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.

Yeah, it is a pretty odd name for a special character, it does seem quite generic by GW standards with the NounVerb names they tend to give out.

 techsoldaten wrote:

3) Page number is 88. That means, minus datasheets, GW would have to write about 50 pages of fluff. They've been averaging about 30 pages of fluff in recent Codexes.

4) They dropped Exalted Possessed. Why would they bring that designation back for Eightbound?

Apparently the Daemons book has Crusade rules in between datasheets & points values, this could be the same. Other general rules for the faction like strats, relics, ugrades, etc could be another 20+ pages before the datasheets leaving around 30 pages of fluff.

Exalted possessed were dropped because the new kit was the same size as them and very similarly designed. The "exalted" title only existed while the very old possessed models were still around with a noticeably different scale.

It's not clear yet if WE will get two different possessed kits, or one dual kit with options to visually differentiate the two unit entries. But it's pretty certain they won't look exactly the same.

 blood reaper wrote:
I'd not realised Lord Invocatus was a named character - which I put down to the fact GW now seems to give names to generic characters (i.e., the mounted Warpsmith/Discolord has a specific name, despite being a generic character).

What's odd there is that the model's box has a name attached, but the codex datasheet entry is totally generic. I wonder if they originally planned to have both named & generic versions of the same model then dropped one after the packaging went to print.

Perhaps Lord Invocatus / juggerlord has more distinct options in the kit to differentiate the two units.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
The Death Guard Chaos Lord model is the regular Chaos Lord model

That'd be great; if the Death Guard Lord could take a Thunder Hammer...

One thing I will say - I am beyond happy that WE still have terminators.

warl0rdb0b wrote:
Yeah, it is a pretty odd name for a special character, it does seem quite generic by GW standards with the NounVerb names they tend to give out.

Especially since it sounds like "invoke" which to me seems like what a sorcerer or wizard would do. Not a Khorne lord

So if that unit list is genuine I've probably lost access to half or more of my WE army.

How viable is it to ally in a CSM detachment to contain the bikes, havocs, raptors etc? How well does the new CSM codex ally with DG / TS? What do you lose?

4) They dropped Exalted Possessed. Why would they bring that designation back for Eightbound?

Not going to lie, the idea that the CSM codex writers and the WE codex writers didn't talk to each other and aren't on the same page makes it more believable to me, not less

Voss wrote:

4) They dropped Exalted Possessed. Why would they bring that designation back for Eightbound?

Not going to lie, the idea that the CSM codex writers and the WE codex writers didn't talk to each other and aren't on the same page makes it more believable to me, not less

It's probably nitpicking by me but we didn't have "Exalted Possessed". They were called "Greater Possessed". So strapping Greater Possessed in no way prevents them from introducing "Exalted whatever" in another Chaos Codex.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
The Death Guard Chaos Lord model is the regular Chaos Lord model

That'd be great; if the Death Guard Lord could take a Thunder Hammer...

It is odd that the thunder hammer option was dropped. But overall, the profile for the Lord is the same as the 8th edition CSM profile, minus the hammer and with the addition of the balesword, which I don't think necessitates a new model.


One thing about all of these WE rumors is that I don't think we've actually heard anything about Mutilators specifically, only seen some concept art that looks like them. If that art is indeed for the so-called Eightbound or Exalted Possessed, then maybe that means that Mutilators will be coming back to CSM at some time and won't be locked to WE only.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
The Death Guard Chaos Lord model is the regular Chaos Lord model

That'd be great; if the Death Guard Lord could take a Thunder Hammer...

It is odd that the thunder hammer option was dropped. But overall, the profile for the Lord is the same as the 8th edition CSM profile, minus the hammer and with the addition of the balesword, which I don't think necessitates a new model.


One thing about all of these WE rumors is that I don't think we've actually heard anything about Mutilators specifically, only seen some concept art that looks like them. If that art is indeed for the so-called Eightbound or Exalted Possessed, then maybe that means that Mutilators will be coming back to CSM at some time and won't be locked to WE only.

The death guard chaos lord is exactly the right example of the problem, a new player cannot walk in to a shop and buy a "death guard chaos lord". The only option they have is to convert which, as we know GW aren't big on pushing for people in store. So the only option is create a new sculpt or drop the entry. Somehow that got past DG, although the sorcerer conveniently has gone because the plaguecaster exists.

The same is true the other way, I can't imagine GW deciding that pushing WE iconography covered khorne models as generic mutilators is likely to happen.

Well the option of leaving it there and letting players convert worked for decades, even for units which had no model at all. It was only after chapterhouse that GW changed that policy, during a period where they did not do market research. It never had anything to do with what we wanted.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Votaan? Certainly.

World Eaters? I wouldn't be so sure. It's not like DG or 1KSons have received massive expansions since their fist books.

You could argue that the Tzaangors were the "expansion" for 1KSons, but I doubt many actual 1KSons players would be too keen on that idea.

I agree that Votann will almost assuredly get a large second drop sometime in 10th.

It is probably true and I am a bit sad that WE will likely not get a second wave any time. The optimist in me though says that GW has been putting out a lot of kits this edition, and I'm hoping the more neglected armies this round get something in 10th. DG is probably okay, but Tsons are really due to have a large unique range expansion. I'd like to think that the Ark of Omens could throw a kit or two out there, similar to what we saw in some of PA as well, but it wouldn't be for WE.

