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.

So with the new Deathwatch: Overkill specialist game releasing next week, SM and 'Nid players are getting some seriously awesome models to use, and WD has rules for using them in 40k! My question is, would you allow someone to use them in existing formations/detachments (Gladius Strike Force, Librarius Conclave, etc.)? Specifically, I would like to use Jensus Natorian as part of a Librarius Conclave and Ortan Cassius (basically a slightly tone-down version of Chaplain Cassius) as the Chaplain of a Battle Demi Company. I've been working on Blood Ravens for a while, so to finally see an official Ravens mini is pretty awesome! The only real issue I see is that none of the new minis have Chapter Tactics.

Obviously, this one won't have a RAW answer. I plan to talk to my gaming group about this today, and I was just wondering what the general consensus in the forum would be.

Yes to the IC, though I think the rest are a bit more iffy. Probably can't take the squad in anything, and IDK about the WS, RG, BA and Sallie. But yeah, no, I got no problem with the blood raven being in the Conclave and Cassius being in a demi-company! Could actually make for a cool retelling of the battles with Hive Fleet Behemoth, tbh.

(Note this poll shows why internet polls are a horrible method to make rulings about rules in 40k)

Obviously, this one won't have a RAW answer

No there is and it is dead simple: You can't.
You can't put a mode into a formation unless the formation allows you to do it* and currently there are none who allow you to add deathwatch marines.
Lets take your example to show why it doesn't work.

Specifically, I would like to use Jensus Natorian as part of a Librarius Conclave and Ortan Cassius (basically a slightly tone-down version of Chaplain Cassius) as the Chaplain of a Battle Demi Company.

Jensus Natorian is a character with the name "Jensus Natorian" form the Deathwatch faction. The libraius conclave allows things named "librarian" and "Tiggi" from the Space marines faction. nothing else. not a Blood angels librarian not even a named FW space marine librarian and definitely not Jensus Natorian that has the wrong name and the wrong faction.
So how do you know to what faction belongs your model ? by looking at the top of the page. There is a symol there. That symbol isn't decorative it shows the faction of the model. This one for example shows the symbol for the deathwatch faction not the Space marine faction symbol.


You can still use the model as a count as librarian of the correct faction.

*Some models have strange rules that allow you to sneak it into any detachments, such as IG priest one could argue that those can also be included. But all dataslates of Deathwatch we have seen jet don't have this exception.

 EnTyme wrote:
So with the new Deathwatch: Overkill specialist game releasing next week, SM and 'Nid players are getting some seriously awesome models to use, and WD has rules for using them in 40k! My question is, would you allow someone to use them in existing formations/detachments (Gladius Strike Force, Librarius Conclave, etc.)? Specifically, I would like to use Jensus Natorian as part of a Librarius Conclave and Ortan Cassius (basically a slightly tone-down version of Chaplain Cassius) as the Chaplain of a Battle Demi Company. I've been working on Blood Ravens for a while, so to finally see an official Ravens mini is pretty awesome! The only real issue I see is that none of the new minis have Chapter Tactics.

Obviously, this one won't have a RAW answer. I plan to talk to my gaming group about this today, and I was just wondering what the general consensus in the forum would be.

This has a very straightforward answer. All of the new Datasheets and the Formation have the Deathwatch Faction. Do any of the things you mentioned allowed models with Factions other than Space Marines (or models with no Faction)? Nope. Ergo, the RaW answer is a clear no.

On a somewhat related note, could the units in the formation use transports?

 ReNoid wrote:
On a somewhat related note, could the units in the formation use transports?

I don't believe they have any on their own datasheets, but they should be treated the same as any other Battle Brothers in regards to Transports when allied to an IoM army.

 ReNoid wrote:
On a somewhat related note, could the units in the formation use transports?

Not related at all. The question can units in formations buy transports has been discussed over and over again in this part of the forum. A quick google search should give you multiple results.

I may not have been quite clear enough in what I meant. This isn't about competitive, it's about friendly games. If you and your buddy were playing, and he asked if you'd be okay with you using Ortan Cassius as the chaplain in his Smurf BDC, would you be okay with him using those rules as opposed to the Chaplain Cassius rules?

In a friendly game do whatever you want, you don't need dakkas approval.

Yeah, i dont really see an issue here. It would be more relevant if you asked how good they were, but that has already been discussed to death. In friendly games you can do whatever as long as your opponent allows it.

 EnTyme wrote:
I may not have been quite clear enough in what I meant. This isn't about competitive, it's about friendly games. If you and your buddy were playing, and he asked if you'd be okay with you using Ortan Cassius as the chaplain in his Smurf BDC, would you be okay with him using those rules as opposed to the Chaplain Cassius rules?

Well it's house rules and if it can make somekind of sense (specially from fluff point) i'm all in. Unless my opponent try to bring some bad ass shenannigans to pull an even tougther deathstar then we'll go strictly RAW, but friendly games it's a whole different matter.

 EnTyme wrote:
I may not have been quite clear enough in what I meant. This isn't about competitive, it's about friendly games. If you and your buddy were playing, and he asked if you'd be okay with you using Ortan Cassius as the chaplain in his Smurf BDC, would you be okay with him using those rules as opposed to the Chaplain Cassius rules?

