[list]

Don't vehicles confer relentless now? Or am I not remembering that correctly?

MadmanMSU wrote:

mercury14 wrote:

 gorgon wrote:


No, I think you're definitely on to something about the game dynamics changing. Armies will be meeting in the midfield more often, and also earlier in the game.

And this is a significant buff to assault lists that people aren't recognizing at this point.

No, it's not a significant buff. Assault is no better OR worse off than it was in 6th. It just hasn't changed much. Some assaulting is still powerful, just as it was in 6th, but you still won't see massive assault based armies.

(Unless you count FMCs in there, they got hit hard on the assault rules)

It's not that the assault rules have changed, it's that assault opportunities will likely be more plentiful overall.

MadmanMSU wrote:
Did FAST vehicles change in any way, with regards to shooting or passengers or what-have-you?

Interested.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So with cover saves being worse or more scarce...and D-weapons heavily nerfed...I'm throwing my Heat cannons around like nobody's business!

Any change to grenades?

There was a rumor that models in a transport were relentless, I assume that was false?

It's been stated that models get a LD test to avoid snap shots when their transport is stunned/shaken, is this also the case for jink snap shot?

Thanks in advance!

shiwan8 wrote:

 RedFox wrote:
So basically there's not a single positive new rule that benefit assault...ouch

Unless you count the fact that you most likely have to go and fight in CC unless there's 2 gun lines fighting each other. One needs to understand that this games edition is not about killing the enemy from the field but the missions that force you to go up close and personal.

Yep, gunlines will have quite a dilemma against, say, an Ork or Tyranid army if tasked with securing objectives in the midfield in early game turns. The design approach wasn't to make assaults more dangerous, but to encourage more of them.

I just noticed that they increased the range of Psychic Shriek and the Biomancy witchfire attacks from 12" to 18". I'm a fan.

 Brometheus wrote:

 Voodoo_Chile wrote:

Chaos psychic focus – mark of chaos or being a daemon of a particular chaos god = auto primaris of that god in addition to others.

This is really quite interesting. Anyone know if this takes up one of your powers or when they say "In addition" it is actually a freebie?

If so I look forward to the FAQs for CSM as it might make Thousand Sons somewhat useful to fulfill the Mark of Tzeentch requirement and allow a Maleficarum roll

It definitely needs a faq, along with the Black Staff... I hope Ahriman can take Divination. I wonder what, if anything, they'd make the Black Staff do? Same Witchfire multiple times? Spell familiar? Pick spells? Who knows.

But lets be honest... I'm sure they'll promptly put out a 7th faq for CSM, and just leave TS in the dust (lol?) so don't get your hopes up too much

such pun, many sad. :(

 jhnbrg wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

There is a lot that will need changing with FAQ's.

Instead of FAQs there will be 8th edition...

No, next it will be:

"WH40k online edition.

Incredible news! No need for paper anymore, our only edition of Warhammer Fourthy thousand will be available online through our specific client. This, for the very small monthly fee of 14.99$ (30$ for you guys in australia, a real deal!).
For this negligible amount, you will have access to all our rules all the time, anywhere... assuming you have windows 8.1!
This new never ending edition will be updated monthly with rules update, balances and everything you need to forge the ultimate narative!"

Couldn't resist.

Seriously, I like a large amount of the leaks I've read and can't wait to have the book in my hands tonight and test the rules with my friends.
3 more hours...

What is the order of modifiers in the new book? Same as before? Basically, my question is, will charging with an MCean he makes 2 attacks, 1 base + 1, or just a net 1, regardless of Daemon weapons, CC weapons, charging, etc.

Edit: when smashing

 MajorStoffer wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

It's been 1 year, 1 month and 5 days since the last FAQ.

And the Tzeentch Chariot still can't shoot it's only weapon.

I wouldn't hold out hope on any relevant FAQs.

That being said, I'm liking the sound of 7th, but I remain dissapointed it wasn't a more comprehensive revamp. But then I shouldn't expect GW to take risks, they're not desperate enough yet. I'm very interested in seeing their next financials, and what they have lined up for after them. They come out in, what, late June, early July?

Didnt they release FAQs right after 6th came out? What relevance does the last FAQ have in when an edition FAQ comes out? From what Ive seen out here, each edition at least has a FAQ that comes out right after it

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

zhutch wrote:
So it's looking like the new biomancy powers might be a good option for AM armies... thoughts?

Divination looks definitely less appealing what with the WC 2 on prescience

Dunno... I think Telepathy is much more interesting for Guard (Divination still is)

Divination is still solid, but I forsee a lot of invisibility fishing now.

Still solid? Do you realize how much more difficult it will be to cast Prescience now? Compare 6th to 7th. You have a LD 9 or 10 psyker. In 6th casting Prescience was easy peasy. In 7th, how many warp charge dice do you need to throw to have the same odds of success as you did in 6th edition? A lot. Which means you can't reliably cast it three times with three ML1 psykers because you won't have enough warp charge dice. Also, congrats your risk of perils is now 20+% because you had to use so many dice.

The primaris power in divination is much much worse now, being warp charge 2 with the new rules.

Models firing out of a vehicle that moved at combat speed count as having moved that turn, models firing out of a vehicle that moved at cruising speed can only fire snap shots that turn. They cannot fire if the vehicle moves flat out or uses smoke launchers, nor can the vehicle move at flat out or use smoke if the embarked unit fired.

 Lord Yayula wrote:
Regarding the jink change, you can only fire snaps on your next shooting phase but... can you assault? I wouldn't mind changing some bolter shots for the 4+ cover

I'd love to have an answer to this. If say, Shining Spears jink on their turn can they still assault after that?

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

It hurts whether a cow runs into you and headbutts you, or smushes you against a wall slowly. Big heavy things can crush even if they go slowly. Trust.

I like to think a monolith kind of hovers over the tank and slowly descends onto it, crushing it into the ground

 optometris wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

It hurts whether a cow runs into you and headbutts you, or smushes you against a wall slowly. Big heavy things can crush even if they go slowly. Trust.

I like to think a monolith kind of hovers over the tank and slowly descends onto it, crushing it into the ground

Getting rammed by a Monolith is like being run over by a fat old lady in an electric wheelchair.

 optometris wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

It hurts whether a cow runs into you and headbutts you, or smushes you against a wall slowly. Big heavy things can crush even if they go slowly. Trust.

I like to think a monolith kind of hovers over the tank and slowly descends onto it, crushing it into the ground

Anyone who's played American or Aussie Football knows this one.

BTW, optometris, I love your avatar

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

zhutch wrote:
So it's looking like the new biomancy powers might be a good option for AM armies... thoughts?

Divination looks definitely less appealing what with the WC 2 on prescience

Dunno... I think Telepathy is much more interesting for Guard (Divination still is)

Divination is still solid, but I forsee a lot of invisibility fishing now.

Still solid? Do you realize how much more difficult it will be to cast Prescience now? Compare 6th to 7th. You have a LD 9 or 10 psyker. In 6th casting Prescience was easy peasy. In 7th, how many warp charge dice do you need to throw to have the same odds of success as you did in 6th edition? A lot. Which means you can't reliably cast it three times with three ML1 psykers because you won't have enough warp charge dice. Also, congrats your risk of perils is now 20+% because you had to use so many dice.

The primaris power in divination is much much worse now, being warp charge 2 with the new rules.

Divination is more than just Prescience, and its good its more dificult to cast, its a powerful ability. Divination is still solid, just not overpowered now. Everything in that dicipline is still good except misfortune

Sorry you got a problem with Prescience being nerfed, but it had it comming. Its still good

Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

SeanDrake wrote:
Models firing out of a vehicle that moved at combat speed count as having moved that turn, models firing out of a vehicle that moved at cruising speed can only fire snap shots that turn. They cannot fire if the vehicle moves flat out or uses smoke launchers, nor can the vehicle move at flat out or use smoke if the embarked unit fired.

This might have been mentioned, but the thread is expanding really rapidly, so I might have missed it.

For normal and Fast vehicles, what movement distance will constitute Combat Speed, Cruising Speed, and Flat Out in this edition?

 MajorStoffer wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

It's been 1 year, 1 month and 5 days since the last FAQ.

Faqs, were in fact, abandoned by GW because they were starting to write 7th edition 13 months ago. They basically gave up on 6th (in under a year from its release no less), quietly, knowing what was going down. Our new universal faq is "Roll 1d6. If it is 1-3 you are right & 4-6 your opponent is correct." (BTW, that ain't a joke.)

Saldiven wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:
Models firing out of a vehicle that moved at combat speed count as having moved that turn, models firing out of a vehicle that moved at cruising speed can only fire snap shots that turn. They cannot fire if the vehicle moves flat out or uses smoke launchers, nor can the vehicle move at flat out or use smoke if the embarked unit fired.

This might have been mentioned, but the thread is expanding really rapidly, so I might have missed it.

For normal and Fast vehicles, what movement distance will constitute Combat Speed, Cruising Speed, and Flat Out in this edition?

I'm pretty sure for normal vehicles, this is unchanged. No idea about fast though.

