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.

FallenAfh wrote:

Griever wrote:
Keep in mind we also accept that Tau can ally with Daemons, even though by all accounts Tau shouldn't even be able to see or sense them and vice versa. GW is not keeping this "fluffy"

With the current fluff. Didn't the same people who leaked the allies rules also mention how Tau fluff would be changing? Its the same situation with Necrons and their new fluff.

The piece of "information" that Griever posted is incorrect and flawed.

The fact that Tau do not have psykers does not mean "they can't see or sense Daemons".
Daemons are not like Peter Pan. You don't have to believe in them for Daemons to fly away, wearing your innards as a hat.
All the fact that Tau do not have psykers means is that it is incredibly taxing for Daemons to attempt possession of a Tau host.

Keep in mind that the 6th edition rulebook not only changes rules, it also developes the background.

A previous thread on 6th edition first mentioned Tau and Ultramarines being brothers in arms because of changed background. The rumour stated that Ultramarines learned that Tau are immune to Chaos and essential to saving the Empire against Chaos. That's why Ultramarines took the task to protect the Tau and work together. Ultramarines do it out of a sense of duty, Tau do it because they are not interested in fighting humans without a reason. Makes sense. And makes future Chaos tau threads even more difficult

That implies that the Tau were around when Guilleman was still alive; which is a massive retcon to Tau fluff.

Harriticus wrote:

Griever wrote:

1) I think you're looking too deeply into the different designations

I'm not, you're looking too deeply. I see the chart that says "Imperial Guard are allies with Daemons" and I see "GW is saying that Imperial Guard can ally with Daemons"

You on the other hand are looking more deeply into it, saying "they don't mean Imperial Guard (even though that's what the chart says), they mean Traitor Guard"

2) Now you're just making stuff up.

Where? I'm looking at what the chart says and nothing more

3) Why do you get to decide that Traitor guard would have marks of chaos? AFAIK, typical soldiers are too significant to recieve the blessing of the chaos gods

I think Traitor Guard would at least need some sort of representation that they're traitor guard, besides "well obviously that's what they mean" or "because I say so". Even if it just says "these guys are meant to be traitor guard" somewhere. Otherwise you're speculating, and it's Imperial Guard allying with Daemons, because that's what it says

I flipped out about allies earlier on, but you're being a little bit ridiculous now. Daemons with human support in the form of cultists/tratiot guard is completely feasible, a well known piece of fluff, and has always been something people have done with IG. Hell, FW even makes models for traitor guard.

It is feasible, and Forgeworld does make Traitor Guard models. However, it has not been said that the Imperial Guard are meant to be Traitor Guard, and the FW Traitor Guard forces have their own entirely separate ruleset.

Basically I'm not operating by assumption and faith. Yes, I would like that Traitor Guard can ally with Daemons and I would like that GW intends for the Imperial Guard to be Traitor Guard, but there's simply no evidence to support this.

Keep in mind we also accept that Tau can ally with Daemons, even though by all accounts Tau shouldn't even be able to see or sense them and vice versa. GW is not keeping this "fluffy"

I really don't see why so many of you have your panties all bunched up about who can ally with who, and why the fluff doesn't support that. You are so worried about the fluff for your armies but when the dice hit the table, the fluff goes away. You can have GK fighting GK, or SoB fighting SoB, who cares if one of them has a couple of units from another army with them. Is that 'fluffy'? If you're that concerned about fluff, there are many games you should just walk away from, as the 'fluff' would never allow such a battle to occur.

rogueeyes wrote:Has anyone even thought about how nids will try to fail instinctive behaviour tests in order to get rage and the rumored 2 attacks it gives?

Synapse be damned.

Yeah, you leave a unit of Raveners outside synapse to reap the awesome bonus of a single extra attack on the charge. Then two of them pop from a couple of Krak missiles since cover saves now suck. They fail morale check and run off the table.

Sounds like a great plan man.

Kanluwen wrote:That implies that the Tau were around when Guilleman was still alive; which is a massive retcon to Tau fluff.

IIRC the order came from the Emperor, not Guilleman, according to the leak.

