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.

Seeing as most of the DKoK have been moved to legends, a lot of people are saying you can still use the legends data sheet they will be getting. But I honestly wonder how people feel about them, only in regards to non-tournament play of course.

The only people going to object to Legends stuff are those who aren't worth playing.

Uriah Jacobus and Confessor Kyrinov will always have a place on my roster.

Considering that most of the stuff in Legends is stuff GW was too lazy to copy/paste, such as HQ generic weapons options, I really don't have any issue with people using them.

I certainly still intend to give my Cannonesses combi-weapons, and sister superiors stormbolters, among other options.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Seeing as most of the DKoK have been moved to legends, a lot of people are saying you can still use the legends data sheet they will be getting. But I honestly wonder how people feel about them, only in regards to non-tournament play of course.

Only the centaur, gorgon, and grenadiers went to legends IIRC, and I think the gorgon will be unlegends soon, so I wouldn't panic. R&H and Elysians lost a lot more, and didn't get legends for their trouble.

I have no objection to legends, but I do expect the most up to date rules for the model to be used.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Seeing as most of the DKoK have been moved to legends, a lot of people are saying you can still use the legends data sheet they will be getting. But I honestly wonder how people feel about them, only in regards to non-tournament play of course.

Only the centaur, gorgon, and grenadiers went to legends IIRC, and I think the gorgon will be unlegends soon, so I wouldn't panic. R&H and Elysians lost a lot more, and didn't get legends for their trouble.

I have no objection to legends, but I do expect the most up to date rules for the model to be used.

Mars-Alpha Leman Russes, Deathrider Commissars, Quartermaster Cadres, and Marshal Karl V.

It's a poor excuse for claiming "you can still use your minis!", and an even poorer excuse for not bothering to even try to Legends a bunch of stuff.

It's not even up for debate in our gaming group, whenever my Lord or sorcerer want to take a ride on their palanquin they will do so.

ccs wrote:
The only people going to object to Legends stuff are those who aren't worth playing.

So are you OK with me playing with 10% discounted models?

Seeing legend models didn't get point adjustements it means they are cheaper than non-legend equilavent.

tneva82 wrote:

ccs wrote:
The only people going to object to Legends stuff are those who aren't worth playing.

So are you OK with me playing with 10% discounted models?

Seeing legend models didn't get point adjustements it means they are cheaper than non-legend equilavent.

...10% discounted models that don't get to interact with any stratagems and don't get game-wide stat creep updates?

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Seeing as most of the DKoK have been moved to legends, a lot of people are saying you can still use the legends data sheet they will be getting. But I honestly wonder how people feel about them, only in regards to non-tournament play of course.

Only the centaur, gorgon, and grenadiers went to legends IIRC, and I think the gorgon will be unlegends soon, so I wouldn't panic. R&H and Elysians lost a lot more, and didn't get legends for their trouble.

I have no objection to legends, but I do expect the most up to date rules for the model to be used.

Mars-Alpha Leman Russes, Deathrider Commissars, Quartermaster Cadres, and Marshal Karl V.

Mars Alpha Leman Russes are just an alternate model Leman Russ, like the Sygies or Gryphonne ones. They'll use the Leman Russ datasheet now, which is either a buff since it won't be forgotten when the codex comes around, or future-proofing against it randomly being broken because of an unforeseen [or just ignored because it's a random FW datasheet that might as well be legends for the support it gets but somehow remains legal in competitive play] interaction. That said, there are 3 Leman Russes which seem to have legitimately gone legends or just vanished: the Annihilator, Conqueror, and Destroyer Tank Hunter.

As for 5 actual unique units plus a special character, I wouldn't panic about it.

I'm mostly disappointed by the loss of Grenadiers, which is a hard hit since they're iconic to the DKoK and since Stormtroopers can't be Regiment, share a place with Kasrkin for just not really having a analogue to use them as in the IG codex.

The IG has fallen a long way from being loved by Forgeworld, with Elysians, DKoK, and R&H to, well, here, where there's apparently a minimal interest in maintaining even the extant line and when molds need replacing, they just drop the item for another legion-specific dreadnought.

The thing that surprises me though is that the Gorgon model was recently restored. This implies they went out of their way to refurbish the mold for the Gorgon, but not for Grenadiers or literally anything else, and I have a hard time believing that the Gorgon is more popular than Grenadiers, the Leman Russ Conqueror, or really basically anything that might be useful.

Legends stuff is explicitly and intentionally designed to be fully legal in all types of play (including matched-play).

The entire point and reason for Legends to exist is to not have rules for older models disappear into nothingness like, for example, Doom of Malan'tai, various Dark Eldar characters, etc.. .

tneva82 wrote:
So are you OK with me playing with 10% discounted models?

Seeing legend models didn't get point adjustements it means they are cheaper than non-legend equilavent.

So you're the 1 vote on "never", hey?

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Legends stuff is explicitly and intentionally designed to be fully legal in all types of play (including matched-play).

The entire point and reason for Legends to exist is to not have rules for older models disappear into nothingness like, for example, Doom of Malan'tai, various Dark Eldar characters, etc.. .

Matched play yes, competitive play no.

A word to the wise, however – these profiles will not be curated as part of the annual points review, and as such aren’t really intended for use in competitive play

tneva82 wrote:

ccs wrote:
The only people going to object to Legends stuff are those who aren't worth playing.