Has anyone mentioned how rerolls to psychic tests will work now? Is it all or nothing, or reroll any dice?

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

zhutch wrote:
So it's looking like the new biomancy powers might be a good option for AM armies... thoughts?

Divination looks definitely less appealing what with the WC 2 on prescience

Dunno... I think Telepathy is much more interesting for Guard (Divination still is)

Divination is still solid, but I forsee a lot of invisibility fishing now.

Still solid? Do you realize how much more difficult it will be to cast Prescience now? Compare 6th to 7th. You have a LD 9 or 10 psyker. In 6th casting Prescience was easy peasy. In 7th, how many warp charge dice do you need to throw to have the same odds of success as you did in 6th edition? A lot. Which means you can't reliably cast it three times with three ML1 psykers because you won't have enough warp charge dice. Also, congrats your risk of perils is now 20+% because you had to use so many dice.

The primaris power in divination is much much worse now, being warp charge 2 with the new rules.

Divination is more than just Prescience, and its good its more dificult to cast, its a powerful ability. Divination is still solid, just not overpowered now. Everything in that dicipline is still good except misfortune

Sorry you got a problem with Prescience being nerfed, but it had it comming. Its still good

A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

If they didn't add it, I think my club will allow fast transports to count as having not moved for disembarking purposes. Doesn't help me, but the Tau/Eldar players would get a small buff from that.

HELP!

With all this talk and leaks of 7th, I am seriously feeling my pure guard army is doomed. Can I still play this - 2 hq, 3 elite, 2 troops, 1 fast, 2 heavy, 2k pts, all one army...?

And if I still can, is it doomed because of all the new possibilities (i.e. am I limiting myself for being a purest? or fair player?)?

All this talk of allies, matrix, factions, detachments, I am confused....

 Lobukia wrote:
If they didn't add it, I think my club will allow fast transports to count as having not moved for disembarking purposes. Doesn't help me, but the Tau/Eldar players would get a small buff from that.

...because they need a buff? O_o

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
If they didn't add it, I think my club will allow fast transports to count as having not moved for disembarking purposes. Doesn't help me, but the Tau/Eldar players would get a small buff from that.

...because they need a buff? O_o

I don't think Fast vehicles have ever counted as stationary for disembarking purposes (at least, not since before there was a distinction).

 spartanlegion wrote:
HELP!

With all this talk and leaks of 7th, I am seriously feeling my pure guard army is doomed. Can I still play this - 2 hq, 3 elite, 2 troops, 1 fast, 2 heavy, 2k pts, all one army...?

And if I still can, is it doomed because of all the new possibilities (i.e. am I limiting myself for being a purest? or fair player?)?

All this talk of allies, matrix, factions, detachments, I am confused....

Of course you can.

Even if you couldn't you could just unbound it anyway to play as is.

 spartanlegion wrote:

 MajorStoffer wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

It's been 1 year, 1 month and 5 days since the last FAQ.

Faqs, were in fact, abandoned by GW because they were starting to write 7th edition 13 months ago. They basically gave up on 6th (in under a year from its release no less), quietly, knowing what was going down. Our new universal faq is "Roll 1d6. If it is 1-3 you are right & 4-6 your opponent is correct." (BTW, that ain't a joke.)

That rule (The Most Important Rule) is unchanged from 6th Ed. It's not new.

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

I hope that is a joke else there would be no point in open-topped transporters.

 Sigvatr wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

I hope that is a joke else there would be no point in open-topped transporters. Furthermore, a single lascannon shot can suddenly kill d6 models? Legit.

Because lascannons are templates?

Derp.

 Sigvatr wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

I hope that is a joke else there would be no point in open-topped transporters.

Holy crap my FMC list will utterly hose dark eldar skimmer spam now.

 Sigvatr wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

I hope that is a joke else there would be no point in open-topped transporters.

Eek. Makes me even less interested in taking my DE off the shelf.

 Sigvatr wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

I hope that is a joke else there would be no point in open-topped transporters.

Well, it is only template weapons, not single shot or blast. Templates have always done hits to the models inside buildings, so it makes sense that open topped transports are vulnerable to it as well.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Derp.

That's just the flamer template. Not even blasts, right?

Speaking of buildings, do they still have the horrible dmg chart they had before?

Meh, I wait for actual rules confirmation. Prepare the scanners! Would be quite a nerf to GA. Finally, they get nerfed. So OP, much wow.

Lobukia wrote:If they didn't add it, I think my club will allow fast transports to count as having not moved for disembarking purposes. Doesn't help me, but the Tau/Eldar players would get a small buff from that.

But Devilfishes aren't fast

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

Oooh, shiny! hehe

Just wanted some clarification on this, does Move through Cover mean you don't take an initiative penalty for charging through terrain, and you don't reduce your charge range by 2"? Of is it just the ignore the -2"?

Suddenly want to run some hellhounds to wreck some pointy dark eldar cave.

Man, has anyone considered just how much extra dice rolling the psychic phase will add? On top of the already absurd number of charts, tables, D3 random stuff and other layers of dice rolling redundancy.

Used to be; take psychic check on Ld value. Done. If perils happened, you lost a wound.

Now; roll for charges, add up ML levels, roll test for power, have opponent roll dispel. If perils happened, roll on a chart. Potentially, roll a Ld check, or D3 this, or D3 that, then apply negative effects. One of those effects may involve some more dice rolling by inflicting hits.

Do that for every psyker/power.

Every turn.

GW continues to amaze me with their gifted game design abilities.

mercury14 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Derp.

That's just the flamer template. Not even blasts, right?

Hellstorm weapons also but not blasts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blacksails wrote:
Man, has anyone considered just how much extra dice rolling the psychic phase will add? On top of the already absurd number of charts, tables, D3 random stuff and other layers of dice rolling redundancy.

Used to be; take psychic check on Ld value. Done. If perils happened, you lost a wound.

Now; roll for charges, add up ML levels, roll test for power, have opponent roll dispel. If perils happened, roll on a chart. Potentially, roll a Ld check, or D3 this, or D3 that, then apply negative effects. One of those effects may involve some more dice rolling by inflicting hits.

Do that for every psyker/power.

Every turn.

GW continues to amaze me with their gifted game design abilities.

Reference section consists of seven pages of tables.

 Lobukia wrote:

 optometris wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
Was there confirmation on how Heavy vehicles work? Do they have any new interactions with Ordnance weapons?

As far is it seems it gives bonuses when Ramming (distance travelled does not help this anymore)

Puny mortals, BEHOLD the power of the RAMMING MONOLITH! Watch it ram your vehicles moving at 10 km/h!

It hurts whether a cow runs into you and headbutts you, or smushes you against a wall slowly. Big heavy things can crush even if they go slowly. Trust.

I like to think a monolith kind of hovers over the tank and slowly descends onto it, crushing it into the ground

Anyone who's played American or Aussie Football knows this one.

BTW, optometris, I love your avatar

haha cheers, I can watch that gif for ages lol

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

SeanDrake wrote:


Reference section consists of seven pages of tables.

Dear lord.

I mean, that's just amazing.

Any word yet on Fast vehicles?

Divination+Satanic for 3++ love in an easy to cast package.

 Blacksails wrote:
Man, has anyone considered just how much extra dice rolling the psychic phase will add? On top of the already absurd number of charts, tables, D3 random stuff and other layers of dice rolling redundancy.

Used to be; take psychic check on Ld value. Done. If perils happened, you lost a wound.

Now; roll for charges, add up ML levels, roll test for power, have opponent roll dispel. If perils happened, roll on a chart. Potentially, roll a Ld check, or D3 this, or D3 that, then apply negative effects. One of those effects may involve some more dice rolling by inflicting hits.

Do that for every psyker/power.

Every turn.

GW continues to amaze me with their gifted game design abilities.

It's a dice game.... expect lots of dice?

If you're after less dice rolling, I hear in monopoly you only have to roll two dice per player turn. OR better yet!!!

checkers! all you have to do is move!

sounds great for you.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Leth wrote:
You can buy venomthropes for cover as well as grenades. With enough elite slots you can buy them one each without losing out. two units of 10 termagaunts now opens up everything so whats that 100 points to get 3 of every other slot? Yea not seeing a lot of points spent in troops to make it work. In addition you can spam zoanthropes now for easy synapse and some of the cheapest access to 2 warp charges.

two x flying hive tyrants with double leech
3x venomthrope
2x zoanthrope
4x 10 man termagaunts
7x carnifex with adrenal split however you want
50 points to work with.

Not the best list, but it gives you an idea of what you can work with. Or you can go 3-6 exocrines and a skyshield landing pad with zoanthropes and venomthropes for a 2+ cover 4+ invul all the time potentially with FNP. The options go on for nidzilla.

Oh boy - 7 Carnifexes that will do jack all over the course of the game. Well built list. Truly you understand the ins and outs of the Tyranid codex.
hint: the Shrouded bubble is pretty small. And having 2 Synapse is just a bad idea (the 2 Flyrants can't be counted on because they move fast).
But that's okay. You schooled me well.