Kanluwen wrote:

FallenAfh wrote:

Griever wrote:
Keep in mind we also accept that Tau can ally with Daemons, even though by all accounts Tau shouldn't even be able to see or sense them and vice versa. GW is not keeping this "fluffy"

With the current fluff. Didn't the same people who leaked the allies rules also mention how Tau fluff would be changing? Its the same situation with Necrons and their new fluff.

The piece of "information" that Griever posted is incorrect and flawed.

The fact that Tau do not have psykers does not mean "they can't see or sense Daemons".
Daemons are not like Peter Pan. You don't have to believe in them for Daemons to fly away, wearing your innards as a hat.
All the fact that Tau do not have psykers means is that it is incredibly taxing for Daemons to attempt possession of a Tau host.

The hell? I never said that, I just quoted somebody who did.

Griever wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

FallenAfh wrote:

Griever wrote:
Keep in mind we also accept that Tau can ally with Daemons, even though by all accounts Tau shouldn't even be able to see or sense them and vice versa. GW is not keeping this "fluffy"

With the current fluff. Didn't the same people who leaked the allies rules also mention how Tau fluff would be changing? Its the same situation with Necrons and their new fluff.

The piece of "information" that Griever posted is incorrect and flawed.

The fact that Tau do not have psykers does not mean "they can't see or sense Daemons".
Daemons are not like Peter Pan. You don't have to believe in them for Daemons to fly away, wearing your innards as a hat.
All the fact that Tau do not have psykers means is that it is incredibly taxing for Daemons to attempt possession of a Tau host.

The hell? I never said that, I just quoted somebody who did.

My apologies, I think I accidentally screwed up with the quoting function.

FallenAfh wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:That implies that the Tau were around when Guilleman was still alive; which is a massive retcon to Tau fluff.

IIRC the order came from the Emperor, not Guilleman, according to the leak.

The book could go any direction with it, but I don't see why it would have to be from Guilleman. Why couldn't Calgar decide that?

Still buttmad about DE CCW.

But I think I'm slowly coming to peace with 6th, I'll have my mind made up when the Erratas are done.

If they don't fix the Klaives/Agonizers/Huskblade then I'm going full Exodite mode: Min-Maxed Eldar+Dark Eldar, I'll become the worst TFG of all time.

I'll exploit psychic powers, spam rangers, darklight, dragons, splinters....whatever it takes.

I'll completely disregard the fluff. Buy what ever beasties I want from WHFB or even LOTR and make them count as Wraiths/Grotesques/Pain Engines/Beastmasters/Avatars whatever I feel like.

Ents and Dryads everywhere with laz0rs attached to their arms, making lore nerds cry.

It'll be like Wood Elves.........in space.

Griever wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

FallenAfh wrote:

Griever wrote:
Keep in mind we also accept that Tau can ally with Daemons, even though by all accounts Tau shouldn't even be able to see or sense them and vice versa. GW is not keeping this "fluffy"

With the current fluff. Didn't the same people who leaked the allies rules also mention how Tau fluff would be changing? Its the same situation with Necrons and their new fluff.

The piece of "information" that Griever posted is incorrect and flawed.

The fact that Tau do not have psykers does not mean "they can't see or sense Daemons".
Daemons are not like Peter Pan. You don't have to believe in them for Daemons to fly away, wearing your innards as a hat.
All the fact that Tau do not have psykers means is that it is incredibly taxing for Daemons to attempt possession of a Tau host.

The hell? I never said that, I just quoted somebody who did.

Well, whoever said it is silly!

This will ruin the game for me. I play the game BECAUSE of the Fluff. Not because of the miniatures. Not because of the rules. I've played this game since Rogue Trader days BECAUSE of the Fluff.

Now, things have changed a LOT since those days, and for the better...mostly. Slaanesh running around with Khorne, simply because the Chaos Daemons Codex says they can, is pretty stupid. They were only enemies for 20+ years. Oh look, the Necrons do have personality...ugh...

But, now we are to believe that the Ultramarines are "Battle Brothers" with the Tau...because they are resistant to Chaos? Really?

