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.

He's got the ability to do fun things, but the model is selling off name recognition and fluff fandom, not the rules.

He's 2019's Sly Marbo. He CAN do some damage, but he will likely not earn his points back.

Andykp wrote:
So an unofficial leak showed a draft that was then corrected and now the official release is correct. That sounds like a win for proof readers there to me???

Not really - the magazine where the stats were printed (this month's White Dwarf) went to print with the incorrect statline, which is hardly a win for the staff.

They have done pretty well on getting a fix to market quickly, though.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
He's got the ability to do fun things, but the model is selling off name recognition and fluff fandom, not the rules.

He's 2019's Sly Marbo. He CAN do some damage, but he will likely not earn his points back.

Marbo costs less, can appear anywhere (twice!), and when he does can choose to deal (a statistically probable) 1+ mortal wounds with 2 inch radius, punishing enemies who are clustering to use aura abilities. Alternatively he can take a high risk/reward charge against anyone on the board, shutting them down for a round. Failing that he can get a free shooting phase, for a total of 6 strength 5 shots that hit and wound on 2+.

The amount of utility that adds to a game from objective grabbing, threat to any(in some cases every) model, drawing enemy out of position, or just shutting down a key enemy model is worth the points. If I have 5x 20 point models and you have 10x 10 point models and each of my dudes kills one of yours, breaking your killteam- none of my guys have 'earned their points back' but I've won.

Eisenhorn doesn't offer anything like that utility or lethality.

 =Angel= wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
He's got the ability to do fun things, but the model is selling off name recognition and fluff fandom, not the rules.

He's 2019's Sly Marbo. He CAN do some damage, but he will likely not earn his points back.

Marbo costs less, can appear anywhere (twice!), and when he does can choose to deal (a statistically probable) 1+ mortal wounds with 2 inch radius, punishing enemies who are clustering to use aura abilities. Alternatively he can take a high risk/reward charge against anyone on the board, shutting them down for a round. Failing that he can get a free shooting phase, for a total of 6 strength 5 shots that hit and wound on 2+.

The amount of utility that adds to a game from objective grabbing, threat to any(in some cases every) model, drawing enemy out of position, or just shutting down a key enemy model is worth the points. If I have 5x 20 point models and you have 10x 10 point models and each of my dudes kills one of yours, breaking your killteam- none of my guys have 'earned their points back' but I've won.

Eisenhorn doesn't offer anything like that utility or lethality.

Sly Marbo dies if you look at him funny. He, at most, will kill a single squad of GEQ, very rarely a small squad of MEQ. He will never kill a character unless the opponent is a moron. He HAS to be taken as an HQ. 55pts. He will need to kill two guard squads to get his points back.

On the other hand, Eisenhorn can summon, Mind Control, acts a a Commisar pre-nerf for conscript squads with the moral thing, and that's about it. He's also a Psycher, so he gets a Deny/Cast. I haven't seen his designation, but I'm fairly certain he's an HQ as well. He will earn his 70pts back.

Just one more reason why rules should never be printed in White Dwarf.

 oni wrote:
Just one more reason why rules should never be printed in White Dwarf.

I'd rather they make the mistakes in White Dwarf instead of an actual Codex.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 =Angel= wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
He's got the ability to do fun things, but the model is selling off name recognition and fluff fandom, not the rules.

He's 2019's Sly Marbo. He CAN do some damage, but he will likely not earn his points back.

Marbo costs less, can appear anywhere (twice!), and when he does can choose to deal (a statistically probable) 1+ mortal wounds with 2 inch radius, punishing enemies who are clustering to use aura abilities. Alternatively he can take a high risk/reward charge against anyone on the board, shutting them down for a round. Failing that he can get a free shooting phase, for a total of 6 strength 5 shots that hit and wound on 2+.

The amount of utility that adds to a game from objective grabbing, threat to any(in some cases every) model, drawing enemy out of position, or just shutting down a key enemy model is worth the points. If I have 5x 20 point models and you have 10x 10 point models and each of my dudes kills one of yours, breaking your killteam- none of my guys have 'earned their points back' but I've won.

