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.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
My main armies are Orks and Khorne Daemons, and I have a bunch of Orks riding bloodcrushers etc. The idea of allowing the former to summon the latter sounds hilarious

You next need Bloodletters riding either orks or squigs

Herald on a Squig Throne!

SQUIGS FOR THE SQUIG GOD!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I-I've never t-thought of d-doing that u-until I have enough money and FW releases them in a r-rulebook... n-nope

Don't worry, "no one" else has either.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
My main armies are Orks and Khorne Daemons, and I have a bunch of Orks riding bloodcrushers etc. The idea of allowing the former to summon the latter sounds hilarious

You next need Bloodletters riding either orks or squigs

Herald on a Squig Throne!

SQUIGS FOR THE SQUIG GOD!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I-I've never t-thought of d-doing that u-until I have enough money and FW releases them in a r-rulebook... n-nope

Don't worry, "no one" else has either.

Special rule, they explode SD 4 small blasts on death. Thought they were a joke didn't you punk!?

Reminds me of the local GW that is about to close. That owner really cared and tried. Anyways, he made a headless orksman who was an ork riding a squig (you could take off the ork's head and put it in his hand as well. Magnets and all)

 streamdragon wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?

I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.

Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.

I'm sure there are other games you'll find, might I offer a suggestion:

Seriously though. You've had a discussion over a few scanned WD pages without seeing hide nor hair of actual implementation. It's one thing when you have full or partial rules leaks, but we don't even have that. We have a few designer notes with no real foundation or context to it.

The discussion was more inclusive than that, with the latest edition of the rules being the final nail in the coffin. We all decided to meet up this week and play X-wing, one of us has quite a few models and I'm going to get a couple of starter sets. It's fun,You can get two starter sets for the cost of the 6th ed rule book. Who knows what I could get for the cost of the 7th ed. I was just holding on to 40k out of nostalgia.

Like many have said. Each edition and codexs heavily favor some armies, the errata and FAQs for those are gone, (the errata being the more important) it just becomes work after a while. If this ploy doesn't give GW the lift that it needs and they either sell the IP or change their stategy to more long term, I may come back...I'll still have all the models. Too much time spent on that to just let them go.

Orks should be allowed to summon Warboss Tuska.

 insaniak wrote:
Now we can all say 'I was there the day GW killed the 40k fluff...'

No kidding.

Marines can summon Bloodthirsters. Warhammer 40,000, as a game, is over.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Now we can all say 'I was there the day GW killed the 40k fluff...'

No kidding.

Marines can summon Bloodthirsters. Warhammer 40,000, as a game, is over.

Please let there be no limit and even permit GK use it. I'll laugh my ass off. Oh, or better yet. Just let me ally and still get to summon daemons GK! Fight alongside your comrades and chaos daemon bretheren! And leading the charge of bloodthirsters is Draigo himself.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 tarnish wrote:
Unlike some, i don´t have the stamina to read all 94 pages of posts, but most of what i have seen is rage regarding the Unbound Army rules and that they will ruin the hobby.
In my neck of the woods we are likely to make changes along the way if the Unbound rules make for a terrible game, and indeed, anyone should feel free to do so! It´s YOUR game!
Tournaments regularly change some aspect of the rules aswell. So i ask you: what is the problem here?

The problem is that it is a piece of work that a lot of people don't like, which if presented as an option would be fine because you could just ignore it, but it is going to be in the core rules.

You've seen the new rulebook in its entirety too then? What else is in it?

No, I am talking about the Unbound rules, which is the topic of the conversation you supposedly are joining.

Ive been in the thread since the WD was posted, I'm aware the conversation was about the Unbound rules, which havent been released in its entirety yet as far as I'm aware.

Then you must be aware that there is a huge amount of resentment, opposition and indeed derision for the Unbound rules even in their hinted at form.

Yearh shows me for appealing to reason and communication in the community.... I must be worse then hitler himself for suggesting that!

Edit: Thanks for having my back Kilkrazy.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Now we can all say 'I was there the day GW killed the 40k fluff...'

No kidding.

Marines can summon Bloodthirsters. Warhammer 40,000, as a game, is over.

Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

 Ramshackle_Curtis wrote:
Back when I started playing I had to wait for the first army list to be written. You could take anything you wanted and they gave you rules for making up your own vehicles, characters and robots. Rogue Trader was broken, and you simply had to house rule stuff. I still have fun with it now.

1st edition was amazing fun, needed a level of control for sure, was only broken if you tried to break it, a fragile ruleset for sure but for small scale skirmish games, with each model acting individually within small groups was utterly amazing.

And the world didn't end, it grew, army lists developed, it expanded, and became where we are now.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Just because the WD team does something proves nothing.

