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.

Brimstone wrote:Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

You mean moreso than the last one? Yeesh.

Thanks for the tips, Brim!

@Minaith: WWB is a horrendous mechanic that requires, what, a couple hundred words of FAQ? FNP is a far better game mechanic. Regarding C'tan, I dunno what to say when someone thinks star gods are appropriate for a game in which we've never even received rules for a SM primarch. The rumored "c'tan avatar" idea seems like a nice compromise that'd allow people to use their existing models.

gorgon wrote:

Brimstone wrote:Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

You mean moreso than the last one? Yeesh.

Thanks for the tips, Brim!

@Minaith: WWB is a horrendous mechanic that requires, what, a couple hundred words of FAQ? FNP is a far better game mechanic. Regarding C'tan, I dunno what to say when someone thinks star gods are appropriate for a game in which we've never even received rules for a SM primarch. The rumored "c'tan avatar" idea seems like a nice compromise that'd allow people to use their existing models.

Star Gods are no more or less appropriate than having a named character appear in every battle that army has participated in across the whole galaxy, AT THE SAME TIME.

And that is before we get in to what happens when Eldar fight Eldar and Eldrad is in both armies.

Except that GW explicitly said that said special characters can be used to rep an archetype (such as an elder Farseer) and not only said individual. And except that *star gods* represent an entirely different scale of conflict. And except that there ARE only 4 star gods per the fluff, and you could have the same C'tan on either side of the table.

C'tan never should have been in the book in the first place, or at least not as star gods.

gorgon wrote:Except that GW explicitly said that said special characters can be used to rep an archetype (such as an elder Farseer) and not only said individual.

Oh well if GW said it, then it must be ok.

Game on double-Vulkan surprise!

gorgon wrote:

Brimstone wrote:Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

You mean moreso than the last one? Yeesh.

Thanks for the tips, Brim!

@Minaith: WWB is a horrendous mechanic that requires, what, a couple hundred words of FAQ? FNP is a far better game mechanic. Regarding C'tan, I dunno what to say when someone thinks star gods are appropriate for a game in which we've never even received rules for a SM primarch. The rumored "c'tan avatar" idea seems like a nice compromise that'd allow people to use their existing models.

Space marine primarchs were either dead, missing or simply corrupt and ruling their own daemon world? The C'tan however are actually out there feasting and becoming stronger.

Also in regards to two players with the same c'tan either side, if theres such an issue to it they could simply not choose to use the special characters. As for special characters possibly representing their archtype i find it a little amusing. I cant imagine using commander azrael to represent another dark angel commander since he's walking around with a helmet bearer. Does that mean i shouldnt use azrael in a dark angel army simply because of the unique lion helm?

If they remove all of the rules that made the Necrons unique they basically become fancy robo-SM, that are way slower.

And no a peek into the alternate dimension called 'Nottingham' where this logic makes sense:

GW Rep #1: So, Necrons.
GW Rep #2: New models?
GW Rep #3: A given.
GW Rep #2: New fluff?
GW Rep #1: Make it fit the new models.
GW Rep #2: New rules?
GW Rep #3: Make the new stuff good, the old stuff bad, and then do whatever with the new metal models. They're cheap to make anyway and we can fix 'em next time around.
Jervis: Organising a painting day with friends is a great part of the hobby.
GW Rep #1: Thanks for the input Jervis.
GW Rep #2: Wait a sec... Marines sell really well.
GW Rep #3: Indeed they do.
GW Rep #2: So make Necrons like Marines.
GW Rep #1: Yeah! They don't need special rules.
Jervis: Special Characters add an interesting dynamic to your themed games. Try it out next time you get your group together.
GW Rep #3: Uhh... again, thanks Jervis. Not quite relevant, but still, thanks.
GW Rep #1: So... NecroMarines?
GW Rep #2: Sounds good to me. We'll get Arby to write it.
GW Rep #3: Done. 3 hour lunch today?
Jervis: How about a 4 hour lunch?
All GW Reps: Now you're makin' sense J-man!
Jervis: Tournament Gamers are a fringe group we don't cater to.