Wow, maybe get off your god damn high horse and realize that I was not trying to school you. I was trying to get the ideas flowing for how you could make your list work with the new edition. I even said it was a bad list in my post but you were too busy looking for flaws to actually read it.

But I am sorry I wasted my time, you are so dedicated to being miserable that even trying to think about ways to make it work is a waste of time. My bad.

Deny the Witch question. The new rule states:
"For a Deny the Witch Test to be Successful, you need to nullify all of the warp charges that were successfully harnessed by the psycher when he passed his psychic test"

Does that mean that if I'm casting a 2 WC spell, and I roll 3 successes, that in order to deny it, my opponent has to roll 3 denies? Or only 2? RAW it would seem to be 3, right?

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

You have to understand that most of the powergaming community relied on that power to save them from the dice. Now it´s back to square one and they feel like the game has taken then fun away from them and replaced it with balance. Offcourse they feel cheated and mad, everything is different now. Psykers will demand effort and it will go wrong sometimes. How can you reliably win if things go wrong?

MadmanMSU wrote:
Any word yet on Fast vehicles?

Fast vehicles move 12" flat out, if moved at combat speed can fire all weapons, cruising speed fire 2 weapons at full be rest as snap shots

 tarnish wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

You have to understand that most of the powergaming community relied on that power to save them from the dice. Now it´s back to square one and they feel like the game has taken then fun away from them and replaced it with balance. Offcourse they feel cheated and mad, everything is different now. Psykers will demand effort and it will go wrong sometimes. How can you reliably win if things go wrong?

+1 for the chuckle and the avatar haha

Aww no change to walkers so all my dreads remain men.

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Any word yet on Fast vehicles?

Fast vehicles move 12" flat out, if moved at combat speed can fire all weapons, cruising speed fire 2 weapons at full be rest as snap shots

Anything special for passengers or just all snaps at cruising still?

tag8833 wrote:
Deny the Witch question. The new rule states:
"For a Deny the Witch Test to be Successful, you need to nullify all of the warp charges that were successfully harnessed by the psycher when he passed his psychic test"

Does that mean that if I'm casting a 2 WC spell, and I roll 3 successes, that in order to deny it, my opponent has to roll 3 denies? Or only 2? RAW it would seem to be 3, right?

It appears that is clearly intended to work that way, to me. Remember that more dice increases the risk to the psyker and if they die, no power at all.

Wilson wrote:

It's a dice game.... expect lots of dice?

If you're after less dice rolling, I hear in monopoly you only have to roll two dice per player turn. OR better yet!!!

checkers! all you have to do is move!

sounds great for you.

Entirely missing the point.

There's a way to have a dice rolling game use a sensible amount of dice. Rolling absolutely everything on a random D3 or D6 or a table takes away from the players actions. That, and having to roll everything slows the game down, instead of just "2" rather than "D3".

But just so you understand, look at the old way, and look at the new way. Both involve rolling dice. Both will have roughly the same outcome. One is simpler, more efficient, easier to track, and easier to resolve; the other is a bloated mess.

 Desubot wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Any word yet on Fast vehicles?

Fast vehicles move 12" flat out, if moved at combat speed can fire all weapons, cruising speed fire 2 weapons at full be rest as snap shots

Anything special for passengers or just all snaps at cruising still?

Nothing mentioned regarding passengers so I guess would act normally.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

No, not at all. Not. At. All. If you don't think moving a spell from warp charge 1 to 2 in addition to having the new warp dice rules isn't a tremendous nerf to prescience, either you are unaware of the math in 7th (likely) or are 8 years old and haven't taken the class to understand it yet (extremely unlikely).

Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

No, not at all. Not. At. All. If you don't think moving a spell from warp charge 1 to 2 in addition to having the new warp dice rules isn't e is a HUGE a tremendous nerf to prescience, either you are unaware of the math in 7th (likely) or are 8 years old and haven't taken the class to understand it yet (extremely unlikely).

Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

Prescience is a HUGE buff and force-multiplying power. It should most definitely require a difficult test to use.

It is specifically bolded that "all sucsesfull warp charges" have to be blocked so I would say in your example 3 blocks would be needed to stop the power.

Oh right i forgot to ask.

Anything on IC joining other IC besides MC?
(9 Captains joining 1 chapter master alone?)

 RedFox wrote:
So basically there's not a single positive new rule that benefit assault...ouch

Yup.

Well, except that when assaulting walkers if you deal a penetrating hit it counts as TWO wounds when determining who won combat. Not that anyone takes walkers other than knights anyway.

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

No, not at all. Not. At. All. If you don't think moving a spell from warp charge 1 to 2 in addition to having the new warp dice rules isn't a tremendous nerf to prescience, either you are unaware of the math in 7th (likely) or are 8 years old and haven't taken the class to understand it yet (extremely unlikely).

Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

It takes a good 5 dice to cast it reliably now (reliably, as in, near the same reliability that it took in 6th). And, of course, if you roll 2 sixes, you also perils.

So, for example, if you took Coteaz purely to cast prescience on someone, you're only getting 2+d6 dice (excluding other psykers you may or may not add to the army) to cast it with.

That's a pretty big hit to psykers. And this is basically across the board. There will be a lot less spells being flung about.

SeanDrake wrote:

mercury14 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Derp.

That's just the flamer template. Not even blasts, right?

Hellstorm weapons also but not blasts.

Yea that twists a knife into the side of ork and DE which was pretty unecessary.

Doesn't matter. People still amaze me by failing to realize the impact of Telepathy and deamonology. It doesn't matter if you can only get 2-3 powers off a turn consistently when they are stupidly broken in design.

This whole edition will change from Divination spam, to telepathy spam. You seriously only need invisibility on a beast pack or seer council. A council can get a minimum of 16 dice, just throw 15 at invisibility and save one for the ghost helm. Have fun needing ~7 natural 6's to stop it. Now that unit is IMMUNE to blasts and templates and is only hit on 6's for shooting AND HTH! That is actually worse then before. Heck, you can put a seer council in the dais with invisibility now just for laughs

GK's will do the same thing due to psychic pilot and BoP + mystics and just make Imperial Knights Invisible.

I totally forgot about my space wolves, they get 4 rune priests per FOC....

Mark my words mana batteries will be the flavor of the month as soon as this hits. You can't kill what you can't target or hit, Invisibility is such a moronic spell. Had that one power not been printed I'd be much more comfortable. This edition is far from perfect, but closer then it's ever come from what I have read..... Up until they dropped the ball on dispelling blessing. It is basically not ever going to happen on important spells. The next problem is they went and made spells that are WAY to abusive.

Oh well, I guess I'll just continue to focus on campaigns and painting. Competitive play is was always a joke but now it's not even funny.

 tarnish wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

You have to understand that most of the powergaming community relied on that power to save them from the dice. Now it´s back to square one and they feel like the game has taken then fun away from them and replaced it with balance. Offcourse they feel cheated and mad, everything is different now. Psykers will demand effort and it will go wrong sometimes. How can you reliably win if things go wrong?

You have to understand that purely based on math and odds, the change to prescience is in fact a tremendous nerf. Your not even passive aggressive attempts to insult people (not me, I'm the furthest from a power gamer you can find lol) does nothing to the actual facts here. Prescience was very very powerful before. Now it is SIGNIFICANTLY less powerful. Calling it a tremendous nerf is extremely reasonable. I think you'd agree if you actually went over the math. But perhaps you'd much rather spend your time implying people you disagree with are mad and upset and don't believe in effort?

 Blacksails wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:


Reference section consists of seven pages of tables.

Dear lord.

I mean, that's just amazing.

What's even more amazing? That they finally put all of the tables in ONE location!!! I was soooo sick and tired of thumbing through the rule book to find a single table and then back through to find another.

jamesk1973 wrote:

 RedFox wrote:
So basically there's not a single positive new rule that benefit assault...ouch

Yup.

Well, except that when assaulting walkers if you deal a penetrating hit it counts as TWO wounds when determining who won combat. Not that anyone takes walkers other than knights anyway.

As has been said table and mission setup has changed enough, that if you can resist the edge to zerg a gun line and instead go for objectives. There will be a much increased chance that assault will be engaged in in the mid field areas.

Is there a reference section in the back like there was in 6th listing all the vehicles hull points for armies that haven't gotten an updated codex yet?

SeanDrake, can bikes assault after they jink? Thanks.

 spartanlegion wrote:

 MajorStoffer wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

It's been 1 year, 1 month and 5 days since the last FAQ.

Faqs, were in fact, abandoned by GW because they were starting to write 7th edition 13 months ago. They basically gave up on 6th (in under a year from its release no less), quietly, knowing what was going down. Our new universal faq is "Roll 1d6. If it is 1-3 you are right & 4-6 your opponent is correct." (BTW, that ain't a joke.)

If that's the case then they really made a complete suckers play with $83 of supplements released in December (almost the cost of the new rule book). If that's the case, then they are bigger scumbags than I thought.

@seandrake - what point are fortifications placed? Before or after terrain setup etc?