"Hey guys...sorry about those crusades, and killing thousands of your troops, and destroying hundreds of your tanks. Oh yeah, and sorry for trying to exterminate your race simply because you are...well...different...than us. But, you see, there are these REALLY bad guys that we need your help with..."

Please. It's nothing more than an amazingly bad attempt for GW to sell more miniatures. If they are so damn desperate to sell miniatures, then how about making the ENTIRE game worthwhile for EACH army. Not the flavor of the month, Not the Codex that Ward just happens to rape. Make the ENTIRE game better...

Ultramarines being buddies with the Tau is like Hitler asking England to help them against Russia...

"Um...sorry about Dunkirk, and the whole Battle of Britain thing, and the London blitz, and well, you know, killing hundreds of your people for no reason...BUT, there is this REALLY big country to our east that we picked a fight with, and um...we need your help to...um...fight them. Or, they will destroy us...."

Makes me sick.

Interesting discussion on the fluff, but should you all be more concerned with the WAAC, cherry picking, min/maxing, you'll be facing on the table instead?
Wait till you have to ignore all the fluff just to have half a chance at winning against one of those lists.
I think that's a bigger problem than Tau and Chaos.
Besides, I'm pretty certain everyone has noticed by now, that the only thing driving GW in this edition is sales.

Kanluwen wrote:Even when Chaos forces were on the planet during the 13th Black Crusade, the Traitor Guard regiments planetside were not made up of Cadians.
Cadian regiments don't turn. Maybe a few Cadians here and there will out of a regiment, but whole regiments going traitor is unheard of.

Right, I misremembered - the traitors who slaughtered the Cadian High Command were an offworld regiment; it's been some time since I read that story in the 3E 'dex.

Still, "Cadian regiments don't turn" is an assumption that strikes me as somewhat naive. Wasn't there something about many Cadians now being born with purple eyes like the Chaos-worshipping natives that were wiped out a couple millennia ago? Shouldn't be hard to come up with some fluffy concept built around this ... like a dormant "sleeper taint" that has been growing stronger and stronger with every past generation but waits for some trigger event to become active. There, Chaos Cadians!

undertow wrote:I really don't see why so many of you have your panties all bunched up about who can ally with who, and why the fluff doesn't support that. You are so worried about the fluff for your armies but when the dice hit the table, the fluff goes away. You can have GK fighting GK, or SoB fighting SoB, who cares if one of them has a couple of units from another army with them. Is that 'fluffy'? If you're that concerned about fluff, there are many games you should just walk away from, as the 'fluff' would never allow such a battle to occur.

Maybe in your games the fluff goes away. Some of us see more in 40k than a bunch of dice and stats.

I for one have never played a battle that "wouldn't have been allowed to occur". The previous editions lended themselves well to make almost anything explainable. In fact, some Codices even offered "battle narratives", showing you reasons why your army would fight this enemy or that one. Pretty cool stuff.

And like I said, I wouldn't mind if GW would simply allow everyone to ally with anyone, leaving it to the players to sort out what they think is fluffy and what not. But this "neither nor" approach just strikes me as if GW sorta tried to stick to the fluff ... but then didn't. You know what I mean? Some combinations make sense, others don't - and the cop-outs that might "excuse" some of the nonsensical combinations might just as well be applied to combinations that, under this chart, are forbidden. It's really random.

CaptainLoken wrote:This will ruin the game for me. I play the game BECAUSE of the Fluff. Not because of the miniatures. Not because of the rules. I've played this game since Rogue Trader days BECAUSE of the Fluff.

Now, things have changed a LOT since those days, and for the better...mostly. Slaanesh running around with Khorne, simply because the Chaos Daemons Codex says they can, is pretty stupid. They were only enemies for 20+ years. Oh look, the Necrons do have personality...ugh...

But, now we are to believe that the Ultramarines are "Battle Brothers" with the Tau...because they are resistant to Chaos? Really?

"Hey guys...sorry about those crusades, and killing thousands of your troops, and destroying hundreds of your tanks. Oh yeah, and sorry for trying to exterminate your race simply because you are...well...different...than us. But, you see, there are these REALLY bad guys that we need your help with..."