Minaith1989 wrote:Basically what I'm saying is, IF those rumours are true then they have murdered yet another codex

Don't be silly. You'll get matching new models with big shoulderpads and screaming bald heads.

Minaith1989 wrote:They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

Could you honestly complain any more? This isn't a careful and precise diagnosis of rumors, this is more of a "I'm going to take anything I read and turn it into GW neutering this army wah wah wah." If you're so hung up about the fluff being represented perfectly in the rules then why not play Movie Marines?

Necrons are the Undead army of the 40k universe. Slow and Purposeful makes sense, as does FNP. Rending would also make sense but would justify an even higher cost than only 20pts

bhsman wrote:

Minaith1989 wrote:They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

Could you honestly complain any more? This isn't a careful and precise diagnosis of rumors, this is more of a "I'm going to take anything I read and turn it into GW neutering this army wah wah wah." If you're so hung up about the fluff being represented perfectly in the rules then why not play Movie Marines?

Necrons are the Undead army of the 40k universe. Slow and Purposeful makes sense, as does FNP. Rending would also make sense but would justify an even higher cost than only 20pts

Please read my post more thoroughly. I believe I put IF in there.

On the Whole auto-glance issue, it's really rather worthless. I think a much better rule would be "If a 6 is rolled when attempting to penetrate or wound (people forget Gauss works on toughness too) the shot is considered AP 1."

This would have the drawback of not being able to glance or wound anything in the game, but on those times the weapon in question did so, it would truly matter.

EDIT: clarity

Minaith1989 wrote:Please read my post more thoroughly. I believe I put IF in there.

Oh, so if this was late 2010 and all of those were confirmed as true, would you have made a different post?

On the Rending idea, I wonder if Rending would be too much. It'd be fine against today's mechanized lists, but would shred infantry lists. On the other hand, that's not too different from an all-Thousand Sons list with AP3 bolters. One of those times where you'd really want GW to release the rules and let people playtest them.

EDIT:

Lordhat wrote:This would have the drawback of not being able to glance or wound anything in the game, but on those times the weapon in question did so, it would truly matter.

How many Toughness 8 models are there in the game, though? Honest question, as they would be the only ones that Gauss Bolters (can't remember the name of the gun ) could wound over a regular BEQ (Bolter equivalent)

I made the post to show what i thought IF the rumours were to be true. I posted my own personal view of what those potential changes would do to my own feel of the army. I did not say that gw has definately ruined necrons for me personally as realistically those changes may not be implemented and there is the chance that the rumours are inaccurate (as so many rumours are). My post was therefore a reflection of what i thought about the possibility of new changes rather than me just completely believing a rumour and taking it as fact and having a mass moan about it. If those changes are implemented when a new codex is released then I will be disappointed.

As for gauss weaponry i think it should remain the same really. Necrons ahve some units good for assault but their main strength is their highly advanced range weaponry. I think the gauss weaponry represents that well.

bhsman wrote:

Lordhat wrote:This would have the drawback of not being able to glance or wound anything in the game, but on those times the weapon in question did so, it would truly matter.

How many Toughness 8 models are there in the game, though? Honest question, as they would be the only ones that Gauss Bolters (can't remember the name of the gun ) could wound over a regular BEQ (Bolter equivalent)

Yep, the Gauss rule has such a great effect on infantry as it is... /sarcasm.

Honestly though, this would help to alleviate the rumored I1 of the warriors. A gun line Necron army would stand a chance again, not to mention bringing Gauss weapons back in line with the fluff. It would make Gauss have an actual tangible benefit for H. Destroyers offsetting the (assumed) built-in cost of having the special rule in the first place. Not quite Rending, but a damn sight more effective than auto-wound/glance.

Minaith1989 wrote:if these rumours are true then heres what i think:

1)- Removing we'll be back and replacing it with feel no pain kind of goes against the whole background info of "necrons have a remarkable ability to self repair even the most horrendous damage" (quoted from codex necrons). So basically what their saying is their walking husks of metal which makes them more resilient to ranged attacks. However it seems they've completely forgotten how to self repair themselves and instead decide to take a little nap when they get shot down.