MadmanMSU wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
No, not at all. Not. At. All. If you don't think moving a spell from warp charge 1 to 2 in addition to having the new warp dice rules isn't a tremendous nerf to prescience, either you are unaware of the math in 7th (likely) or are 8 years old and haven't taken the class to understand it yet (extremely unlikely).

Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

It takes a good 5 dice to cast it reliably now (reliably, as in, near the same reliability that it took in 6th). And, of course, if you roll 2 sixes, you also perils.

So, for example, if you took Coteaz purely to cast prescience on someone, you're only getting 2+d6 dice (excluding other psykers you may or may not add to the army) to cast it with.

That's a pretty big hit to psykers. And this is basically across the board. There will be a lot less spells being flung about.

Some sense! Thank you. Yes, 5 dice is almost but not quite getting you to the same success rate. But that also has a 20% perils rate! Also, the enemy can deny the witch on your blessing! And hey, if your 6th edition army had three psykers each casting prescience easily, by easy I mean like 80-90% success rate, to try to do that now you'd need 15-18 warp charge dice, you'd peril a lot more often and even after your limited successes some would be dispelled. That is if you could even get to 18 warp charge dice in the first place. That's a tremendous difference.

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

No, not at all. Not. At. All. If you don't think moving a spell from warp charge 1 to 2 in addition to having the new warp dice rules isn't a tremendous nerf to prescience, either you are unaware of the math in 7th (likely) or are 8 years old and haven't taken the class to understand it yet (extremely unlikely).

Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

Ive seen the charts, an ability that powerful should be that hard to cast, I dont see the problem, and yes, the rest of the tree is still solid, nothing you've said has debunked the fact that there are still strong powers other than Prescience worth taking on the Divination table.

Not sure why you're only hung up on just Prescience? It needed a nerf, it got a nerf. Unless you just like picking random fights over opinions.

Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

And yes, I really can't feel any sympathy for people angry about psykers being nerfed when at the same time, some armies don't even have access to any psykers.

What do assault grenades do for charging now? Do they still ignore the initiative penalty like. Move through Cover?

Krak grenades were nerfed, right?

 Blacksails wrote:

Wilson wrote:

It's a dice game.... expect lots of dice?

If you're after less dice rolling, I hear in monopoly you only have to roll two dice per player turn. OR better yet!!!

checkers! all you have to do is move!

sounds great for you.

Entirely missing the point.

There's a way to have a dice rolling game use a sensible amount of dice. Rolling absolutely everything on a random D3 or D6 or a table takes away from the players actions. That, and having to roll everything slows the game down, instead of just "2" rather than "D3".

But just so you understand, look at the old way, and look at the new way. Both involve rolling dice. Both will have roughly the same outcome. One is simpler, more efficient, easier to track, and easier to resolve; the other is a bloated mess.

-in your opinion, which is very much fair enough.

i will however happily play these new rules and still find it a good laugh.

I like the random side of things, means anyone has a chance of winning+ who knows what will happen element.

pros and cons.

Do you auto lose if you are tabled?

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

Ive seen the charts, an ability that powerful should be that hard to cast, I dont see the problem, and yes, the rest of the tree is still solid, nothing you've said has debunked the fact that there are still strong powers other than Prescience worth taking on the Divination table.

Not sure why you're only hung up on just Prescience? It needed a nerf, it got a nerf.

Oh dear. This is CLASSIC moving the goalposts. You said I was overexaggerating when I said there is a tremendous nerf to prescience. Whether you think it needed a nerf is IRRELEVANT. Whether you see a problem or not is irrelevant. I thought it was too powerful before too you know. Which is why I was shocked when you said I was exaggerating about the change to it. The primaris power in divination is tremendously worse now because it is relatively much harder to reliably cast compared to 6th edition. Since you now seem to be agreeing with me on that, there is nothing more to say to you. In the future try to give more consistent responses ok?

mercury14 wrote:
Krak grenades were nerfed, right?

Only in that vehicles explode on a 7+, which they cannot roll except vs open topped vehicles.

mercury14 wrote:
Krak grenades were nerfed, right?

Yea can grenades still be thrown?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Loopstah wrote:
Do you auto lose if you are tabled?

Seriously? Have you ever felt like a winner after being tabled?

Wilson wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

Wilson wrote:

It's a dice game.... expect lots of dice?

If you're after less dice rolling, I hear in monopoly you only have to roll two dice per player turn. OR better yet!!!

checkers! all you have to do is move!

sounds great for you.

Entirely missing the point.

There's a way to have a dice rolling game use a sensible amount of dice. Rolling absolutely everything on a random D3 or D6 or a table takes away from the players actions. That, and having to roll everything slows the game down, instead of just "2" rather than "D3".

But just so you understand, look at the old way, and look at the new way. Both involve rolling dice. Both will have roughly the same outcome. One is simpler, more efficient, easier to track, and easier to resolve; the other is a bloated mess.

-in your opinion, which is very much fair enough.

i will however happily play these new rules and still find it a good laugh.

I like the random side of things, means anyone has a chance of winning+ who knows what will happen element.

pros and cons.

Maybe yatzy is the game for you then?

 tetrisphreak wrote:

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

No, not at all. Not. At. All. If you don't think moving a spell from warp charge 1 to 2 in addition to having the new warp dice rules isn't e is a HUGE a tremendous nerf to prescience, either you are unaware of the math in 7th (likely) or are 8 years old and haven't taken the class to understand it yet (extremely unlikely).

Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

Prescience is a HUGE buff and force-multiplying power. It should most definitely require a difficult test to use.

*facepalm*. Why can't people read around here? I'm talking about how much the power changed from 6th to 7th. Some people apparently didn't think it was nerfed hard. For example the person I was talking to up there. The change it underwent is real and it has nothing to do with anyone's value judgements. It's definitely a lot worse now in 7th than it was in 6th.

 jhnbrg wrote:

Wilson wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

Wilson wrote:

It's a dice game.... expect lots of dice?

If you're after less dice rolling, I hear in monopoly you only have to roll two dice per player turn. OR better yet!!!

checkers! all you have to do is move!

sounds great for you.

Entirely missing the point.

There's a way to have a dice rolling game use a sensible amount of dice. Rolling absolutely everything on a random D3 or D6 or a table takes away from the players actions. That, and having to roll everything slows the game down, instead of just "2" rather than "D3".

But just so you understand, look at the old way, and look at the new way. Both involve rolling dice. Both will have roughly the same outcome. One is simpler, more efficient, easier to track, and easier to resolve; the other is a bloated mess.

-in your opinion, which is very much fair enough.

i will however happily play these new rules and still find it a good laugh.

I like the random side of things, means anyone has a chance of winning+ who knows what will happen element.

pros and cons.

Maybe yatzy is the game for you then?

From now on I am going to refer to psychic denial as Yahtzee!

I think the most massive change this edition is the fact that everything can score. Personally, I'm seeing a massive shift away from troops to elites. Elites have always been better, with their downside being that they were either non-scoring or too expensive (FOC swapping shenanigans aside). But now you can just take the bare minimum for troops and throw all the scoring elites in you want.

Yes, troops will be able to secure objectives, but honestly, most of the time an elite unit will just wipe that troops out anyway. This results in things like:

Chaos. Now they can get their elite troops for scoring without having to pay the HQ tax. Scoring Oblits.

Tau. Crisis suits can score now. So can riptides.

Grey Knights. Scoring dreadknights and psyfledreads, without having to take Mordrak. Scoring purifiers.

Scoring Landraiders.

Deathwing that score without having to pay 200 points for Belial.

Etc etc etc.

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

Ive seen the charts, an ability that powerful should be that hard to cast, I dont see the problem, and yes, the rest of the tree is still solid, nothing you've said has debunked the fact that there are still strong powers other than Prescience worth taking on the Divination table.

Not sure why you're only hung up on just Prescience? It needed a nerf, it got a nerf.

Oh dear. This is CLASSIC moving the goalposts. You said I was overexaggerating when I said there is a tremendous nerf to prescience. Whether you think it needed a nerf is IRRELEVANT. Whether you see a problem or not is irrelevant. I thought it was too powerful before too you know. Which is why I was shocked when you said I was exaggerating about the change to it. The primaris power in divination is tremendously worse now because it is relatively much harder to reliably cast compared to 6th edition. Since you now seem to be agreeing with me on that, there is nothing more to say to you. In the future try to give more consistent responses ok?

No you're still exaggerating and overreacting. Its not "tremendously worse", its worse yes, but thats the point of a nerf. No goal post moving at all

And you still havent actually argued my main point, you still are hung up on Prescience, which I had never mentioned in anything i said, nor in the original post that set you off on your tirade. I was simply commenting on the Divination discipline on a whole, and you went off on a tirade regarding Prescience.

This is the 2nd time you've specifically attacked a post of mine where I stated a neutral opinion about something. I wasnt aware my opinions were so offensive to your sensibilities

mercury14 wrote:
SeanDrake, can bikes assault after they jink? Thanks.

Nothing mentioned one way or the other under bikes or jink rules.

