Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've been largely ignoring the new detachment rules because I find them terribly confusing. But, if I understand it correctly than you need to have 2 faction keywords in common between all the units in a detachment, correct? And all detachments must have at least 1 keyword in common to be used together, right?

Does "Khorne" and "Chaos" count as two different keywords? I'm looking at my units and I'm wondering if I can "soup" my detachments as long as everything is both Chaos and Khorne (which they are). For example, Khorne Berzerkers, Blood Slaughterers, Bloodletters, and Flesh Hounds all have the Khorne keyword and the Chaos keyword. Can I not combine them into a single detachment? Is this possible or impossible? If possible, I'm guessing I'd lose out on the Demonic Allegiance and World Eaters traits. But, if this is possible, I could combine things that already lose (or don't need) my trait rule?

Thanks

 Kharneth wrote:
I've been largely ignoring the new detachment rules because I find them terribly confusing. But, if I understand it correctly than you need to have 2 faction keywords in common between all the units in a detachment, correct? And all detachments must have at least 1 keyword in common to be used together, right?

Does "Khorne" and "Chaos" count as two different keywords? I'm looking at my units and I'm wondering if I can "soup" my detachments as long as everything is both Chaos and Khorne (which they are). For example, Khorne Berzerkers, Blood Slaughterers, Bloodletters, and Flesh Hounds all have the Khorne keyword and the Chaos keyword. Can I not combine them into a single detachment? Is this possible or impossible? If possible, I'm guessing I'd lose out on the Demonic Allegiance and World Eaters traits. But, if this is possible, I could combine things that already lose (or don't need) my trait rule?

Thanks

You understand incorrectly. Where did you get the idea that you need two keywords? The new beta rule even explicitly says you only need one. And the prohibited list only applies to units inside a single detachment, you can still use the prohibited list to link multiple detachments (e.g. a detachment of ADEPTUS ASTARTES and a detachment of ASTRA COPYWRITUM because all units share the IMPERIUM keyword).

You can't combine what you listed in a single detachment because they do not share a keyword that is not on the prohibited list (You can't pick KHORNE due to the Designers Commentary). What you can do is put all your HERETIC ASTARTES units in one detachment, and all your CHAOS DAEMONS units in another.

Where is the designer's commentary? All I see is the list of "Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari, and Tyranids."

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Page 5. You'll have the usual RaI crowd saying it doesn't apply, but if GW are going to insist on Special Snowflake FAQs instead of properly fixing their game, I am going to hold them to it, warts and all.

I'm not sure where you're looking. I mean, I see which question it is but I don't see how it negates the use of "Khorne" as a faction keyword. I'm looking on Battle Scribe right now and really should be looking in the book, but is "Khorne" not a Faction keyword for both World Eaters units and Demons of Chaos (Khorne)?

If Khorne is listed as a faction keyword for both, you can include them in the same detachment with Khorne being the Faction Keyword that unites them (note that Khorne has to be a Faction keyword, not just a keyword)

 doctortom wrote:
If Khorne is listed as a faction keyword for both, you can include them in the same detachment with Khorne being the Faction Keyword that unites them (note that Khorne has to be a Faction keyword, not just a keyword)

Except, as I already mentioned, the Designers Commentary Special Snowflakes it to not be legal. RaW it's legal, but you know how GW is, why bother fixing a rule when they can break it more.

Lets not duplicate the discussion from another thread, eh?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
If Khorne is listed as a faction keyword for both, you can include them in the same detachment with Khorne being the Faction Keyword that unites them (note that Khorne has to be a Faction keyword, not just a keyword)

Except, as I already mentioned, the Designers Commentary Special Snowflakes it to not be legal. RaW it's legal, but you know how GW is, why bother fixing a rule when they can break it more.

The designer's commentary only brings up Khorne after talking about the difference between faction keywords and keywords that aren't faction keywords, and how things that affect Khorne would affect it if it's a faction keyword or a normal keyword, after a detachment is made.. They did not deal with the issue of Khorne as a faction keyword between different units the way you say they do. If Khorne is a faction keyword for all units in a detachment (and not just a keyword that isn't a faction keyword), you can make a battleforged detachment with those units with the Khorne faction keyword, as per the rules. The requirement is though that Khorne has to be a faction keyword; it behooves the person putting the detachment together to make sure that it's a faction keyword for all the units if you want a Khorne detachment.

Are there cases in which Khorne isn't a faction keyword? I was under the impression that it and the other 3 alignments/marks were always faction keywords.