Feel No Pain is a much better game mechanic as it doesn't require pages of rules, already exists, and approximates being hard to kill rather nicely.

2) Removing Phase out. It seems the necrons have also completely forgotten any strategy and instead will hold an objective or try to capture an objective despite the damage it could do to their own army/force. We'll i guess they dont need teleporters anymore!

I don't know what to say. You want to keep the ability for me to win (with full Massacre in a tournament) by killing enough of your squishy dudes? As Brimstone said, this is supposed to be the next step in Necron awakening, who knows what their objectives are going to be now. They may want to capture that computer node and hold it to learn all about the Imperium and what makes humans tick. You seem to have a very limited imagination when it comes to this game.

3) The possibility that gauss weapons will not rend. Well, it seems that being a highly technological race with incredible weaponry doesnt actually count anymore so the necrons must have just decided to turn off the rending effect of their weapons.

It's been awhile since I played Necrons so correct me if I'm wrong, but how could they "turn off the rending effect" of their weapons if they didn't have that to begin with. Gauss weapons don't have rend now, right?

4) Slow and purposeful. I can kind of understand this as some necrons have become automatons due to repeated repairs/new bodies. Still though, i would have thought their burning hatred of the living would still guide them on what to do? Perhaps their about peace and love now.

I don't know how you equate Slow and Purposeful, a rule that represents a slow moving but never stopping advance, with Necrons being about peace and love. Seems to me that S&P perfectly represents the methodical advance of an Undead Robot Horde.

5) Removing the c'tan. Possibly the worst thing i have seen so far. Yes the c'tan are VERY powerful, yes they are possibly too good at the moment but they are after all the equivalent of a GOD. I don't see why they just couldnt wack the points up on the C'tan rather than removing them all together. To me removing them is essentially removing the head from someones body. The c'tan direct the necron forces and will happily engage in battle themselves for the sheer pleasure of killing and feeding. I dont see why all of a sudden the c'tan have decided to take a back seat. Perhaps the nightbringers hunger has finally subsided and just wants a nice long nap. The other thing is, it seems the whole eldar prophecy about the four c'tan rising up seems to have gone right out the window:

"The vaulmoon shall bring forth the dragon" (vaulmoon is what the eldar call a forgeworld e.g mars.). Looks like he isnt going to be doing anything though is quite happy being caged up.

" The master of death will drink deep from Ishas eye" Looks like the nightbringers all full up on stars and humanoids and just wants a nap.

"That which lies outside will be drawn to the harvest". Looks like the outside likes his comfy disonsphere and doesnt want to move out his home just yet.

"The jackal god shall turn brother against brother". The deceivers done manipulating people, it seems he decided to go to therapy and has all that compulsive lying out of his system! He's off for a better life now.

Couple things. C'tan should probably have never been in the game to begin with (the rules of the game, not the fluff). I guess you could say that the two C'tan we have now were just reawakened and therefore less powerful but if we continue the Necron Awakening theme I bet the C'tan are getting a lot more powerful now and are better suited for games like Apoc where they can go toe to toe with a Titan as it should be.

I don't understand how removing the rules for a model means that they've abandoned the C'tan fluff. No one said that the C'tan aren't going to be in the Necron fluff, just that they won't be useable as characters in normal games of 40k. Plus, most rumors have pointed to Necron lords being able to take necrodermis upgrades and act like mini C'tan so even your models will still be useable.

Basically what I'm saying is, IF those rumours are true then they have murdered yet another codex (lol chaos spacemarines. Lord of change with no psychic power?).

They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

I've heard a lot of knee-jerking in your post, but that's about it.

Eh. A lot of the proposed changes jsut follow the current wave of 'simplification' GW is big on. Not a huge deal, if they can keep the usual over-correction to a minimum.