Super Newb wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:

Super Newb wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Super Newb wrote:


A problem? No, not really. But 'still solid', the words you used to describe it, doesn't a imply huge incredible nerf. The one guaranteed power you get, the primaris power, has been nerfed a tremendous amount. I don't think most people fully understand how much harder it is going to be to fire off warp charge two powers reliably.

Overexagerate much?

No, not at all. Not. At. All. If you don't think moving a spell from warp charge 1 to 2 in addition to having the new warp dice rules isn't e is a HUGE a tremendous nerf to prescience, either you are unaware of the math in 7th (likely) or are 8 years old and haven't taken the class to understand it yet (extremely unlikely).

Do you know the odds? Do you? Compare prescience in 6th with prescience in 7th. Odds of success and odds of perils under each rule system. Walk me through the numbers if you think I am over exaggerating. If instead you have no idea what the odds are then you have nothing to support your claim do you?

Prescience is a HUGE buff and force-multiplying power. It should most definitely require a difficult test to use.

*facepalm*. Why can't people read around here? I'm talking about how much the power changed from 6th to 7th. Some people apparently didn't think it was nerfed hard. For example the person I was talking to up there. The change it underwent is real and it has nothing to do with anyone's value judgements. It's definitely a lot worse now in 7th than it was in 6th.

See I think the problem your running into is people are assuming your complaining with some rational point rather then just to complain. I am all for throwing out your opinion, but seriously dude. You are saying that it doesn't matter whether it needed a nerf or not. But that it was nerfed in general. Whats your beef? Its confusing, do you agree it needed a nerf or not?

Yes it was nerfed. But it did very much need a nerf. Personally I think it should be warp charge 2 AND been removed as the primaris and been random. Rerolls are EXTREMELY good in 40k.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Loopstah wrote:
Do you auto lose if you are tabled?

Seriously? Have you ever felt like a winner after being tabled?

Now you can get VP each turn rather than at the end it might have changed.

 tetrisphreak wrote:
@seandrake - what point are fortifications placed? Before or after terrain setup etc?

If you mean a fortification you have bought, that deploys with the rest of your army.

Only in maelstrom missions, though?

MadmanMSU wrote:
I think the most massive change this edition is the fact that everything can score. Personally, I'm seeing a massive shift away from troops to elites. Elites have always been better, with their downside being that they were either non-scoring or too expensive (FOC swapping shenanigans aside). But now you can just take the bare minimum for troops and throw all the scoring elites in you want.

Yes, troops will be able to secure objectives, but honestly, most of the time an elite unit will just wipe that troops out anyway. This results in things like:

Chaos. Now they can get their elite troops for scoring without having to pay the HQ tax. Scoring Oblits.

Tau. Crisis suits can score now. So can riptides.

Grey Knights. Scoring dreadknights and psyfledreads, without having to take Mordrak. Scoring purifiers.

Scoring Landraiders.

Deathwing that score without having to pay 200 points for Belial.

Etc etc etc.

Spamming nurgle spawn units to swamp out other scorers will be a thing I am sure. 180 for 15 T6 wounds with a massive footprint, fearless, speed and scoring? Um.... duh. Also welcome back wraiths, it's been a few months.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

Lulz. You've got a darn good point there, lol.

However, I would not have expected so many people to be oblivious to how much the casting of psychic powers has changed in 7th, even after they've read the leaks! To agree with the nerf is one thing, to jump all over someone when they explain just how much of a nerf it is? That's shocking. I know kids play 40k, but anyone 12 or over should be able to appreciate the large difference in the odds between 6th and 7th.

Loopstah wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

Loopstah wrote:
Do you auto lose if you are tabled?

Seriously? Have you ever felt like a winner after being tabled?

Now you can get VP each turn rather than at the end it might have changed.

I was teasing. Honestly if I get tabled I feel like a loser. Period. Semantics aside you got your ass handed to you

I'm ok with scoring Paladins without Draigo, either solo or in groups

Super Newb wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

Lulz. You've got a darn good point there, lol.

However, I would not have expected so many people to be oblivious to how much the casting of psychic powers has changed in 7th, even after they've read the leaks! To agree with the nerf is one thing, to jump all over someone when they explain just how much of a nerf it is? That's shocking. I know kids play 40k, but anyone 12 or over should be able to appreciate the large difference in the odds between 6th and 7th.

Yea and any one 12 years or older should be rational enough to realize it HAD to happen. Spammed blanket rerolls were idiotic and a crutch that too many people got too comfortable abusing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I'm ok with scoring Paladins without Draigo, either solo or in groups

Me too, I remember when those guys were hard to kill.... man has lethality creeped on us.

Can anyone tell me what the vortex special rule is? It's now part of the vortex of doom psychic power which is strength D vortex

PapaSoul wrote:
Can anyone tell me what the vortex special rule is? It's now part of the vortex of doom psychic power which is strength D vortex

Iirc the marker doesn't go away, it keeps scattering every turn.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

And yes, I really can't feel any sympathy for people angry about psykers being nerfed when at the same time, some armies don't even have access to any psykers.

I'm a space marine that used to play with tigurius all the time (loaded up with divination powers all the time) and I fully and totally agree with this change to psy and increased difficuly in using force multiplier powers.

I understand that for the tournament scene, garanteed powers are all that counts. But I play with my friends and I'm all for more randomness to make games unpredictable.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

PapaSoul wrote:
Can anyone tell me what the vortex special rule is? It's now part of the vortex of doom psychic power which is strength D vortex

Iirc the marker doesn't go away, it keeps scattering every turn.

I think it goes away if you roll doubles when you roll for scatter

 Sinful Hero wrote:
What do assault grenades do for charging now? Do they still ignore the initiative penalty like. Move through Cover?

So far Move through Cover ignores the -2 movement penalty but not the initiative penalty. Genestealers are still worthless, unless people are reading the assault section wrong. Still hoping it says something like, units charging at full movement, attack at full initiative.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I'm ok with scoring Paladins without Draigo, either solo or in groups

Return of the Solodin. Pretty cheap way to cause some backfield havoc.

As mentioned above, Wraithwing will be back, I'm sure. And this time, they're scoring.

On the one hand, I like the changes. Troop units were always kind of boring, and now you can really bust out the fun toys.

On the other hand, the game has completely given up on balance and/or reason. The entire game is just bring what you want, damn any sort of cohesion. Even come the apocalypse can ally in.

"Hey guys. What armies did you bring?"
"I'm using Grey Knights and Nurgle Daemons today."

 Red Corsair wrote:
See I think the problem your running into is people are assuming your complaining with some rational point rather then just to complain. I am all for throwing out your opinion, but seriously dude. You are saying that it doesn't matter whether it needed a nerf or not. But that it was nerfed in general. Whats your beef? Its confusing, do you agree it needed a nerf or not?

I don't have a beef. I've noticed though that most people don't seem to get how much the casting of psychic powers changed, especially warp charge 2 and 3 powers. In this specific case I commented on just how much of a change prescience underwent. After doing that two dudes claimed I was exaggerating or mad / upset / a lazy player just because I pointed out how much the casting of prescience changed. That's ridiculous and childish, don't you think? The nerf exists, and it is a very very big one. That shouldn't even be in dispute, yet it was here. And why jump on someone for pointing out the extent of the nerf? Why act like pointing that out is a personal insult? It doesn't make any damn sense.

I welcome the extra randomness. It forces you to act more tactfully during the game, like a real firefight things will be shifting and changing constantly, how much more fun are the games where it all comes down to the last turn rather than those games where you sat there from like turn 2-3 onward and your fate is basically sealed, unless you can pull off a massive slog against your opponent. It gets super boring playing the same tactic of hold out til the end then run for the objectives snatching victory last minute.

I think the game will be much more fun, and things will be a bit more even (sorry nids, hopefully it wont turn out as bad as first thought).

MadmanMSU wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I'm ok with scoring Paladins without Draigo, either solo or in groups

Return of the Solodin. Pretty cheap way to cause some backfield havoc.

And now they'll give you a warp dice too

 Red Corsair wrote:

Super Newb wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

Lulz. You've got a darn good point there, lol.

However, I would not have expected so many people to be oblivious to how much the casting of psychic powers has changed in 7th, even after they've read the leaks! To agree with the nerf is one thing, to jump all over someone when they explain just how much of a nerf it is? That's shocking. I know kids play 40k, but anyone 12 or over should be able to appreciate the large difference in the odds between 6th and 7th.

Yea

Good, you agree. Apology accepted.

 optometris wrote:
I welcome the extra randomness. It forces you to act more tactfully during the game, like a real firefight things will be shifting and changing constantly, how much more fun are the games where it all comes down to the last turn rather than those games where you sat there from like turn 2-3 onward and your fate is basically sealed, unless you can pull off a massive slog against your opponent. It gets super boring playing the same tactic of hold out til the end then run for the objectives snatching victory last minute.

I think the game will be much more fun, and things will be a bit more even (sorry nids, hopefully it wont turn out as bad as first thought).

That isn't going to change though. You're still going to lose the game on turn 2 because you rolled poorly and have to sit there for 3 turns, its just now you have even less player agency while you're doing it.

