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.

Okay, just a tad confused about un-bound armies.
1. Is this now the normal state of 40k? As in, is a 'normal' game unbound or is it a special mode like escalation or killteam?
2. Also, if your codex says you need 1 HQ and 2 Troops, can you just ignore it?
3. Are FOC's completely out the window from now on?

I just asked a similar question in YMDC. Let me see if I can delete my thread, I'd rather not spam threads.

It's up to you and your opponent to decide before-hand to agree to use or not use unbound armies.

The rules state both players must use the same method. Decide before playing and before creating your lists.

Thread should probably be in YMDC, not General.

1. It is an optional way to build an army. You don't need opponents permission to use it.
2. Pretty much. There are a few restrictions on Unbound, but the FOC is completely thrown out.
3. If you want. Tournaments might rule no Unbound, but in general you can use it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rorschach9 wrote:
It's up to you and your opponent to decide before-hand to agree to use or not use unbound armies.

The rules state both players must use the same method. Decide before playing and before creating your lists.

Actually the rules are quite clear. You can use either method, and so can your opponent.

I wanted to run 3 HQ's in my 1800pt army. This is now okay, and if so, would it be Battleforged?

Theres two methods of building an army, battle-forged and unbound.

Battle-forged is pretty much the traditional style. You get better troops and can re-roll your warlord trait (lol). You can also take unlimited force org charts as long as you fit HQ + 2 Troops for them.

Unbound you take whatever the feth you want.

In theory, the two styles should be able to play each other. In practice, Unbound is disliked by a lot of players at the moment, and you could expect to get "battleforged only" requirements against a lot of players.

Edit:

It is an optional way to build an army. You don't need opponents permission to use it.

You dont need permission to run it in the same way you dont need permission to take a Lord of War in a vanilla game.

I wanted to run 3 HQ's in my 1800pt army. This is now okay, and if so, would it be Battleforged?

Take two detachments. HQ + 2 Troops + whatever and HQ + 2 troops for that third HQ.

 Lobomalo wrote:
I wanted to run 3 HQ's in my 1800pt army. This is now okay, and if so, would it be Battleforged?

Depends on the army.

If running Space Wolves, Inquisition or Daemon Heralds it is possibly legal. For pretty much everything else you would need 4-18 Troops.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Lobomalo wrote:
I wanted to run 3 HQ's in my 1800pt army. This is now okay, and if so, would it be Battleforged?

Depends on the army.

If running Space Wolves, Inquisition or Daemon Heralds it is possibly legal. For pretty much everything else you would need 4-18 Troops.

My friend wants to run 3 Librarians on Bikes and I want to run 3 flying Hive Tyrants

To keep it Battleforged, you would each need 4 Troop choices at a minimum, meaning you would have a Detachment of 2 HQ, 2 Troops (plus anything else), and a second Detachment of 1 HQ and 2 Troops (plus anything else).

 Happyjew wrote:
To keep it Battleforged, you would each need 4 Troop choices at a minimum, meaning you would have a Detachment of 2 HQ, 2 Troops (plus anything else), and a second Detachment of 1 HQ and 2 Troops (plus anything else).

I see. These detachments, they can deploy at the same time correct?

 Happyjew wrote:
Thread should probably be in YMDC, not General.

1. It is an optional way to build an army. You don't need opponents permission to use it.
2. Pretty much. There are a few restrictions on Unbound, but the FOC is completely thrown out.
3. If you want. Tournaments might rule no Unbound, but in general you can use it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rorschach9 wrote:
It's up to you and your opponent to decide before-hand to agree to use or not use unbound armies.

The rules state both players must use the same method. Decide before playing and before creating your lists.

Actually the rules are quite clear. You can use either method, and so can your opponent.

Bah, you are correct. A bit of dyslexia going on at my end it seems. I kept reading "both armies need to use the same method" instead of "need NOT use the same method" .. Moar Coffee!!

Im confused about this as well. Can i take several FOC without it becoming unbound, ie letting me reroll warlord traits and getting better troops?

So i take 2 HQ, 4 Troops and 6 Heavy Supports which gives me two lots of 1 HQ, 2 Troop and 3 Heavy Support. On its own i know its unbound but can i effectively double up on that without it being unbound.

We usually play no unbound and i want to include more Heavy Support for my nids lol

 Dakkamite wrote:
In practice, Unbound is disliked by a lot of players at the moment, and you could expect to get "battleforged only" requirements against a lot of players.

I think a lot of people wouldn't be so much against Unbound armies if it was a bit better structured. Honestly, fighting against a full Space Marine Tank Company doesn't seem so bad, but playing against an army composed of Riptides supported by Heldrakes... ugh, no thanks! It's the complete free-for-all that I think people don't like. Beyond the obvious imbalances, it's so obviously a careless cash-grab by GW that peeps are just viscerally rejecting the whole thing altogether.

 Lobomalo wrote:


My friend wants to run 3 Librarians on Bikes and I want to run 3 flying Hive Tyrants

So... just do it. If it's you vs your friend you don't need a special rule telling you that you can take 3 HQs, just decide between you.

Unbound: no "FOC" to follow. Include what you want, barring codex restrictions, up to the points limit. Rules such as "unique" still apply

Bound; You have to use detachments, such as the two CAD or Allies listed in the BRB, or special ones such as Imperial Knights or Inquisition. You must follow the detachment rules, and as a result gain adiditonal bonuses based on what detachment you pick as your primary - for example not EVERY detachment lets you reroll warlord trait, or gives you Objective Securred, suchas Imperial Knights.

1 HQ 2 Troop 3 Heavy support is a legal CAD layout, so can be bound if all from same faction. 2 of them would still be bound, etc.

You can also use chapter tactics as Allies, so you could have 3 bikers with 1 being in an Ally detachment, as long as it has different chapter tactics. This would allow you to take more HQ without neeifdng more than 3 troops, but obviously then restricts how many HS etc you can have.

Actually you don't even need to stick within a single codex to make unbound lists.

My view. It's optional. Reasons...

1.) First bolded line on pg 116. "Players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models it hey can use." This flat out states that if you must agree. If you don't....no game. Simple. Don't want to play unbound? Find another player. Battle forged is unarguably the most popular and appears the game was meant to play that way. So it's easier to get a game if not using unbound.

2.) Less info for unbound. While the rest of the book describes how to functionally use battle forged. Including codex entry's like troops and heavy support. Irrelevant to unbound in most ways.

3.) most tournaments have already shunned unbound. Just another indicator.

I am a realist. Most opponents and clubs do not use this as standard. As far as actual games in most places go it must be via permission. Same with superheavys yet they are obviously, cut and dry legal. RAW you might be able to force it on someone by using poorly backed up semantics and grasp of language but anyone with a backbone that does not want to face it simply won't.

Personally I'm all for it and would love to face some. Not 7 rip tides mind you but some cool lists are possible via unbound, and I always welcome a challenge if it's insane to try. Would make for some cool all unbound tournaments as well. But the reality is if a power gamer wants to force it on another...you have both precedent and reasons beyond your an asshat to refuse the game politely. If it's a cool list with a killer Theme don't refuse that game because your stubborn about unbound. Agree to use battle forged vs unbound like the rules say and have a good game. Can be cool but in short optional in reality.