Losing WBB for FNP is, as others have said, replacing one rule that has a lot of weird game interactions with a simpler one that has the same net effect but is much simpler. FNP appears to be slightly weaker, of course.

Phase Out is one of those neat rules that is very flavorful at first glance, but the execution makes it something of a let-down. It disincentives taking anything that is not a 'Necron' so most of the list's cool toys have a strike against them even before battlefield value is considered. I'd guess it'll stay as a fluff reference... if the Necrons lose,t hey just 'phase out' and leave the battlefield as if they were never there.

Simplifying Gauss rules makes a lot of sense, as the Gauss rules seemed like the 'Rending Beta' anyway.

Losing the C'Tan seems like it's overkill, in my opinion. They are powerful, sure, but they can be defeated. I don't see anything wrong with them being 'gods' as they're really more like the Eldar Avatar in some ways. I think in the 40k setting, you can be a 'god' if you're powerful enugh to get away with saying you are.

Ozymandias wrote:

Minaith1989 wrote:if these rumours are true then heres what i think:

1)- Removing we'll be back and replacing it with feel no pain kind of goes against the whole background info of "necrons have a remarkable ability to self repair even the most horrendous damage" (quoted from codex necrons). So basically what their saying is their walking husks of metal which makes them more resilient to ranged attacks. However it seems they've completely forgotten how to self repair themselves and instead decide to take a little nap when they get shot down.

Feel No Pain is a much better game mechanic as it doesn't require pages of rules, already exists, and approximates being hard to kill rather nicely.

2) Removing Phase out. It seems the necrons have also completely forgotten any strategy and instead will hold an objective or try to capture an objective despite the damage it could do to their own army/force. We'll i guess they dont need teleporters anymore!

I don't know what to say. You want to keep the ability for me to win (with full Massacre in a tournament) by killing enough of your squishy dudes? As Brimstone said, this is supposed to be the next step in Necron awakening, who knows what their objectives are going to be now. They may want to capture that computer node and hold it to learn all about the Imperium and what makes humans tick. You seem to have a very limited imagination when it comes to this game.

3) The possibility that gauss weapons will not rend. Well, it seems that being a highly technological race with incredible weaponry doesnt actually count anymore so the necrons must have just decided to turn off the rending effect of their weapons.

It's been awhile since I played Necrons so correct me if I'm wrong, but how could they "turn off the rending effect" of their weapons if they didn't have that to begin with. Gauss weapons don't have rend now, right?

4) Slow and purposeful. I can kind of understand this as some necrons have become automatons due to repeated repairs/new bodies. Still though, i would have thought their burning hatred of the living would still guide them on what to do? Perhaps their about peace and love now.

I don't know how you equate Slow and Purposeful, a rule that represents a slow moving but never stopping advance, with Necrons being about peace and love. Seems to me that S&P perfectly represents the methodical advance of an Undead Robot Horde.

5) Removing the c'tan. Possibly the worst thing i have seen so far. Yes the c'tan are VERY powerful, yes they are possibly too good at the moment but they are after all the equivalent of a GOD. I don't see why they just couldnt wack the points up on the C'tan rather than removing them all together. To me removing them is essentially removing the head from someones body. The c'tan direct the necron forces and will happily engage in battle themselves for the sheer pleasure of killing and feeding. I dont see why all of a sudden the c'tan have decided to take a back seat. Perhaps the nightbringers hunger has finally subsided and just wants a nice long nap. The other thing is, it seems the whole eldar prophecy about the four c'tan rising up seems to have gone right out the window:

"The vaulmoon shall bring forth the dragon" (vaulmoon is what the eldar call a forgeworld e.g mars.). Looks like he isnt going to be doing anything though is quite happy being caged up.

" The master of death will drink deep from Ishas eye" Looks like the nightbringers all full up on stars and humanoids and just wants a nap.

"That which lies outside will be drawn to the harvest". Looks like the outside likes his comfy disonsphere and doesnt want to move out his home just yet.

"The jackal god shall turn brother against brother". The deceivers done manipulating people, it seems he decided to go to therapy and has all that compulsive lying out of his system! He's off for a better life now.