MadmanMSU wrote:
I think the most massive change this edition is the fact that everything can score. Personally, I'm seeing a massive shift away from troops to elites. Elites have always been better, with their downside being that they were either non-scoring or too expensive (FOC swapping shenanigans aside). But now you can just take the bare minimum for troops and throw all the scoring elites in you want.

Yes, troops will be able to secure objectives, but honestly, most of the time an elite unit will just wipe that troops out anyway. This results in things like:

Chaos. Now they can get their elite troops for scoring without having to pay the HQ tax. Scoring Oblits.

Tau. Crisis suits can score now. So can riptides.

Grey Knights. Scoring dreadknights and psyfledreads, without having to take Mordrak. Scoring purifiers.

Scoring Landraiders.

Deathwing that score without having to pay 200 points for Belial.

Etc etc etc.

This has got me thinking about Trazyn's scoring ability not doing anything now. Maybe they'll make it Objective Secured?

 Sigvatr wrote:
Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

And yes, I really can't feel any sympathy for people angry about psykers being nerfed when at the same time, some armies don't even have access to any psykers.

If only those armies that didn't have access to Psykers were compensated somehow, like with greater shooting capability or something.

SeanDrake wrote:

MadmanMSU wrote:
Read this, want to know if someone can confirm:

Edit: Nevermind.

No Escape
If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.

Good thing my Ork Boyz can bail out of their trukks quickly...

 Red Corsair wrote:
I was teasing. Honestly if I get tabled I feel like a loser. Period. Semantics aside you got your ass handed to you

I dunno, could always be that "heroic last stand" thing. Sure, you got tabled, but your dudes managed to hold on long enough to (insert forged narrative here).

Granted, it'd depend on which turn you got wiped out. Turn 2, I can't imagine any narrative that doesn't end with "and then they all died like little wimps".

 undertow wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

And yes, I really can't feel any sympathy for people angry about psykers being nerfed when at the same time, some armies don't even have access to any psykers.

If only those armies that didn't have access to Psykers were compensated somehow, like with greater shooting capability or something.

Maybe with their army's next respective codex.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 optometris wrote:
I welcome the extra randomness. It forces you to act more tactfully during the game

I don't understand this. Randomness adds nothing but randomness...

 Sigvatr wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Until 7th, psychic powers were almost risk-free to cast with LD 10 running around all over the place.

Who would have expected a nerf to free buffs? Weird.

And yes, I really can't feel any sympathy for people angry about psykers being nerfed when at the same time, some armies don't even have access to any psykers.

If only those armies that didn't have access to Psykers were compensated somehow, like with greater shooting capability or something.

Maybe with their army's next respective codex.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 optometris wrote:
I welcome the extra randomness. It forces you to act more tactfully during the game

I don't understand this. Randomness adds nothing but randomness...

Agreed, here's the definition of a tactic

tac·tic


/ˈtaktik/

noun

noun: tactic; plural noun: tactics

an action or strategy carefully planned to achieve a specific end.


Notice how it doesn't say random end?


tac·ti·cal

/ˈtaktikəl/

adjective

adjective: tactical

of, relating to, or constituting actions carefully planned to gain a specific military end.


Again, not random.


strat·e·gy


/ˈstratəjē/


noun

noun: strategy; plural noun: strategies

a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.


If the overall aim (goal, objective) changes all the time, I can't see that "increasing" the tactical nature of the game. Random of the sake of it is bad.

SeanDrake wrote:

mercury14 wrote:
SeanDrake, can bikes assault after they jink? Thanks.

Nothing mentioned one way or the other under bikes or jink rules.

That sounds like restriction free to assault, that is great... so IF turbo boost is the same I can move 12" with the bikes, turbo boost another 12" on 1st turn, if shot jink for a 4+ cover and on my turn assault pretty much anything on the other side of the table. Which would actually be exactly the same as it is know but with some tasty witchfire shots from the sorcerer.

The big thing I see the Maelstrom of War missions doing is discouraging castling up and actually moving to achieve certain objectives.

Sure it's random, but it's not a horrible kind of random and should do a lot to break up the monotony of sitting across the table from a gunline (yes I know some people like playing with those kind of lists, but not many people like playing against those kind of lists).

Has there been any real changes to Cavalry, I don't expect any, but I have not seen anything about them.

Is Bjorn still 3 HP?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The big thing I see the Maelstrom of War missions doing is discouraging castling up and actually moving to achieve certain objectives.

Sure it's random, but it's not a horrible kind of random and should do a lot to break up the monotony of sitting across the table from a gunline (yes I know some people like playing with those kind of lists, but not many people like playing against those kind of lists).

Except that it's the kind of random that can reward gunline.

"oh look, capture objective 3, it just so happens objective 3 is in my deployment zone"

Yeah..

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The big thing I see the Maelstrom of War missions doing is discouraging castling up and actually moving to achieve certain objectives.

Sure it's random, but it's not a horrible kind of random and should do a lot to break up the monotony of sitting across the table from a gunline (yes I know some people like playing with those kind of lists, but not many people like playing against those kind of lists).

Except that it's the kind of random that can reward gunline.

"oh look, capture objective 3, it just so happens objective 3 is in my deployment zone"

Yeah..

Which is partially helped by objectives being placed before deployment (and table sides are determined) encouraging players to put them out of the deployment zones to prevent giving away free points turn 1.

Any idea to how Runic weapons for Rune Priests will work in 7th?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The big thing I see the Maelstrom of War missions doing is discouraging castling up and actually moving to achieve certain objectives.

Sure it's random, but it's not a horrible kind of random and should do a lot to break up the monotony of sitting across the table from a gunline (yes I know some people like playing with those kind of lists, but not many people like playing against those kind of lists).

Except that it's the kind of random that can reward gunline.

"oh look, capture objective 3, it just so happens objective 3 is in my deployment zone"

Yeah..

Which is partially helped by objectives being placed before deployment (and table sides are determined) encouraging players to put them out of the deployment zones to prevent giving away free points turn 1.

There are cards for more than one objective. Back where we started.

Maelstrom is a separate issue though. It will not be used for competitive play anyway as it relies on randomness way too much, but for casuals, it might be fun. If you want to find out who is the better player, however, steer away from Maelstrom and Unfun as far as you can and house-rule the rest, e.g. using more than 1 FOC.

I'm starting to think the army that benefit the most from the changes to 40k is deamons really for example Bloodcrusher can now get back eternal warrior (not my tyranid warriors though that would make them useful ) + they gain a 4+ feel no pain, if they also can gain invisibility it truly means to fear them + random addition you can buff them with ,ie scouting, AW rerolls to hit, addition to inv save to name a few. what do people think maybe not top tier but could be fun

 undertow wrote:

 spartanlegion wrote:

 MajorStoffer wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Iechine wrote:
So...Shadows in the Warp, from a codex just a few months old is now useless?

I'd relax a bit if I were you. Expect a FAQ on release day or shortly thereafter.

I'm in a similar situation with Tzeentch Daemons getting +3 to Ld for Psychic checks. I'm not freaking out ... yet.

It's been 1 year, 1 month and 5 days since the last FAQ.

Faqs, were in fact, abandoned by GW because they were starting to write 7th edition 13 months ago. They basically gave up on 6th (in under a year from its release no less), quietly, knowing what was going down. Our new universal faq is "Roll 1d6. If it is 1-3 you are right & 4-6 your opponent is correct." (BTW, that ain't a joke.)

That rule (The Most Important Rule) is unchanged from 6th Ed. It's not new.

yeah, it's a rule & now the answer to any and all faqs too!

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The big thing I see the Maelstrom of War missions doing is discouraging castling up and actually moving to achieve certain objectives.

Sure it's random, but it's not a horrible kind of random and should do a lot to break up the monotony of sitting across the table from a gunline (yes I know some people like playing with those kind of lists, but not many people like playing against those kind of lists).

Except that it's the kind of random that can reward gunline.

"oh look, capture objective 3, it just so happens objective 3 is in my deployment zone"

Yeah..

Which is partially helped by objectives being placed before deployment (and table sides are determined) encouraging players to put them out of the deployment zones to prevent giving away free points turn 1.

There are cards for more than one objective. Back where we started.

That doesn't disprove my point about not putting objectives inside deployment zones.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TableTopJosh wrote:
Any idea to how Runic weapons for Rune Priests will work in 7th?

That will be a FAQ issue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maelstrom is a separate issue though. It will not be used for competitive play anyway as it relies on randomness way too much, but for casuals, it might be fun. If you want to find out who is the better player, however, steer away from Maelstrom and Unfun as far as you can and house-rule the rest, e.g. using more than 1 FOC.

If you REALLY want to see who the better player is then mirror match or play a more tactical/competetive game that isn't horribly unbalanced. All winning 40k proves is who got luckier that game or abused their codex the best (or both).

Unbound is taking a lot of underserved flak as after looking at the rules, a bound list can be as abusive and spamy as unbound easily and gets a bonus for it.

Knowing faqs stopped about a year before 7th comes out, that's a good litmus test for 7th faqs. When they stop, 1 year count down to 8th...

Why wouldn't you put objectives in deployment zones? Might just as well be you who gets the free VP.