Please. It's nothing more than an amazingly bad attempt for GW to sell more miniatures. If they are so damn desperate to sell miniatures, then how about making the ENTIRE game worthwhile for EACH army. Not the flavor of the month, Not the Codex that Ward just happens to rape. Make the ENTIRE game better...

Ultramarines being buddies with the Tau is like Hitler asking England to help them against Russia...

"Um...sorry about Dunkirk, and the whole Battle of Britain thing, and the London blitz, and well, you know, killing hundreds of your people for no reason...BUT, there is this REALLY big country to our east that we picked a fight with, and um...we need your help to...um...fight them. Or, they will destroy us...."

Makes me sick.

/Shrug, did the invention of Apocalypse make you feel the same way?

CaptainLoken wrote:Ultramarines being buddies with the Tau is like Hitler asking England to help them against Russia...

"Um...sorry about Dunkirk, and the whole Battle of Britain thing, and the London blitz, and well, you know, killing hundreds of your people for no reason...BUT, there is this REALLY big country to our east that we picked a fight with, and um...we need your help to...um...fight them. Or, they will destroy us...."

Makes me sick.

Nice. Godwin'd.

Kanluwen wrote:

FallenAfh wrote:

Griever wrote:
Keep in mind we also accept that Tau can ally with Daemons, even though by all accounts Tau shouldn't even be able to see or sense them and vice versa. GW is not keeping this "fluffy"

With the current fluff. Didn't the same people who leaked the allies rules also mention how Tau fluff would be changing? Its the same situation with Necrons and their new fluff.

The piece of "information" that Griever posted is incorrect and flawed.

The fact that Tau do not have psykers does not mean "they can't see or sense Daemons".
Daemons are not like Peter Pan. You don't have to believe in them for Daemons to fly away, wearing your innards as a hat.
All the fact that Tau do not have psykers means is that it is incredibly taxing for Daemons to attempt possession of a Tau host.

Whyle in the physical world, daemons are so physical as any other creature, and so, tau can see and interact with them. The fact that tau are imune to the chaos taint, and that their culture dont fear things from the warp (they barely know it) can be a great excuse for this type of alliance. They are not buddys, but are not sworn enemies too.

matphat wrote:should you all be more concerned with the WAAC, cherry picking, min/maxing, you'll be facing on the table instead?

No.
More afraid of find more people that do not try to win. . .or worse don't even play anymore.

I would always rather play someone who tries to win than someone who does not, and losing a game always teaches me more than winning.
No loss.

The Dwarf Wolf wrote:The fact that tau are imune to the chaos taint, and that their culture dont fear things from the warp (they barely know it) can be a great excuse for this type of alliance. They are not buddys, but are not sworn enemies too.

That's true, a lot could be explained by sheer naivety and lack of experience. Demons can be pretty convincing, at least some of them.

A good explanation also has to take into account the type of enemy this alliance is fighting, though. Demons + Tau vs Imperium? Easy to explain. But Demons + Tau vs Eldar? Or other Tau? Hmm... might require more thought.

I just don't play people that have to win at all costs. Once the "but, it says I can in the book" BS starts to hit the table, I will simply walk away.

I'm not against playing a tough opponent. I learn from those games as well.

But, I refuse to play people that have to cheat/cheese it up to win. That type of behavior is so pathetic, that I have nothing but contempt for the players.

"But, it is just a game!"

Really? Then why do you have to cheat in order to play?

"It's not cheating! It's in the rules!"

Right...

pretre wrote:

CaptainLoken wrote:Ultramarines being buddies with the Tau is like Hitler asking England to help them against Russia...

"Um...sorry about Dunkirk, and the whole Battle of Britain thing, and the London blitz, and well, you know, killing hundreds of your people for no reason...BUT, there is this REALLY big country to our east that we picked a fight with, and um...we need your help to...um...fight them. Or, they will destroy us...."

Makes me sick.

Nice. Godwin'd.

Not if you take in account the fluff advances as proposed a whyle ago. If ultramarines primarch wake up and say "the emperor told us to protect those guys my comrades", it is not to much to think that half the space marines chapters in the galaxy would follow him. Dont forget the way Ultramarines and sucessors are described in fluff, they are blind followers of the codex astartes, and will surellly blindly follow the author of the codex...