 StarTrotter wrote:

It's not confirmed that everybody will get to summon. As others have mentioned, WD isn't exactly known for being loyal. I do have my hunch that they weren't breaking rules for this though but until it's confirmed... And to be realistic Chaos has always been an accessory. Chaos guard, CSM, chaos orks. Heck, there used to be chaos genestealers.

Bloodthirsters have never been an accessory. That's a big leap from where we have been in past editions.

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

Oh so you've seen the new rulebook as well then? How does the Demonology pyker disciplines work then? So we can clear up confusion

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

 Idolator wrote:
HEY! Where did everyone go that was positively adamant that that this was not going to be a 7th edition? That this was merely going to be an update with a downloadable FAQ and free updates for digital customers?

I had a gathering at my house (40k players one and all), not one of us is hopeful that we will ever play the game again. It's a shame because that was how all of us met in the first place.

Such a rich background and genre combined with a dynamic gaming concept, all gone to hell.

Our local group here is definitely gearing up for the same kinda decision.

Well its confirmed. Loyalists will now summon deamons.

/flips table over and walks out

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

This is what I get from it:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Just because the WD team does something proves nothing.

I can't tell how much Peregrine and HBMC are kidding...I'd guess Pregrine is mostly serious, HBMC is mostly kidding, though. Am I close, guys?

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

And do you really think that the only thing you'll be able to summon is a Bloodthirster? There's probably a random table in there somewhere (hadn't you heard?? tables are awesome!) that like other people have suggested, will either turn you into a puddle of goo, a greater daemon or something in between.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

 tomjoad wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

The rules clearly allow it, and it's isn't hard to see how sacrificing a cheap psyker to get a powerful unit is a good trade. The only thing preventing this from becoming the norm is self-imposed limits on violating the fluff too badly, anyone who just wants to win the game is going to be happy to bring cheap demon summoners in their GK army. In fact, given how cheap inquisitors are, I can already imagine an awesome unbound army that takes nothing but naked psyker inquisitors and immediately starts turning them into bloodthirsters.

You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Just because the WD team does something proves nothing.

I can't tell how much Peregrine and HBMC are kidding...I'd guess Pregrine is mostly serious, HBMC is mostly kidding, though. Am I close, guys?

I've never witnessed Peregrine show a sense of humor about anything (and if he has I just can't tell).

Calling it now, you'll be able to summon riptides, because.. hey you should buy a riptide.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

It implies nothing of the sort.

And since you replied before I'd finished editing my post, here was the second bit:

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

I believe that said that they "Allowed him" to do it implying that it might not be the norm.

Also, this is how I imagine the 7th ed rulebook:

WayneTheGame wrote:
Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.

Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it

That's some narrative forging right there.

firstly, I'm sure it was just a fun twist to the end of a losing game... Can't imagine GW allowing this any official way in 7th. (Crosses fingers)

However, I played dark angels for 10 years, and read all the background and fluff on them. The stories of Johnston buying his time when the heresy broke out in order to side with the winning side, the secrets the angels have of Johnston in the center of the roc, the whispered rumors the "loyal" da were in fact the ones ready to side with Horus (which is the great secret) and the "fallen" were the terra da that were ousted and called the traitors... Now with Ezekiel (knowing how to) channel a blood thirster? Sounds like GW has the makings of an entire multi-year story campaign direction it could take...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It implies nothing of the sort.

The WD Team's track record doesn't really this is really set in stone though, or else we'd all be playing without using points and just plonking all of our toys down on the table all the time already. Because that's what they've done plenty of since 6th launched.

This whole thread has just devolved into

"Aargh, this thing is really worrying/concerning/angering/rage quit"

"Ah, but we don't know that yet!"

For pages and pages, someone, please, try and come up with something new to say, or at least recognise you're trapped in a circular argument and stop until new info lands.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

It implies nothing of the sort.

And since you replied before I'd finished editing my post, here was the second bit:

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

The advent of Daemonology has caused many moral quandaries in the White Dwarf office, not least for Adam Troke. A staunch Dark Angels collector, Adam found himself allowing none other than Grand Master Ezekiel himself to use the Daemonology powers in one of our test games – all in the interest of research and playtesting, of course.

From the WD. There are the facts that are known, he allowed Ezekiel to use those powers for playtest, in the interest of research and playtesting. Explain to me how that makes it a concrete fact that outside of a playtest, the DA GM is allowed to do this in a real setting?

Please quote the 7th edition rulebook page and paragraph that allows this.

 Leth wrote:
I believe that said that they "Allowed him" to do it implying that it might not be the norm.

It says the player allowed Ezekiel, not that they were allowing the player to do anything out of the ordinary (from a rules perspective, not a fluff perspective, that is). The paragraph emphasises the desperation of the Dark Angel player, a situation so desperate that he had to have the head Librarian of the Dark Angels summon a Daemon in order to win.

All that paragraph does is – and I say this both ironically and un-ironically – is forge a narrative. People are trying to find an alternate meaning for “allowing”, removing any and all context from what’s written there.