SeanDrake wrote:
Unbound is taking a lot of underserved flak as after looking at the rules, a bound list can be as abusive and spamy as unbound easily and gets a bonus for it.

Well unbound doesn't have totake say six troops to run three detachments, but yes people are likely assuming too much about unbound.

 spartanlegion wrote:
Knowing faqs stopped about a year before 7th comes out, that's a good litmus test for 7th faqs. When they stop, 1 year count down to 8th...

I'm just amazed it took them a year to come up with 7th edition. A YEAR.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

If you REALLY want to see who the better player is then mirror match or play a more tactical/competetive game that isn't horribly unbalanced. All winning 40k proves is who got luckier that game or abused their codex the best (or both).

...or who can throw more money at GW!

Off to watch TV will pop back later for anymore questions

 Sigvatr wrote:
Why wouldn't you put objectives in deployment zones? Might just as well be you who gets the free VP.

Because randumb means you can screw yourself over that way. It's smarter to be safe than sorry, especially if you're the only one who puts an objective in a deployment zone and then your opponent takes that table side.

Too many risks and it's frankly just better to not put them in the deployment zone when you look at all the potential ways you can shoot yourself in the foot with them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MadmanMSU wrote:

 spartanlegion wrote:
Knowing faqs stopped about a year before 7th comes out, that's a good litmus test for 7th faqs. When they stop, 1 year count down to 8th...

I'm just amazed it took them a year to come up with 7th edition. A YEAR.

Probably longer than that honestly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

If you REALLY want to see who the better player is then mirror match or play a more tactical/competetive game that isn't horribly unbalanced. All winning 40k proves is who got luckier that game or abused their codex the best (or both).

...or who can throw more money at GW!

Which goes back to the codex abuse thing. 40k is not a game you play to prove who is "best".

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Why wouldn't you put objectives in deployment zones? Might just as well be you who gets the free VP.

Because randumb means you can screw yourself over that way. It's smarter to be safe than sorry, especially if you're the only one who puts an objective in a deployment zone and then your opponent takes that table side.

Too many risks and it's frankly just better to not put them in the deployment zone when you look at all the potential ways you can shoot yourself in the foot with them.

It depends on your army. If you got a gunline, placing them mid-field won't be much of a help. On the other hand, placing them in the deployment zones allows you to remain stationary and still get VP.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

PapaSoul wrote:
Can anyone tell me what the vortex special rule is? It's now part of the vortex of doom psychic power which is strength D vortex

Iirc the marker doesn't go away, it keeps scattering every turn.

Yay for 2nd edition!




Is there any change to using grenades in combat against MCs and walkers?

Over on another thread, there was some discussion on the possibility of purchasing just the rules by themselves at some future date.

I figure that if GW was planning to do this, that they would have placed a bar code/sku on the backs of each individual book in the set of three. Is there anyone out there with access to the books that could check on this for me?

The only reason to place these on the back, as far as I can tell, would be for the purpose of possible individual sale. It would also allow for the company to create a revenue stream from those that didn't/couldn't spend the larger sum for the three book release without having to do any additional work or printing.

Someone please check. I will love you forever.

MadmanMSU wrote:

 spartanlegion wrote:
Knowing faqs stopped about a year before 7th comes out, that's a good litmus test for 7th faqs. When they stop, 1 year count down to 8th...

I'm just amazed it took them a year to come up with 7th edition. A YEAR.

true that.

Sigvatr wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Why wouldn't you put objectives in deployment zones? Might just as well be you who gets the free VP.

Because randumb means you can screw yourself over that way. It's smarter to be safe than sorry, especially if you're the only one who puts an objective in a deployment zone and then your opponent takes that table side.

Too many risks and it's frankly just better to not put them in the deployment zone when you look at all the potential ways you can shoot yourself in the foot with them.

It depends on your army. If you got a gunline, placing them mid-field won't be much of a help. On the other hand, placing them in the deployment zones allows you to remain stationary and still get VP.

50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

 Idolator wrote:
Over on another thread, there was some discussion on the possibility of purchasing just the rules by themselves at some future date.

I figure that if GW was planning to do this, that they would have placed a bar code/sku on the backs of each individual book in the set of three. Is there anyone out there with access to the books that could check on this for me?

The only reason to place these on the back, as far as I can tell, would be for the purpose of possible individual sale. It would also allow for the company to create a revenue stream from those that didn't/couldn't spend the larger sum for the three book release without having to do any additional work or printing.

Someone please check. I will love you forever.

No bar code on the books, just the slip case. There is only a ISBN on the slip case as well not the books.

Sure, play gunline and put objectives into the deploy zones. Best case you will be playing with 2 objectives controlled vs 4 in the other player hands (who will put all his 3 in the middle).

MarkyMark wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
Over on another thread, there was some discussion on the possibility of purchasing just the rules by themselves at some future date.

I figure that if GW was planning to do this, that they would have placed a bar code/sku on the backs of each individual book in the set of three. Is there anyone out there with access to the books that could check on this for me?

The only reason to place these on the back, as far as I can tell, would be for the purpose of possible individual sale. It would also allow for the company to create a revenue stream from those that didn't/couldn't spend the larger sum for the three book release without having to do any additional work or printing.

Someone please check. I will love you forever.

No bar code on the books, just the slip case. There is only a ISBN on the slip case as well not the books.

Thanks dude. All the love is yours now.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

Guess I'm in a different circumstance as I only had been playing since late last year, and had only really bought the DV rulebook off of ebay for 20 bucks.

This new rulebook set seems exciting to me.

MarkyMark wrote:
No bar code on the books, just the slip case. There is only a ISBN on the slip case as well not the books.

Which still doesn't rule it out... They could simply have a different cover planned for the solo release (ala the over-priced little hardback from 6th edition). Or just shrinkwrap it and add a barcode sticker.

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

:*

Gunlines got a huge buff with 7th. More resolute vehicles, less and more scarce cover on the battlefield, scoring, Nightfight nerf etc.

First they release 3 book set & collectors edition. August sees them replacing mini 6th inside the DV box set with mini 7th (seen in collectors edition) in August (mentioned in WD), then next spring new BA/ork starter with mini 7th... This was covered 100 pages back....

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning. Better to put the objectives out in e pen in mid field to mitigate luck related losses instead of potentially handing out free VP to your opponents.

What night fight nerf?

Unless I am missing something, will basically every psychic power in each codex be unplayable in 7th until we know how many 'Warp Charges' it takes to cast it?

Sigvatr wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

:*

Gunlines got a huge buff with 7th. More resolute vehicles, less and more scarce cover on the battlefield, scoring, Nightfight nerf etc.

Agree that gunlines aren't hurting, especially with the Nightfighting rule changes, but cover shoulnd't be less scarce, and vehicle durability actually helps vehicular assault armies just as much. Foot armies can now claim cover saves from ruins without having to deal with difficult terrain (due to being in area terrain), so they can potentially move faster so long as they don't go OVER the ruins. Personally, we rarely used area terrain because A) we didn't have alot of based ruins, and B) the idea was kind of wonky (what, I can see you 100% but you still get a 5+ cover????). It does kind of mess with forests, but I believe somebody posted that forests are covered.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning.

This from the guy that thinks random cards make for tactical play...

Super Newb wrote:
Unless I am missing something, will basically every psychic power in each codex be unplayable in 7th until we know how many 'Warp Charges' it takes to cast it?

Good point, guess itll be in a FAQ, unless they transfer mastery level to warp charges

mercury14 wrote:
What night fight nerf?

Everyone gets Stealth, no distance requirements.

Super Newb wrote:
Unless I am missing something, will basically every psychic power in each codex be unplayable in 7th until we know how many 'Warp Charges' it takes to cast it?

Pretty sure they will release a boat load of FAQs on Saturday to update the Codex books to 7th.

Are superheavy vehicles exploded only on a 7 as well?

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning.

This from the guy that thinks random cards make for tactical play...

Go read my posts again and then get your eyes checked before you go putting words in my mouth again. I never said anything about tactical play. I only said it'd help discourage castling. Far cry from calling that "tactical".

mercury14 wrote:
Are superheavy vehicles exploded only on a 7 as well?

Probably, they still get rolled on the Armor Pen chart even if they ignore most of the effects except for Explodes!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning. Better to put the objectives out in e pen in mid field to mitigate luck related losses instead of potentially handing out free VP to your opponents.

If you have a gunline, and the enemy doesn't why not place objectives in each deployment zone? It benefits you over the long run if you do that. Gunlines don't like moving. They like shooting. Over the course of the game sitting and shooting would tend to make the gunline perform better, no?

mercury14 wrote:
What night fight nerf?

IIRC everyone gets Shrouded.

Okay, I'm sure it's in this thread somewhere, but 287+ pages in a bit daunting to read through.

UNBOUND - I've gathered from the context that making an unbound force allows you to ignore the force orginization charts.
Is there any drawback imposed on Unbound forces, or is it just play what ever you want nonsense ?

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

mercury14 wrote:
Are superheavy vehicles exploded only on a 7 as well?