Eisenhorn doesn't offer anything like that utility or lethality.

Sly Marbo dies if you look at him funny. He, at most, will kill a single squad of GEQ, very rarely a small squad of MEQ. He will never kill a character unless the opponent is a moron. He HAS to be taken as an HQ. 55pts. He will need to kill two guard squads to get his points back.

On the other hand, Eisenhorn can summon, Mind Control, acts a a Commisar pre-nerf for conscript squads with the moral thing, and that's about it. He's also a Psycher, so he gets a Deny/Cast. I haven't seen his designation, but I'm fairly certain he's an HQ as well. He will earn his 70pts back.

Don't forget we're talking about Kill Team here. And I agree that 70 points for Eisenhorn is a bit much, and I wish he could summon his daemonhost in Kill Team. That would definitely make him worth the points.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Sly Marbo dies if you look at him funny. He, at most, will kill a single squad of GEQ, very rarely a small squad of MEQ. He will never kill a character unless the opponent is a moron. He HAS to be taken as an HQ. 55pts. He will need to kill two guard squads to get his points back.

 =Angel= wrote:
The amount of utility that adds to a game from objective grabbing, threat to any(in some cases every) model, drawing enemy out of position, or just shutting down a key enemy model is worth the points. If I have 5x 20 point models and you have 10x 10 point models and each of my dudes kills one of yours, breaking your killteam- none of my guys have 'earned their points back' but I've won.

Marbo costs 11 Guardsmen and I've covered why you don't need to kill enemy models of an equivalent value of points in order to be worth your points cost.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
On the other hand, Eisenhorn can summon, Mind Control, acts a a Commisar pre-nerf for conscript squads with the moral thing, and that's about it. He's also a Psycher, so he gets a Deny/Cast. I haven't seen his designation, but I'm fairly certain he's an HQ as well. He will earn his 70pts back.

You know these are Killteam rules right? There are no conscripts and there's no summoning. We are talking about a 70 point model in the context of very small scale games, where each model can be shot individually.

Yeah, leaving out the ability to summon Cherubael was quite a disappointment. Could have added an interesting element to Kill Team that no other unit really has.

The poor proof reading has me happy they didn't try doing rules for any of his acolytes... but I wish they'd done those characters too, or at least give us a generic Inquisition list to work with.

Macabre Galatic wrote:
The worst thing is that Deathwatch can't take him. How stupid. I haven't read the books so there might be a reason for this but it just seems daft. He should be able to be taken by all imperial sides.

These rules are rather lacking and while they give you rules for different levels, which presumably represent him at different stages of his life... but overall the rules seem rather aimless in representing him in anything but name. Arguably in tying his levels to different points in his life, those points where he is rogue, it's easy to imagine there would be some factions he couldn't work with. Maybe if they had done that it would have made sense.

Macabre Galatic wrote:
The worst thing is that Deathwatch can't take him. How stupid. I haven't read the books so there might be a reason for this but it just seems daft. He should be able to be taken by all imperial sides.

That indeed is completely bonkers. He is an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor that cannot accompany the Deathwatch! What?

(I also really, really hope that they would give us rules for a generic customisable Inquisitor for the Killteam.)

 Crimson wrote:

Macabre Galatic wrote:
The worst thing is that Deathwatch can't take him. How stupid. I haven't read the books so there might be a reason for this but it just seems daft. He should be able to be taken by all imperial sides.

That indeed is completely bonkers. He is an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor that cannot accompany the Deathwatch! What?

(I also really, really hope that they would give us rules for a generic customisable Inquisitor for the Killteam.)

Not as up to date with KT rules as probably should be - he has the Deathwatch Keyword - why can;t he be taken?

 Mr Morden wrote:


Not as up to date with KT rules as probably should be - he has the Deathwatch Keyword - why can;t he be taken?

I am an idiot! Thank you! The updated datasheet indeed has that keyword added! The problem solved; complaint withdrawn.