Couple things. C'tan should probably have never been in the game to begin with (the rules of the game, not the fluff). I guess you could say that the two C'tan we have now were just reawakened and therefore less powerful but if we continue the Necron Awakening theme I bet the C'tan are getting a lot more powerful now and are better suited for games like Apoc where they can go toe to toe with a Titan as it should be.

I don't understand how removing the rules for a model means that they've abandoned the C'tan fluff. No one said that the C'tan aren't going to be in the Necron fluff, just that they won't be useable as characters in normal games of 40k. Plus, most rumors have pointed to Necron lords being able to take necrodermis upgrades and act like mini C'tan so even your models will still be useable.

Basically what I'm saying is, IF those rumours are true then they have murdered yet another codex (lol chaos spacemarines. Lord of change with no psychic power?).

They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

I've heard a lot of knee-jerking in your post, but that's about it.

I'm beginning to think I'm not allowed to express my own opinions but w/e.

1) My personal preference would be we'kll be back, just because you may find it annoying doesnt mean that a) i cant express my opinion or that b) i think it suits them better.

2) I think the theme of phase out fits the army fine, hence why i'd personally like it to stay. Sure it means you might wine asier but i think it reflects the whole issue of the necrons being able to wait to take trhings over just fine. Agaian just a person preference.


3) I have no idea why i put rending in there, what i meant was the flaying effect of if a 6 is rolled its an auto wound. I stand corrected.

4) Necrons are automatons and some will need guidance hence why i agreed slow and purposeful would be interesting for them. However they do hate the living even if they cant comprehend much else, which is why i threw in the whole issue of they would be driven to destroy the living- they wouldnt think about it. I also dont find necrons that methodical in that the warriors would make calculated manouvers. The lord might but the warriors wouldnt stop to have a think about a situation. Again a personal opinion.

5) As for the C'tan i still think they should be in normal 40k and not just apoc. yes perhaps they would be more suited but at the same time its not like their immortal to take down. Difficult perhaps but not impossible. I also believe that in order to balance how strong they are i suggested a points increase? Again a personal opinion.

6) If you want to flame me do it in a private message rather than clog up this thread. I'm entitled to my own opinions and I will express them. I was hoping to put my own input to an adult discussion. Clearly i was wrong.

For future reference, if anyone wants to flame me then I'd rather you private message me rather than clog up topics. I also won't be responding to them either in the topic.I hope this post has clarified some things i said previously.

Thanks,
Minaith1989

Wow. Trust me, that wasn't a flame.

You are certainly entitled to your opinions. Does that mean we all have to agree with you and not call you out when something sounds absurd? Am I not allowed to respond to your opinions, especially when I think they are wrong?

Looks to me like the only one trying to stifle discussion is you.

Newsflash: disagreement isn't flaming.

Ozy wasn't flaming.

Am I the only one who already thought of the C'Tan as Avatars?

The way I understood it, the ones in 40k games were a portion of the god given a shape on the battle field. To me that is an avatar.

As long as they incorporate universal rules to rep the abilities of the Necrons, instead of a slew of new rules, I think it will work.

I like the FNP in place of WBB. Cleaner and simpler to resolve. Leaving tipped models all over was very messy.

HBMC, do you need to flog your opinions of Special Characters multiple times in one thread? I think everyone gets it. You don't like them.

For a while now you've been beating a dead horse. Let it lie. They aren't changing that method any time soon.

Yes, the C'Tan should be simplified to be more like Avatars / Greater Daemons:

- Monstrous Creature
- Jump Infantry
- Invulnerable Sv3+ (2+?)
- Feel No Pain
- Eternal Warrior
etc.

I could be wrong, but I don't think C'tan are/were ever described as being a "portion." They are the actual star god compressed into the necrodermis.

If the next codex represents the further awakening of the Necrons, it's the perfect time to say the C'tan have more fully charged up and are no longer appropriate for 40K-level battlefields.

I don't think they're going to remove the C'tan so much as..I don't know.