So are you OK with me playing with 10% discounted models?

Seeing legend models didn't get point adjustements it means they are cheaper than non-legend equilavent.

Yes.
Was my initial response unclear on that?

Won't use it myself and won't build new units like it (obviously...?), but I have no objection if you want to field whatever didn't make the cut in your latest codex or points update.

At the moment, I dont have a problem with an opponent adding a few Legends models to their army. Yeah, they're getting a little discount but it's not enough to be That Guy and tell someone they can't use their toys they paid good money for and hopefully painted too.

Give it another edition... I'm not sure I'll feel the same way, if points in the main game continue to fluctuate and GW stands by not changing Legends points. We'll have to see, but it feels like there's a time limit.

The real test will be the next time there is an edition change that is a full reboot of the rules like 8e was. What will GW do to Legends then?

I can understand the reasons for not using them in tournaments but in casual play hell yes!

I'd also be happy for my opponent to use updated weapons profiles and stats if the changes are obvious, if it seems OP then add a few points on.
Discussing things with your opponents pregame make for a much better experience and a much more fun game IMO.

If your worried about points then just work out what they would be by comparing similar current options.
They have removed the option for Firstborn Bike Chaplains and Libbies - Just work out the difference between a bike captain and normal captain and thats the cost of a bike. I usually find that adding 5 points on when doing this is a healthy "tax" for working out your own points.

I think its worth remembering that that its not just tournament or casual games we're talking about here. A lot of games are played in an in-between space I've seen referred to as casual-competitive.

These are games often against people you don't really know, probably pickup games in a local store, which while definitely not organised play often have quite a competitive edge to them. For many people these sorts of games make up the majority of their play.

Yes, they should still be friendly. Yes, you should still talk to your opponent about how to run the game. But discussing how to calculate fair points for legacy units isnt really an option a lot of the time. They'll likely have brought an army and be able to run it as is or not at all.

What might be doable is having a store/group baseline policy on it - either they should be allowed by default or not. But thats about as far as you can go.

 Stux wrote:
At the moment, I dont have a problem with an opponent adding a few Legends models to their army. Yeah, they're getting a little discount but it's not enough to be That Guy and tell someone they can't use their toys they paid good money for and hopefully painted too.

This is basically my stance on it - as has been mentioned, the discount makes up for the fact they don't get access to stratagems and so on (and now, they might well be missing the Core keyword too).

Is there even a single competitive option in legends?

Many people also don't seem to understand that legends is not the same as using something from the index.

ccs wrote:
The only people going to object to Legends stuff are those who aren't worth playing.

This gets an exalt.

I recently played in a tournament using an ork mega armoured warboss. A few people complained about it. Most thought it was cool.

As long as the player brings the datasheets and all the rules about the legend models he/she wants to play I honestly struggle to see what kind of issues someone may found in units belonging to legends.

The Legend section is an official source of rules.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Seeing as most of the DKoK have been moved to legends, a lot of people are saying you can still use the legends data sheet they will be getting. But I honestly wonder how people feel about them, only in regards to non-tournament play of course.

In non-tournament play I think Legends models are completely fine and can be a fun addition.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
The entire point and reason for Legends to exist is to not have rules for older models disappear into nothingness like, for example, Doom of Malan'tai, various Dark Eldar characters, etc...

Is tricky for older models to disappear into nothingness when no model was produced in the first place...

I value consistancy over everything. In the past people weren allowed to use their legends stuff, I don't think just because a whole army became legends this gives grounds to somehow revert it now.

Karol wrote:
I value consistancy over everything. In the past people weren allowed to use their legends stuff, I don't think just because a whole army became legends this gives grounds to somehow revert it now.

good, then by that same measure, gk should go back to consitently bad and " unplayable", if you value consitency.

what. you'd not like that? but what's the difference torwards those that lost a full army, you'd also lose one, equal pikes for everyone, no`?

 Blackie wrote:


The Legend section is an official source of rules.

This; in bold, underlined 40pt text.

Legends are fine. I will happily play against them or with them, and maintain a slight sliver of hope that they will get re-integrated at some point further down the line. Daemon steeds in particular I feel are a glaring omission from the current CSM codex.

I'm fine playing against someone who has a couple of Legends units in their army provided it's not in a tournament setting, otherwise, do what you want as long as you aren't trying to break the game.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Karol wrote:
I value consistancy over everything. In the past people weren allowed to use their legends stuff, I don't think just because a whole army became legends this gives grounds to somehow revert it now.

good, then by that same measure, gk should go back to consitently bad and " unplayable", if you value consitency.

what. you'd not like that? but what's the difference torwards those that lost a full army, you'd also lose one, equal pikes for everyone, no`?

Why from what I understand they were good when they had their codex made by Ward. So it seems like being bad is the in consitency here. Plus the legend system didn't exist in the past, so you can't use something that didn't exist when GW was desiging 8th ed rules for GK to claim they should be bad, specialy as initialy they seem to have been a good army to play with.

Now GW has a design policy and a gold list to remove units from matched play. If GW ever decides to put GK on the list, I won't play of course. But I hope that in advance GW gives GK players something like the IG and eldar players got with their armies, 12-18 months of good rules to play with before they get removed.