As someone who hasn't picked up any of the KT rules, I do have one question - what do the different "levels" mean? There didn't seem to be any material on the page indicating bonuses for higher levels, unless I'm really bad at reading today...

 Dysartes wrote:
As someone who hasn't picked up any of the KT rules, I do have one question - what do the different "levels" mean? There didn't seem to be any material on the page indicating bonuses for higher levels, unless I'm really bad at reading today...

It's tied to a different page based on the type of commander he is since you gain more abilities as you have higher levels.

Andykp wrote:
So an unofficial leak showed a draft that was then corrected and now the official release is correct. That sounds like a win for proof readers there to me???

Before today I wasn't convinced GW had proofreaders, so maybe on some level it is a win for them.

keep in mind that white dwarf is a monthly magazine so there's a deadline here. sometimes mistakes get made when operating under a crunch.

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind that white dwarf is a monthly magazine so there's a deadline here. sometimes mistakes get made when operating under a crunch.

It's the main feature advertised on the front cover of the white dwarf lmao.

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind that white dwarf is a monthly magazine so there's a deadline here. sometimes mistakes get made when operating under a crunch.

Again, even more of a reason to hire competent editors.

If daily and weekly newspapers can manage it (most of the time) then monthly publications have no excuse.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind that white dwarf is a monthly magazine so there's a deadline here. sometimes mistakes get made when operating under a crunch.

Again, even more of a reason to hire competent editors.

If daily and weekly newspapers can manage it (most of the time) then monthly publications have no excuse.

Newspapers write games rules on a daily or weekly basis do they?

BrianDavion wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind that white dwarf is a monthly magazine so there's a deadline here. sometimes mistakes get made when operating under a crunch.

Again, even more of a reason to hire competent editors.

If daily and weekly newspapers can manage it (most of the time) then monthly publications have no excuse.

Newspapers write games rules on a daily or weekly basis do they?

No - but, then again, neither do the WD staff.

Is this feth up the end of the world? No.

But the fact that when they're publishing datasheets in the magazine it doesn't look like anyone double-checked to make sure the numbers were right? That's not a good look.

 Dysartes wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind that white dwarf is a monthly magazine so there's a deadline here. sometimes mistakes get made when operating under a crunch.

Again, even more of a reason to hire competent editors.

If daily and weekly newspapers can manage it (most of the time) then monthly publications have no excuse.

Newspapers write games rules on a daily or weekly basis do they?

No - but, then again, neither do the WD staff.

Is this feth up the end of the world? No.

But the fact that when they're publishing datasheets in the magazine it doesn't look like anyone double-checked to make sure the numbers were right? That's not a good look.

Exactly. These rules were done by the Rules team. The version handed over to the WD team should have gone through the rules editor immediately before being sent to ensure it was the correct version. The rules editor should be competent and with the most knowledge of the game out of the entire rules team and should immediately be able to identify that these were incorrect.

I'd also say that the WD initial proof should be read by all the editors of the different teams, not just the WD editor, before it is sent to print to catch these kinds of things.

This was not a feth up by the WD team, they are not the people who wrote the rules, they just have the job of putting the sent over sheet into the magazine. It is a feth up by the rules team which we already knew lacked a competent editor by the non-functional and garbage rules they regularly release.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind that white dwarf is a monthly magazine so there's a deadline here. sometimes mistakes get made when operating under a crunch.

Again, even more of a reason to hire competent editors.

If daily and weekly newspapers can manage it (most of the time) then monthly publications have no excuse.

Newspapers write games rules on a daily or weekly basis do they?

That isn't even relevant. Editors exist to ensure the quality of the work they are overseeing, it doesn't matter what that purview is.

An editor of a scientific journal isn't going to be an expert in all the scientific fields that are published in the journal but they are still going to get a ton of flack if they publish a blatantly incorrect piece of work in the journal they are overseeing.

Not a huge deal as I'd copy the page anyway and stick it in the commanders book, but now my fancy magazine will be wrong :(

I'm just glad they corrected it immediately, but I never noticed any obvious announcement about it, so I may just have assumed he had terrible stats if I didn't know better.