It also makes a lot of sense, GW is trying to change the mood of the scenario, it is not grim dark anymore, but grim epic, those big changes in the scenario would bring that felling...

CaptainLoken wrote:This will ruin the game for me. I play the game BECAUSE of the Fluff. Not because of the miniatures. Not because of the rules. I've played this game since Rogue Trader days BECAUSE of the Fluff.

If you've been playing since Rogue Trader, you've already endured bigger changes in the background than we're liable to see this time around...

IronNerd wrote:I may have fallen behind a little bit... Outside of the current discussion about DE being boned for power weapon selections, has anyone else talked about how much they want to kick the developers for changing the stats on PWs? An axe is different from a maul is different from a sword? Seriously? So now my CSM termies, who I just assembled with bits from the box, have mauls and axes and no swords, and have silly, seemingly random attributes? Bleh...

I remember all the complaints from back when they originally rolled them all into the generic 'power weapon'...

With the allies rule, GW have effectively given us the tools to paper over an armies cracks ourselves, which might shift expectations as a whole for new books.

"Hey Tau guys! We couldn't think of any CC units for your new book other than vespid, and they just don't sell! Just take Terminators!"

You can justify anything happening in your own games, though. It'd be really annoying to play someone who kept saying "Tau and Orks? After what happened in some-piece-of-BL-trash?! PAH!"

Finally managed to include the official tank rules preview video, the ally table, the BOLS summary, rattman's Q&A, reddit's second Q&A session and the play test expierience by the same source into the first post. Took me a while and kept me from painting my second Malifaux and first Infinity team

CaptainLoken wrote:Ultramarines being buddies with the Tau is like Hitler asking England to help them against Russia...

"Um...sorry about Dunkirk, and the whole Battle of Britain thing, and the London blitz, and well, you know, killing hundreds of your people for no reason...BUT, there is this REALLY big country to our east that we picked a fight with, and um...we need your help to...um...fight them. Or, they will destroy us...."

Makes me sick.

Did you know that 3rd Reich generals (after Hitler's suicide) offered the Western Allies to ally against Russia ... and Patton supported that?

Davylove21 wrote:"Hey Tau guys! We couldn't think of any CC units for your new book other than vespid, and they just don't sell! Just take Terminators!"

That's simple: Take catgirls in school uniforms with katanas, fit's perfectly and will sell like hot cakes

CaptainLoken wrote:
"It's not cheating! It's in the rules!"

Right...

"There's no law against thinking, copper!"

Right...

You must walk away from a lot of games

insaniak wrote:

IronNerd wrote:I may have fallen behind a little bit... Outside of the current discussion about DE being boned for power weapon selections, has anyone else talked about how much they want to kick the developers for changing the stats on PWs? An axe is different from a maul is different from a sword? Seriously? So now my CSM termies, who I just assembled with bits from the box, have mauls and axes and no swords, and have silly, seemingly random attributes? Bleh...

I remember all the complaints from back when they originally rolled them all into the generic 'power weapon'...

But i agree with him, in a game like this, not making the PW generic is asking for trouble... Atributes in 40k increase exponentially, someone with S4 have double the strenght of someone with S3, so, al axe who give you +2S i likely to tripple your srenght.

Anyway, you can just tell your opponent "those guys all have regular PWs ok". Or, do like GW want, and buy a new unit...

For those afraid about Dark Eldar and weapons with I1, fantasy have introduced a rule to equilibrate it: always strike first. If eldars, or some eldar units, get it they will have big uses for big weapons...

Maige wrote:Still buttmad about DE CCW.

But I think I'm slowly coming to peace with 6th, I'll have my mind made up when the Erratas are done.

If they don't fix the Klaives/Agonizers/Huskblade then I'm going full Exodite mode: Min-Maxed Eldar+Dark Eldar, I'll become the worst TFG of all time.

I'll exploit psychic powers, spam rangers, darklight, dragons, splinters....whatever it takes.