 Kharneth wrote:
I've been largely ignoring the new detachment rules because I find them terribly confusing. But, if I understand it correctly than you need to have 2 faction keywords in common between all the units in a detachment, correct? And all detachments must have at least 1 keyword in common to be used together, right?

Does "Khorne" and "Chaos" count as two different keywords? I'm looking at my units and I'm wondering if I can "soup" my detachments as long as everything is both Chaos and Khorne (which they are). For example, Khorne Berzerkers, Blood Slaughterers, Bloodletters, and Flesh Hounds all have the Khorne keyword and the Chaos keyword. Can I not combine them into a single detachment? Is this possible or impossible? If possible, I'm guessing I'd lose out on the Demonic Allegiance and World Eaters traits. But, if this is possible, I could combine things that already lose (or don't need) my trait rule?

Thanks

Hi Karnath

You can indeed build a detachment using the Khorne keyword.

It's probably not optimum compared to separate csm and daemon detachments, but it is absolutely legal, even with new beta rules.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Page 5. You'll have the usual RaI crowd saying it doesn't apply, but if GW are going to insist on Special Snowflake FAQs instead of properly fixing their game, I am going to hold them to it, warts and all.

That rule only applies to Chapters, Regiments and similar keywords where you get to name your own. Mark of Chaos is neither of these things, nor does it allow you to name your own since you have to pick from a specific list.

You are fine to use KHORNE as a faction keyword, however 99% of the time you'll be better off keeping them in their own detachments anyway, in order to get the Legion Tactics and Daemonic Loci.

 Cheexsta wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Page 5. You'll have the usual RaI crowd saying it doesn't apply, but if GW are going to insist on Special Snowflake FAQs instead of properly fixing their game, I am going to hold them to it, warts and all.

That rule only applies to Chapters, Regiments and similar keywords where you get to name your own. Mark of Chaos is neither of these things, nor does it allow you to name your own since you have to pick from a specific list.

You are fine to use KHORNE as a faction keyword, however 99% of the time you'll be better off keeping them in their own detachments anyway, in order to get the Legion Tactics and Daemonic Loci.

World Eaters Legion trait is +1 Attack on the charge.
Khorne Allegiance trait is characters provide a 6" aura of reroll failled charge rolls for Demons of Khorne.

If I want to take a Spearhead detachment I could take 2 skull cannons and a predator with some HQ. Say a Bloodmaster as a throw away (buff the bloodletters +1S, but no rerolling their 3d6+1" charge, oh well), or a Dark Apostle, sure it won't get the +1 attack, but it'll still provide the aura. It can still be a World Eater without gaining the World Eater traits, right?

Also, Khorne Allegiance trait is exclusive for characters, so I could still relatively easily take demons/mortal detachments as long as I'm not relying on the characters to get the trait bonus, which I'm usually not. I'm not sure if I'll find a use for this knowledge, but it's very beneficial to know. There are more options for me, now.

Here's a legit example:

Fast Attack Detachment

Dark Apostle
Blood Slaughterer
Blood Slaughterer
8 Flesh Hounds

It is not a Khorne Allegiance demon detachment, so no Khorne Loci, but it doesn't matter because there are no Khorne Demon characters. It is not a World Eaters exclusive detachment, so no +1 Attack on the charge, but nothing except the Dark Apostle was going to get that trait bonus anyway.

So here's the question, can my Dark Apostle still be a World Eaters character and still provide his 6" reroll to hit aura on all the other World Eaters units in my army? He, himself, is still a World Eater even though his detachment is not, correct?

 Galef wrote:
Are there cases in which Khorne isn't a faction keyword? I was under the impression that it and the other 3 alignments/marks were always faction keywords.

I wasn't sure if there was a case where it was a keyword but not a faction keyword.

 doctortom wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Are there cases in which Khorne isn't a faction keyword? I was under the impression that it and the other 3 alignments/marks were always faction keywords.

I wasn't sure if there was a case where it was a keyword but not a faction keyword.

I double checked the units I take and they are all Faction Keyword Chaos and Khorne. Interestingly enough, Khorne Berzerkers are not keyword <Legion>, they are World Eaters always and only. So, does that mean that Alpha Legion characters cannot provide their aura buffs or other things to Berzerkers?

We must be looking at different codices, because mine has Legion for Berzerkers.

 Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:
We must be looking at different codices, because mine has Legion for Berzerkers.

I swear I just looked at it last night.

