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.

I think for fluff reasons, just like Black Templars chapter tactics excludes them from fielding non-allied Librarians, White Scars should not be allowed to field Dreadnoughts or Venerable Dreadnoughts.

To make things fair for them again (since the loss of these two units is quite a restriction), I think their Jink should be reverted to the old 6th edition one (5+ constant and normal shooting).

What do you think?

As far as I understand, Black Templars never field Librarians, while White Scars rarely field Dreadnoughts, unless things have been ret-conned? One is a doctrine, the other is a preference, so I think they should still get them.

On the exchange, I think it's probably a bit too good: the structure of minor limitation for substantial bonuses harkens back to the old 3.5 IG codex IMHO- as much as it's conceptually sound, you're potentially getting army-wide bonuses for removing an option you didn't particularly care about to begin with.

I've never seen a White Scars list include a Dreadnought. Centurions fill out the heavy weapons role if they have to. White Scars are a fast army, Dreadnoughts aren't fast and can't just hop in a Land Raider like Terminators and Centurions.

You're suggesting a buff without them losing anything. White Scars just shouldn't be able to take Dreadnoughts. No buffs or compensation, they're already good enough.

As for fluff, White Scars never field Dreadnoughts, because interring their body would be a disgrace. It might as well be a doctrine.

So remove 2 units you would not use anyway and get an army wide buff for free?

How about this, dark talons are.crap and are very rare in the dark angels, so if I remove them.to balance throngs out my ravenwing all get a 5+ cover as standard.

Doney work

Okay then, lets remove the buff and have the suggested rule just be that they cant field Dreads.

As long as this doesnt upset heaps of WS players, I'm thankful for more fluff making it into the 40k ruleset

I also have never seen a WS list with a Dreadnought, they either don't fit the playstyle or the player sticks to the fluff. I really don't think it's an issue to be honest.

The other thing is that WS successor chapters do use Dreads, so to introduce a standard for the WS would potentially hurt successor players.

Really, I think we can rely on player integrity here, and it's also not entirely unheard of. Hell, GW themselves did it in a batrep once.

What about biker-Dreadnoughts?

But how will I forge my narrative without fielding WS dreadnoughts

most WS players dont use them because there are better options in the SM codex for what they give, adding the rule would be interesting fluff wise but GW likes to sell models (like dreadnoughts) so I wouldn't hold your breath.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
What about biker-Dreadnoughts?

no.

Just because they don't tend to use them or they're a rarity doesn't mean that they should be denied of using them at all. Many players don't take them anyway.

Also, Dark Hunters use Dreadnoughts and stopping WS from using Dreadnoughts would also impede WS Successors, which isn't really fair.

What is this weird assumption that WS don't use dreads? They do use them.

 Ashiraya wrote:
What is this weird assumption that WS don't use dreads? They do use them.

In Battle of the Fang it says that it is a rarity for a White Scar to be entombed within a Dreadnought, and that Dreadnoughts were an extreme rarity for White Scars.

 BrotherOfBone wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
What is this weird assumption that WS don't use dreads? They do use them.

In Battle of the Fang it says that it is a rarity for a White Scar to be entombed within a Dreadnought, and that Dreadnoughts were an extreme rarity for White Scars.

I fail to see how this is relevant. Rare or not, they exist. One was even in a GW battle report not too long ago.

So.... what do White Scars do with their fallen heroes whose bodies have been broken in combat but their minds and centuries of experience at warfare is intact?


"Well, Brother Osun-Khan. You have served among us with distinction for over three hundred years, and you possess a wealth of knowledge and experience that is the envy of any Space Marine Yet... here you lie, your body in shambles, never to walk again. Your wisdom would be a boon to our Soldiers on the battlefield, but alas you know of our Chapter's sentiments toward the Dreadnought chassis. And so, may the Emperor bless you."

Brother Soloman averts his gaze and presses down with the Pillow of Mercy. His mind wanders to a happier place.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
So.... what do White Scars do with their fallen heroes whose bodies have been broken in combat but their minds and centuries of experience at warfare is intact?

They put them into Dreadnoughts.

Apparently not. Apparently my edit is more fluffy.

"Dreadnoughts are not employed by the White Scars, as the cold, metal sarcophagi of these mighty constructions evokes a horror of the eternal confinement that goes againist the White Scars' philosophy that when a warrior dies, his soul should be free to travel to the afterlife." - Index Astartes: The White Scars

I also belief some of the old chapter approved rules forbid White Scars from using them, but GW is known to recont their own fluff.

 Whereswaldo wrote:
"Dreadnoughts are not employed by the White Scars, as the cold, metal sarcophagi of these mighty constructions evokes a horror of the eternal confinement that goes againist the White Scars' philosophy that when a warrior dies, his soul should be free to travel to the afterlife." - Index Astartes: The White Scars

I also belief some of the old chapter approved rules forbid White Scars from using them, but GW is known to recont their own fluff.