I'll completely disregard the fluff. Buy what ever beasties I want from WHFB or even LOTR and make them count as Wraiths/Grotesques/Pain Engines/Beastmasters/Avatars whatever I feel like.

Ents and Dryads everywhere with laz0rs attached to their arms, making lore nerds cry.

It'll be like Wood Elves.........in space.

Hehe, you post really made me laugh. I really don't hope that it will have to go that far

The main two things that matter to me in a 40K game is that the background within each army is alright and that the game is somewhat balanced.
I play in a private gaming club, and we pretty much modifiy the GW rulesets as we please to better balance the different armies we play (we almost have one of each army, and they all have a fighting chance.), and then just publish the updated rules on our forum. The only thing that GW could do better for us here is that if they could write bettter rules, we would save a lot of time and effort balancing them ourselves.

Fluff reasons for armies fighting each other are not so hard to come up with in a universe as grimdark as 40K, so that does not tend to be an issue at all.
I could always make something up like my IG army has been tainted by a Daemonic influence by laying eyes on them and therefore they have to be purged by the GK. They of course don't want to die so they fight back with all they have - easy!

What is actually harder to come up with are reasons for the different armies outside the obvious Imperium alliances to not kill each other on sight. You have to take further leaps in logic and bend the fluff even more for armies like Necrons and IG not "just" to fight the moment they are ready. That is why I both like the allies system, as it allows for more fluffy armies, and look at it with great care, as it can completely feth up both fluff and game balance.

Lynata wrote:

The Dwarf Wolf wrote:The fact that tau are imune to the chaos taint, and that their culture dont fear things from the warp (they barely know it) can be a great excuse for this type of alliance. They are not buddys, but are not sworn enemies too.

That's true, a lot could be explained by sheer naivety and lack of experience. Demons can be pretty convincing, at least some of them.

A good explanation also has to take into account the type of enemy this alliance is fighting, though. Demons + Tau vs Imperium? Easy to explain. But Demons + Tau vs Eldar? Or other Tau? Hmm... might require more thought.

Have people forgotten Farsight? He has a separatist empire from the Tau. . . could a Daemon not entice him with power to kill off all the orks?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bonde wrote:

Maige wrote:Still buttmad about DE CCW.

But I think I'm slowly coming to peace with 6th, I'll have my mind made up when the Erratas are done.

If they don't fix the Klaives/Agonizers/Huskblade then I'm going full Exodite mode: Min-Maxed Eldar+Dark Eldar, I'll become the worst TFG of all time.

I'll exploit psychic powers, spam rangers, darklight, dragons, splinters....whatever it takes.

I'll completely disregard the fluff. Buy what ever beasties I want from WHFB or even LOTR and make them count as Wraiths/Grotesques/Pain Engines/Beastmasters/Avatars whatever I feel like.

Ents and Dryads everywhere with laz0rs attached to their arms, making lore nerds cry.

It'll be like Wood Elves.........in space.

Hehe, you post really made me laugh. I really don't hope that it will have to go that far

The main two things that matter to me in a 40K game is that the background within each army is alright and that the game is somewhat balanced.
I play in a private gaming club, and we pretty much modifiy the GW rulesets as we please to better balance the different armies we play (we almost have one of each army, and they all have a fighting chance.), and then just publish the updated rules on our forum. The only thing that GW could do better for us here is that if they could write bettter rules, we would save a lot of time and effort balancing them ourselves.

Fluff reasons for armies fighting each other are not so hard to come up with in a universe as grimdark as 40K, so that does not tend to be an issue at all.
I could always make something up like my IG army has been tainted by a Daemonic influence by laying eyes on them and therefore they have to be purged by the GK. They of course don't want to die so they fight back with all they have - easy!

What is actually harder to come up with are reasons for the different armies outside the obvious Imperium alliances to not kill each other on sight. You have to take further leaps in logic and bend the fluff even more for armies like Necrons and IG not "just" to fight the moment they are ready. That is why I both like the allies system, as it allows for more fluffy armies, and look at it with great care, as it can completely feth up both fluff and game balance.

Sadly we wish that we all wish that we could have a gaming group that sounds that mature.

Kanluwen wrote:Daemons are not like Peter Pan.

Epic.