 Kharneth wrote:
Here's a legit example:

Fast Attack Detachment

Dark Apostle
Blood Slaughterer
Blood Slaughterer
8 Flesh Hounds

It is not a Khorne Allegiance demon detachment, so no Khorne Loci, but it doesn't matter because there are no Khorne Demon characters. It is not a World Eaters exclusive detachment, so no +1 Attack on the charge, but nothing except the Dark Apostle was going to get that trait bonus anyway.

So here's the question, can my Dark Apostle still be a World Eaters character and still provide his 6" reroll to hit aura on all the other World Eaters units in my army? He, himself, is still a World Eater even though his detachment is not, correct?

Yes. You can definitely make him a World Eaters Dark Apostle and have him provide his Aura to ther World Eater units.

<Alleigence> Khorne is not the same as <Mark of Chaos> Khorne. Literally the same name, but a different keyword entirely. It's stupid, it's so damn stupid, but it is what it is.

 Kharneth wrote:

 Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:
We must be looking at different codices, because mine has Legion for Berzerkers.

I swear I just looked at it last night.

Yeah, both the hard copy and digital have <Legion>.

 vaklor4 wrote:
<Alleigence> Khorne is not the same as <Mark of Chaos> Khorne. Literally the same name, but a different keyword entirely. It's stupid, it's so damn stupid, but it is what it is.

Except, as discussed elsewhere, it is not different. Nothing in the Designers Commentary applies here. You’re not circumventing things to create fake synergy - the rules as written tell you to swap for a particular keyword. It’s thereafter the same Keyword.

 vaklor4 wrote:
<Alleigence> Khorne is not the same as <Mark of Chaos> Khorne. Literally the same name, but a different keyword entirely. It's stupid, it's so damn stupid, but it is what it is.

"KHORNE" and "KHORNE" are the same keyword. How you get to that keyword doesn't matter; what matters is that they are the same, and you didn't use a custom Chapter/Legion/Regiment/etc to get it.

I can guarantee you now. When KDK comes back out it's gonna say everything that is khorne alligned gets it's effect

hopefully the make BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD just as fun as what it was last edition

 vaklor4 wrote:
<Alleigence> Khorne is not the same as <Mark of Chaos> Khorne. Literally the same name, but a different keyword entirely. It's stupid, it's so damn stupid, but it is what it is.

Which one does Deathguard have?

or thousand sons?

Jidmah wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:
<Alleigence> Khorne is not the same as <Mark of Chaos> Khorne. Literally the same name, but a different keyword entirely. It's stupid, it's so damn stupid, but it is what it is.

Which one does Deathguard have?

mchammadad wrote:or thousand sons?

From a strict interpretation of the rules, neither Death Guard nor Thousand Sons can be said to have either a Mark of Chaos, or a Daemonic Allegiance.

So, can I mix them with daemon or not? Can I mix them with CSM?

And finally: Under the new battle brothers rule, can I mix plague bearers from the DG codex with plague marines from the DG codex? Can I mix plague bearer from the daemon codex with plague marines from the CSM codex?

 Jidmah wrote:
So, can I mix them with daemon or not? Can I mix them with CSM?

No, because they don't share a (FAQ permitted) faction keyword.

 Jidmah wrote:
And finally: Under the new battle brothers rule, can I mix plague bearers from the DG codex with plague marines from the DG codex?

No, because they don't share a (FAQ permitted) faction keyword. Unlike Tzaangors they do not share the HERETIC ASTARTES keyword with the other units in the codex. Edit: I am dumb, this is legal.

 Jidmah wrote:
Can I mix plague bearer from the daemon codex with plague marines from the CSM codex?

No, because they don't share a (FAQ permitted) faction keyword.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
And finally: Under the new battle brothers rule, can I mix plague bearers from the DG codex with plague marines from the DG codex?

No, because they don't share a (FAQ permitted) faction keyword. Unlike Tzaangors they do not share the HERETIC ASTARTES keyword with the other units in the codex.

They share the Nurgle faction keyword, which is neither defined as Alleigence nor as Mark of Chaos.

 Jidmah wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
And finally: Under the new battle brothers rule, can I mix plague bearers from the DG codex with plague marines from the DG codex?

No, because they don't share a (FAQ permitted) faction keyword. Unlike Tzaangors they do not share the HERETIC ASTARTES keyword with the other units in the codex.

They share the Nurgle faction keyword, which is neither defined as Alleigence nor as Mark of Chaos.

And as per the Special Snowflake FAQ, you cannot treat them as the same keyword. Otherwise I could declare my <CHAPTER> to be DAEMON and be able to mix Vanilla Marines and Nurglings. I agree it's stupid, but GW have decided Special Snowflake FAQs are the way to do things, consequences be damned.