Probably, they still get rolled on the Armor Pen chart even if they ignore most of the effects except for Explodes!

Yep and if it didn't change much they just take a few extra HP. which i just realized would be on average 3.5 ish HP per explosion.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning.

This from the guy that thinks random cards make for tactical play...

Go read my posts again and then get your eyes checked before you go putting words in my mouth again. I never said anything about tactical play. I only said it'd help discourage castling. Far cry from calling that "tactical".

Don't feed the trolls.

What is even different in 7th? Psychic rework, maelstrom of war missions, allies chart tweak, bump vehicle chart up one and throw in escalation/stronghold? To me it looks like 6.1 with so little changes from 6th. I already play tons of different missions and ignore the allies rules for the most part. I didn't buy Escalation or Stronghold because I don't do games over 2000. With elite assault based armies I guess I'm just the poster child for "buy more models or just give up", with the collection I already have I'm just not feeling it... $85 bucks for 3 changes in the game that I will notice...

I want to be excited but what got better/cooler?

Super Newb wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning. Better to put the objectives out in e pen in mid field to mitigate luck related losses instead of potentially handing out free VP to your opponents.

If you have a gunline, and the enemy doesn't why not place objectives in each deployment zone? It benefits you over the long run if you do that. Gunlines don't like moving. They like shooting. Over the course of the game sitting and shooting would tend to make the gunline perform better, no?

Becaus eyou're counting on your ability to draw the cards you need to score points for the onjective your on and your opponent not drawing theirs. Especially for turn 1. And then you're counting on random die rolls going in your favor to shoot them off their objective.

It just screams "I want to rely on blind luck to win" and doesnt't look like a sound strategy to play by.

 Leth wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Leth wrote:
You can buy venomthropes for cover as well as grenades. With enough elite slots you can buy them one each without losing out. two units of 10 termagaunts now opens up everything so whats that 100 points to get 3 of every other slot? Yea not seeing a lot of points spent in troops to make it work. In addition you can spam zoanthropes now for easy synapse and some of the cheapest access to 2 warp charges.

two x flying hive tyrants with double leech
3x venomthrope
2x zoanthrope
4x 10 man termagaunts
7x carnifex with adrenal split however you want
50 points to work with.

Not the best list, but it gives you an idea of what you can work with. Or you can go 3-6 exocrines and a skyshield landing pad with zoanthropes and venomthropes for a 2+ cover 4+ invul all the time potentially with FNP. The options go on for nidzilla.

Oh boy - 7 Carnifexes that will do jack all over the course of the game. Well built list. Truly you understand the ins and outs of the Tyranid codex.
hint: the Shrouded bubble is pretty small. And having 2 Synapse is just a bad idea (the 2 Flyrants can't be counted on because they move fast).
But that's okay. You schooled me well.

Wow, maybe get off your god damn high horse and realize that I was not trying to school you. I was trying to get the ideas flowing for how you could make your list work with the new edition. I even said it was a bad list in my post but you were too busy looking for flaws to actually read it.

But I am sorry I wasted my time, you are so dedicated to being miserable that even trying to think about ways to make it work is a waste of time. My bad.

*Thats* the problem. You assume we have not already *been* working on ideas for making lists work. We *know* our codex and what it can and can't do. We *know* CC fexes are mediocre at best, we *know* you need more synapse.... (3-6 exocrines...?? Really???) All you have done is confirm my suspicion that you know absolutely nothing about how to design and play a Nid army. Which means all of your bluster about how 'Nidzilla is fine' is just that.... uninformed bluster.


Every even casually competitive Nid list had 2 flyrants and 2 Crones in it. Both of which are now more resllient... but *much* less of a threat. That isn't so bad... but nothing else got a corresponding buff to counter this.
Oh, and vehicles got more resilient, just as our ability to deal with vehicles took a huge nerf. Oh, and now that we can't kill them... they are scoring, and maybe super scoring.

 adamsouza wrote:
Okay, I'm sure it's in this thread somewhere, but 287+ pages in a bit daunting to read through.

UNBOUND - I've gathered from the context that making an unbound force allows you to ignore the force orginization charts.
Is there any drawback imposed on Unbound forces, or is it just play what ever you want nonsense ?

The Troops in an unbound army do not get super secure objective control so if a random Tactical marine strolled by a BIG blob of unbouned chaos cultist, the tactical marine will grab the objective and waltz on by.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning.

This from the guy that thinks random cards make for tactical play...

Go read my posts again and then get your eyes checked before you go putting words in my mouth again. I never said anything about tactical play. I only said it'd help discourage castling. Far cry from calling that "tactical".

Any psotive effect that going back to the old method of objective deployment had is negated by using the cards. Without the cards I agree, going back to the old method for objective deployment may help mitigate some aspects of castling up.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Super Newb wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
50% of the time your opponent will get that deployment zone though. Objectives THEN deployment. That's why it's a bad idea.

So put one in either, rely on superior firepower to nuke him off of his if his card comes up.

"Get lucky" is not sound planning. Better to put the objectives out in e pen in mid field to mitigate luck related losses instead of potentially handing out free VP to your opponents.

If you have a gunline, and the enemy doesn't why not place objectives in each deployment zone? It benefits you over the long run if you do that. Gunlines don't like moving. They like shooting. Over the course of the game sitting and shooting would tend to make the gunline perform better, no?

Becaus eyou're counting on your ability to draw the cards you need to score points for the onjective your on and your opponent not drawing theirs. Especially for turn 1. And then you're counting on random die rolls going in your favor to shoot them off their objective.

It just screams "I want to rely on blind luck to win" and doesnt't look like a sound strategy to play by.

So a gunline army is counting on blowing up the opponents army and that's... bad strategy?
I'm not sure we're communicating effectively here - because it seems, to me, like that's literally exactly what a gunline army is designed to do.

 Desubot wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
Okay, I'm sure it's in this thread somewhere, but 287+ pages in a bit daunting to read through.

UNBOUND - I've gathered from the context that making an unbound force allows you to ignore the force orginization charts.
Is there any drawback imposed on Unbound forces, or is it just play what ever you want nonsense ?

The Troops in an unbound army do not get super secure objective control so if a random Tactical marine strolled by a BIG blob of unbouned chaos cultist, the tactical marine will grab the objective and waltz on by.

Battle Forged armies also reroll warlord traits and are built by using detachements (which are extra FOCs so their only penalty beyond not strange mix and matching of units is needing to pay a Troops tax on things).

Double FOC is dead, long live infinite FOC.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

mercury14 wrote:
What night fight nerf?

IIRC everyone gets Shrouded.

Is it Shrouded or Stealth?

 WrentheFaceless wrote:


Is it Shrouded or Stealth?

Yes.

 Blacksails wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:


Is it Shrouded or Stealth?

Yes.

Stealth....

In a Night fight all models has the Stealth rule.

You only play Night Fight if one of the players wants to, you roll a dice on 4+ you play Night fight during first turn.

MarkyMark wrote:
Stealth....

Thank you. My mistake.

Well sorry units at have Stealth, looks like you get a massive middle finger instead.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

"Get lucky" is not sound planning. Better to put the objectives out in e pen in mid field to mitigate luck related losses instead of potentially handing out free VP to your opponents.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

If you REALLY want to see who the better player is then mirror match or play a more tactical/competetive game that isn't horribly unbalanced. All winning 40k proves is who got luckier that game or abused their codex the best (or both).

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

You forget that only 50% (iirc) of the cards are based on objectives.

Super Newb wrote:
Unless I am missing something, will basically every psychic power in each codex be unplayable in 7th until we know how many 'Warp Charges' it takes to cast it?

Everything in the old books already has a Warp Charge to cast. No FAQ needed there. The difference his how you generate them. Before it was 1 per ML. Now its 1 per 4+ on die used. FAQ's will be needed for some of the items though, like Bones of Osrak, Runes of Witnessing and Spirit Stone.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
Okay, I'm sure it's in this thread somewhere, but 287+ pages in a bit daunting to read through.

UNBOUND - I've gathered from the context that making an unbound force allows you to ignore the force orginization charts.
Is there any drawback imposed on Unbound forces, or is it just play what ever you want nonsense ?

The Troops in an unbound army do not get super secure objective control so if a random Tactical marine strolled by a BIG blob of unbouned chaos cultist, the tactical marine will grab the objective and waltz on by.

Battle Forged armies also reroll warlord traits and are built by using detachements (which are extra FOCs so their only penalty beyond not strange mix and matching of units is needing to pay a Troops tax on things).

Double FOC is dead, long live infinite FOC.

Thanks.

So basically, there are rewards for using the FOC, and Unbound suffer an inability to hold objectives verses foes using FOC ?

Great.. So Wyrdvane Psykers became even more useless even though the AM codex was written 1 month before 7th ed.

Two rewards.

1) Re-roll the Warlord Table roll (I'm serious, that is your "reward").

2) Super Objective Scoring.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
Stealth....

Thank you. My mistake.

Well sorry units at have Stealth, looks like you get a massive middle finger instead.

If they can't see you in the daylight then you aren't going to be any harder to see at night.