Index Astartes is old. It hardly overrides a WD that is what, two years old?

implying WD armylists should, in any way, be taken as a reference for fluff

WS do not use Dreadnoughts, it's written everywhere just because some BL and WD writers get it wrong doesn't mean that they magically have them now, in fact I kinda like the idea that they don't use Dreadnoughts and I do think they shouldn't be allowed them. What should they get in it's place? Maybe the Javelin Attack Speeder? I'm not sure.

Maybe they should get nothing in exchange.

Why should a faction be rewarded for being stupid and denying itself useful tools? If the White Scars don't use Dreadnoughts then they're a weaker chapter for it.

 Sir Arun wrote:
implying WD armylists should, in any way, be taken as a reference for fluff

When the battle report had short stories following it then yes, it's as canon as anything else.

TBH Dreadnoughts are meh to begin with, so I doubt they will be missed.

Only real good dreadnought combo right now is either a venerable one with MM, arm and HF inside a pod or an ironclad in a pod.

 Sir Arun wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
What about biker-Dreadnoughts?

no.

Spoiler:

It was a joke. However, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw the like, if the White Scars ever got their own Codex for some reason. Especially considering that these are the guys who can modify Land Speeders to be able to take down Reaver Titans with the power of their moustaches. The best part is that the Reaver only destroyed one of these extremely fast craft by falling on it.

Salamanders shouldn't be allowed Landspeeders and Assault Marines!

Iron Hands shouldn't be allowed to field squads of Terminators!

Black Templar shouldn't get Thunderfire Cannons or Devastator Squads!

Crimson Fists shouldn't be allowed to take a large number (if any) vehicles!

White Scars, as it states in the Codex, rarely field Dreadnoughts. But rarely doesn't mean never; there could be a brother who was simply to valuable to lose at the time, or one who agreed to sacrifice himself and be placed into a Dreadnought.

Craftworld Ulthwe should not be allowed to take multiple units of Aspect Warriors, but instead should be able to take more Warlocks.

As it is, only the detachment that has your Warlord cvan currently take Warlocks.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Whereswaldo wrote:
"Dreadnoughts are not employed by the White Scars, as the cold, metal sarcophagi of these mighty constructions evokes a horror of the eternal confinement that goes againist the White Scars' philosophy that when a warrior dies, his soul should be free to travel to the afterlife." - Index Astartes: The White Scars

I also belief some of the old chapter approved rules forbid White Scars from using them, but GW is known to recont their own fluff.

Index Astartes is old. It hardly overrides a WD that is what, two years old?

I'm pretty sure that WD was for the 5th edition Sm codex's release, bit older than two years

 Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Whereswaldo wrote:
"Dreadnoughts are not employed by the White Scars, as the cold, metal sarcophagi of these mighty constructions evokes a horror of the eternal confinement that goes againist the White Scars' philosophy that when a warrior dies, his soul should be free to travel to the afterlife." - Index Astartes: The White Scars

I also belief some of the old chapter approved rules forbid White Scars from using them, but GW is known to recont their own fluff.

Index Astartes is old. It hardly overrides a WD that is what, two years old?

I'm pretty sure that WD was for the 5th edition Sm codex's release, bit older than two years

I'll go check, just one moment.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's in White Dwarf 390, June 2012. Almost exactly two years old. Check page 41. The Dreadnought has his own fluff section, explaining that many White Scars dislike the idea of being in a Dreadnought, but that they do exist.

Cool idea, but why stop there?
We can edit the FoCs and available units for all SM Chapters / CSM Legions / Ork Clans / Nid Hivefleets / Necron Dynasties / Tau Cadres / Eldar Craftworlds / DE Kabals / Guard Regiments. I, personally, would love it. But sadly it wouldn't make the game simpler for many. It could also force people to shy away from their chapter of choice not because they don't like their lore but because their allowed unit set happens to be not so good on the tabletop.

E.G.

Let's assume an Alpha Legion Warband. They are not the greatest of Chaos-ophiles. Therefore let us not give them Daemon Engines, Daemon Princes or Daemon allies.
Also they do not have the Champion of Chaos rule on their characters. Cannot field any Daemon-related unit at all. No Oblits, no Spawns or Possessed either.
What they are left with is essentially an outdated Loyalist marine armory.

With cultists.

Thematic? Yes. Playable? Perhaps. Competitive? Not likely.
I agree they do not have to be, and in the original thought the WS don't even use the Dreads and are perfectly competitive. But once it becomes a precedent, it will ultimately make the game more difficult for the majority.

Back in the 4th edition codex, there was a lot of this sort of swapping/restricting thing going on. It made for some fluffy lists, but was also easy to exploit. Trade away something you don’t want to make the stuff you do want better. Not the best idea. Most fluffy WS players shouldn't ever field a dread, but if they wan’t to, I’d like to hear the story. And that’s not counting successor chapters, who might have reasons to inter their vets that override the traditions of their parent chapter.

It’s not like the Scars are weak right now anyway.