DoW-style C'tan, anyone? Necron Lord, C'tan is purchased as an upgrade that is 'in reserves', when it's available you roll a d3 and the Lord is whatever-scary-dude for that many turns with varying abilities.

Oh god please dont let them do to C'Tan what they did to greater daemons for Chaos Marines.

I remember looking at the newest Chaos book, seeing what they did for summoned daemons, and felt emotions I haven't felt sense the time I walked in on my parents...

Absent other rumors detailing what else is going on, here are my opinions.

Slow and purposeful is awful. We're already the slowest army on the field. Making me a roll a D6 to determine how far I move is just putting the final nail in the non-competitive coffin.

WBB has never confused me. I'm not sure why it confuses other folks either. However, FNP can be a good substitute as it prevents a model from becoming a casulty and hence losing a combat. My endorsement of that is predicated on the Res Orb removing the restrictions on FNP.

Pariahs, same points as terminators with PF and SB and make'em Necron. I saw somebody above call for Wraiths to have warscythes and while I'd probably have to change my shorts if it happened, I think rending would work fine or give'em power weapons. Failing that I'd drop the points on the Wraiths to about the same as assault marines or SM bikes.

Leave my Monolith alone. It's fine as it is. It's my only vehicle so it has to do EVERYTHING. And again, for clarity's sake my opinion here is based on the fact we don't know if Necrons are getting another vehicle or what its point cost would be.

Love the tiered lord system with wargear allowing a high level lord to channel a C'tan.

Also really like DD's build for a C'tan.

I stated in another thread I think they should have a walker/floating combat vehicle similar to a dreadnought and a redesigned tomb spyder could fill that role.

Ok, take it apart.

I would totally support the switch to Feel No Pain and no Phase Out. The tradeoff of effectively having 25% more army available to you sort of balances out the extra wounds a model can take after it would have normally been "tipped over". On the other hand, I find Slow and Purposeful to be like pouring salt in the 'you move like molasses uphill through a tar pit in january' wound. If they were to combine that with 30" Gauss rifles though...

As for the units in the army, I would certainly like to see something done with Wraiths. I would prefer a larger squad, more wounds, or at the very least - power weapons - to something like just lowering their point cost. Flayed Ones should probably get rending. It fits with the idea of having excessively sharp talons, and gives them that punch they totally lack right now. I also totally enjoy the idea of a large skimmer/walker (move through terrain/over troops, fight in assault like a walker) and also think a mid-range vehicle on the level of a predator would be ideal. Those two could possibly be combined.

Finally, I would LOVE to see the C'Tan 'graduate' to Apocalypse level. Far from being overpowered, I feel as if they are UNDERpowered for what they should be. These guys eat stars for breakfast, kill enough people to create Chaos gods, and are home in time for dinner. All Forge World has for me is a stupid pylon. I want a 2 foot tall Nightbringer I can march up to a Reaver Titan and yell "Bring it!".

@Sarge: The problem with WBB is that it has complex interactions with the Res Orb, Spyder & Monolith, along with the measuring bit. If WBB were never modified, then it'd be fine (tho FNP is still easier because it's universal and doesn't need measuring).

The Monolith has similar problems due to having rules that modify other special rules and other armies rules.

The ultimate problem with Necrons is that they have a lot of rules that confuse non-Necron players. Moving to more USRs (like my strawman C'Tan) makes it easier for everybody to understand what they're dealing with.

So that C'Tan template can make a very durable, mobile, hard-hitting model that doesn't generate as many complaints of "cheese" based on not understanding how the C'Tan works.

just a word on the c'tan i always thought they were to powerful being for the normal battlefield.

the idea of that they weren't powerful enough makes no sense to me especially as the Deciever has been about for so long the eldar are accidentally worshiping it as a god so meh.

I have a feeling that GW may want to release Necrons around summer holidays so they can run Summer Campaign showing the Re-awakening of even more of the NEcron Tomb Worlds

Guard vs Necrons would make an awesome starter set.

n0t_u wrote:

I am SOOOO stealing that pic!!!!