 Sasori wrote:
I'd like to think that the Ark of Omens could throw a kit or two out there, similar to what we saw in some of PA as well, but it wouldn't be for WE.

GW have said that AoO will not have any new rules for armies, focusing more on missions and stuff.

However, a murdo-hobo Khornate squad for Kill Team would be neat.

 Marshal Loss wrote:
This is now doing the rounds: apply salt as required

Are there ANY codices where units of a same battlefield role are separated, the way this suggests Angron and the Lord of Skulls are? I know Magnus is at the back of the Thousand Sons codex, and the Silent King is at the back with the other Lords of War for the Necrons.

I'm inclined to call BS.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
This is now doing the rounds: apply salt as required

Are there ANY codices where units of a same battlefield role are separated, the way this suggests Angron and the Lord of Skulls are? I know Magnus is at the back of the Thousand Sons codex, and the Silent King is at the back with the other Lords of War for the Necrons.

I'm inclined to call BS.

Formatting and layout changes have occurred during an edition before. I understand the daemons codex was the first to move the crusade section outside the main rules and it may well happen for others too. Most people would expect the leader of a faction to be the first datasheet listed, so that could be another change in convention. People here are always saying GW are consistent about being inconsistent

The key thing here is that while some of the other details don't exactly match, this page has nailed the unannounced unit names & wargear options known by several playtesters. It has almost definitely come from a source with inside info. To me it's either the final print version of the book or an alternative playtesting document / work in progress file.

Something about that page just strikes me as fake. At least I hope it is.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
I'd like to think that the Ark of Omens could throw a kit or two out there, similar to what we saw in some of PA as well, but it wouldn't be for WE.

GW have said that AoO will not have any new rules for armies, focusing more on missions and stuff.

However, a murdo-hobo Khornate squad for Kill Team would be neat.

They won't be in the books yes, but that doesn't mean that models tied in narratively with Ark of Omens books don't get their rules released elsewhere. Guessing in the App or online.

We already know the Arkifane is going to have a model and rules and is a huge narrative piece of the series. Stands to reason we'll see models released in a similar fashion, just not sure of how they are going to deliver the rules. My main point was that WE will be too new to actually get anything that would be released this series.

 Sasori wrote:

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
I'd like to think that the Ark of Omens could throw a kit or two out there, similar to what we saw in some of PA as well, but it wouldn't be for WE.

GW have said that AoO will not have any new rules for armies, focusing more on missions and stuff.

However, a murdo-hobo Khornate squad for Kill Team would be neat.

They won't be in the books yes, but that doesn't mean that models tied in narratively with Ark of Omens books don't get their rules released elsewhere. Guessing in the App or online.

We already know the Arkifane is going to have a model and rules and is a huge narrative piece of the series. Stands to reason we'll see models released in a similar fashion, just not sure of how they are going to deliver the rules. My main point was that WE will be too new to actually get anything that would be released this series.

AOS Slaanesh got two new heroes in one kit in campaign book mere months after battletome came out. I remember slaanesh players being "bit" miffed about that

Someone else probably mentioned in, but if Terminator Lords can't be used in World Eaters, then that means that the Warhammer+ World Eaters model can't be used in an actual WE army. I guess Azrakh got kicked out of the Legion.

Or they'll allow Terminator Lords, but they can only have Combi-Bolters and Chainfists.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
Someone else probably mentioned in, but if Terminator Lords can't be used in World Eaters, then that means that the Warhammer+ World Eaters model can't be used in an actual WE army. I guess Azrakh got kicked out of the Legion.

Given his limited release method, I'd expect legends rules for him

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Or they'll allow Terminator Lords, but they can only have Combi-Bolters and Chainfists.

After a month or so with a disappointing Errata PDF just like with the CSM main codex!

Does the current Chaos Marine codex cover a Terminator Lord with combi bolter and chainfist? As long as World Eaters remain a supplement to that, I suppose there's no rush for GW to put out a rules PDF.

But yeah, Legends and way too late is probably what's going to happen, unless GW straight up doesn't provide rules. Remember that Novitiates got their PDF rules right away and Traitor Guard did not. The Khorne Lord is a Chaos model, so we know what to expect...

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
Someone else probably mentioned in, but if Terminator Lords can't be used in World Eaters, then that means that the Warhammer+ World Eaters model can't be used in an actual WE army. I guess Azrakh got kicked out of the Legion.

You wouldn't be able to use him as a Terminator Lord if the above is true, but there's nothing stopping you from using him as a Terminator Champion for a unit of Terminators.

In the yarrick post on the warcom site, you can barely make out one of the Khorne possessed in the upper right corner

 GaroRobe wrote:
In the yarrick post on the warcom site, you can barely make out one of the Khorne possessed in the upper right corner

That's the new Daemon Prince model.

Just a casual pic of Angron, hopefully that means they're preparing to showoff more on Friday night.

 Marshal Loss wrote:
That's the new Daemon Prince model.

Sadly, yes. Axe, trophy racks (or SM backpack) and left arm gun, I believe.

Leaks are now proven to be 100% accurate in terms of what's in the codex. Points are up for debate.

Here's hoping the Eightbound or the Jahkals move faster than six inches.