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.

Last week I ran one of these in a friendly campaign. A few of my friend's didn't care if I ran it while some others were adamant about not using it. I can see both sides of the argument, but can't find much info supporting either argument.

My question is, would you allow your opponent to field one of these even though it's listed in Imperial Armor 7 and not any standard codex.


Why a Chaos Daemon player would run one

(Desirable) Fast attack for Chaos Daemons.
Adds some much needed anti-tank capabilities
Works like a Soul Grinder, with lower BS and armor
Unlike a SG, it can add to Epidemus' tally
Can run in a 500pt Combat patrol missions.

Personally I think it's worth the points and fits well in a nurgle list

If its just a fun campaign its up to the players but I wouldn't mind

Well, for me it's simple.

Where are the rules located?
Are they in the codex? No, so it's not for Normal Games. It's that simple.

well yeah, but it should not be a huge problem if its just for fun imo.

is that ice cream on the cat btw?

I understand completely where GWAR is coming from; but I also feel that the allied Inquisition armies add entertaining options to a friendly, low key match. I wish demons and CSM had some standard rules for mixing the two armies, or the fluff-friendly harlequin/dark eldar mix.

Don't ever count on it or assume anyone has to allow it, but it would not bug me.

looks like a decaying leaf lol

It's a Coconut Cat!

Gwar! wrote:Well, for me it's simple.

Where are the rules located?
Are they in the codex? No, so it's not for Normal Games. It's that simple.

QFT.
If you allow that then you have to allow other Imperial Armor items. (Baneblades, Marauders, Fighta Bombas. . .)

The funny thing is I asked my friends and posted before the campaign about using it. The ones that responded didn't mind at all, while my other friends (who I told in person and posted the stats prior so they could see them) were adamant about not using it. You know how it is...

I decided to use it anyway, lol. I wanted to see how they would react when I put it on the table and sure enough it got a lot of attention.

I should be more specific... the argument is it's not in the codex vs. I asked before hand and nobody cared until it was on the table. IMO if you pick and choose what you want to read before a campaign you shouldn't have the right to complain.

I don't mind IA units at all, so I'd be fine playing against it. I think it's only really when you get to SuperHeavy vehicles and the like that I wouldn't want them in normal games. Blight Drones are scaled fine...

However, I'd prefer it if it was a Nurgle-themed army. Mixed Daemons just taking them for the AT would annoy me...

I can't say that I mind them. If it dies to meltagun fire, it's ok by me.

In before this degenerates into an argument about whether Forge World models are legal for regular play.

Hey Chi3f, I am hoping that I'm not one of the ones you thought were opposed to it. The only reason I was asking for the rules for it was because I wanted to see what it was capable of. By the way, you know that I am going to be gunning for that thing first right?

If it's for fun then I see no big deal, but that is why the Campaign lead should clarify things before hand. For Campaigns I run I disallow IA stuff just because while some rules are sane, others are very not.

A Guy took Two in a tournament down at my FLGS they allowed IA just no flyers or super heavys

IMO the drones are for fun games, I would never think to take one in a tournament.

Fun game- sure bring it. Tourney- not unless TO said it is okay. Apoc- bring all you've got...

Chi3f wrote:The funny thing is I asked my friends and posted before the campaign about using it. The ones that responded didn't mind at all, while my other friends (who I told in person and posted the stats prior so they could see them) were adamant about not using it. You know how it is...

I decided to use it anyway, lol. I wanted to see how they would react when I put it on the table and sure enough it got a lot of attention.

I should be more specific... the argument is it's not in the codex vs. I asked before hand and nobody cared until it was on the table. IMO if you pick and choose what you want to read before a campaign you shouldn't have the right to complain.

IMO you should have two army lists, one for if your opponents don't mind playing against it, and one for if they don't want to play against it. The problem with many IA units, while they may not be horribly powerful on their own, is that they often change the balance of an army list significantly when they are included. Waiting until you're already setting up your army to let you opponent know that you want to use something is bad form.

i have no problem with IA rules.

I can't say that I've ever had a problem with IA rules either. If doesn't have a power of D or AV higher then 14, I'm not very worried, and if it has some funky rule, it just moves up higher on my list of things to flatten with Basilisks and Vanquishers

The SM drop pod that allows dreadnoughts to assault the turn they land... that's fair, right?

I'd ask to be told before we met to play exactly what it is and what it does. If I find that it seems a little ridiculous (either too resilient or too destructive) I'd probably say no, or if it allowed you to fit more tanks for cheaper into a squadron (like with some Guard things) I'd probably say no too.

willydstyle wrote:The SM drop pod that allows dreadnoughts to assault the turn they land... that's fair, right?

Sure, it will give them a chance to do something before either A) Private Jenks and his meltagun or B) that bunch of griffons and basilisks under camo or C) that Vanquisher that is traversing it's turret or D) The Commissar and his power fist have a chance to reduce it to scrap.


IG. We'll hit you with everything and the kitchen sink. Except lance weapons. Damn I wish I had those.

yep down at my store we allow AI units just
no gargantuan creatures
no super heavy's
no flyers
no units with structure points of any kind

stuff from like siege of Vraks is fine. it helps add some cool units to the weaker codex's like daemon hunters and nurgle themed daemons

especially Blight drones they are not OP and are fun to play against

the only thing I'm a little hesitant on is Hector Rex he is 300pts of beat stick!

The only restictions on him is that you will not be aload to use him in regular tounaments

If the griffons and basilisks are in a squadron, they will get shot, and then assaulted with str 10 attacks on rear armor... just sayin'.

willydstyle wrote:If the griffons and basilisks are in a squadron, they will get shot, and then assaulted with str 10 attacks on rear armor... just sayin'.

.... parking them next to dangerous/impassible terrain surrounded by (metal) meat shields (and know you know why I refer to platoon 2 as second echelon) tends to discourage that sort of thing. The last time someone tried it, they deep struck their Venerable Dread into a lake.

And drop pods have inertial guidance...

willydstyle wrote:And drop pods have inertial guidance...

Not if they're using the Rules in Imperial Armor, they don't. Drops scatter, and if they land in Impassible Terrain count as destroyed. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. If you're gonna use FW rules for allowing Dreads to assault you'll use FW rules for the drop pod landing, too.

IA1 and IA2 are updated to use the new rules.

If that's the case, how are they assaulting on landing? DP don't benefit from the Assault Vehicle special rule.

(and where can I find that update? I checked FW and couldn't find it)