This is how I would perceive that question.
"Hi I would like to use this OP formation that gives huge advantages in trade of restricting me in my choices, but I would really like to have the advantages of the formation and being able to have free choices are you ok with it ? " I would not be

If you want to field it go unbound and lose the command benefits or the benefits of the formation.
That is where unbound is for, adding cool stuff to friendly games. But don't ask me for free rhino's or being able to cast on a 2+.
.
For me this would be the same as asking:
"Hi buddy can I field 50 points more then you do just so that I can get this cool upgrade that I really like"

I would totally be ok with you using your cool new deathwatch models as any other space marine model -> But It will just be that model and you don't get to sneak in any deathwatch special rules


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
In a friendly game do whatever you want, you don't need dakkas approval.

This, the poll kinda suggest that you might want to show it to your fiends, and add the. "But the majority is ok with it and so should you if you are a nice guy" to your disguised "can I field more points / free stuff then you" question. I would not be amused if you tried to pull that one and actually showed this forum post in your defence.

 oldzoggy wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
I may not have been quite clear enough in what I meant. This isn't about competitive, it's about friendly games. If you and your buddy were playing, and he asked if you'd be okay with you using Ortan Cassius as the chaplain in his Smurf BDC, would you be okay with him using those rules as opposed to the Chaplain Cassius rules?

This is how I would perceive that question.
"Hi I would like to use this OP formation that gives huge advantages in trade of restricting me in my choices, but I would really like to have the advantages of the formation and being able to have free choices are you ok with it ? " I would not be

If you want to field it go unbound and lose the command benefits or the benefits of the formation.
That is where unbound is for, adding cool stuff to friendly games. But don't ask me for free rhino's or being able to cast on a 2+.
.
For me this would be the same as asking:
"Hi buddy can I field 50 points more then you do just so that I can get this cool upgrade that I really like"

I would totally be ok with you using your cool new deathwatch models as any other space marine model -> But It will just be that model and you don't get to sneak in any deathwatch special rules


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
In a friendly game do whatever you want, you don't need dakkas approval.

This, the poll kinda suggest that you might want to show it to your fiends, and add the. "But the majority is ok with it and so should you if you are a nice guy" to your disguised "can I field more points / free stuff then you" question. I would not be amused if you tried to pull that one and actually showed this forum post in your defence.

Haven't looked at the rules for the new models yet, have you? Other than the special ammo, they're fairly underwhelming for the most part.

It doesn't matter how powerfull the rule of the deathwatch are.
It is the free stuff of the formations that I would protest against

You aren't asking if you can include those models in your army because you can in lots of ways.
You are asking if i am all right with giving you formation bonuses even if you violate their requirements. The ones used in your example aren't harmless at all.

 EnTyme wrote:

Haven't looked at the rules for the new models yet, have you? Other than the special ammo, they're fairly underwhelming for the most part.

I totally agree with not allowing it for a simple reason: If you want to bring that kind of mixture to the table, you CAN. stick to the legal formations and detachments, and it works.
What you're asking is kinda like "I know you can only have 2 HQs in a CAD, but I really really want 4 without having to bring twice as many Troop choice taxes for .. erm... fluff reasons?" No, you can't. Especially not when trying to give those additional options benefits that they otherwise could NEVER gain.

You can build e.g. a Gladius Strike Force without using the actual rules. Stick them in a CAD, and you're free to use whatever is legal in that - eg Forgeworld Dreadnoughts.
Nobody will stop you from building a CAD by sticking 3 Tactical Squads with a named Forgeworld Captain, some Assault Marines, Devastators and a Deredeo Dreadnought. But you won't get to use the Battle Demi-Company Formation for that.
If you want to bring an Assassin or Inquisitor, bring the corresponding detachments - the same applies to the Deathwatch.

And if all you care about is the fluffy list, you shouldn't have any issue with that.

Formation benefits are not lost if you go unbound; only command benefits(regular detachments like CAD and Allied, or codex-specific ones and then the Army Selection detachment of formations both have command benefits).

Not only is this a distinction of terminology; the unbound rules specifically state formation benefits remain.

I assume that everyone who voted Yes just read the OP and didn't read the rules themselves?

RAW this is 100% not allowed...

In friendly games, I'd even allow you to upgrade unit members to these guys, with the caveat that you cannot give them additional equipment, they must conform to the same chapter tactic as they're intended to be (this means you could only ever take 1 in your army, unless you decide to take Cassius and that Ultramarine) and they're in the appropriate squad. You'd still have to pay the difference in their costs from a vanilla version though (so the Salamander Terminator would need to pay 25 points because a basic terminator costs 35 points).

If the existing rules list the units in question and they were of the same faction, yes. Role-based detachments just have to demonstrate faction and Role compatibility.

However, I hope they get a Detachment of their own, either way.

 M0ff3l wrote:
I assume that everyone who voted Yes just read the OP and didn't read the rules themselves?

RAW this is 100% not allowed...

Thank you for assuming that I was incapable of reading the question the poll asked. I am well aware that RAW doesn't allow for it, but the poll was asking if I would allow it.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 M0ff3l wrote:
I assume that everyone who voted Yes just read the OP and didn't read the rules themselves?

RAW this is 100% not allowed...

Thank you for assuming that I was incapable of reading the question the poll asked. I am well aware that RAW doesn't allow for it, but the poll was asking if I would allow it.

And that is why these kinds of threats should not be in You Make Da Call imo, it's not a rules question. It's just a 'how lenient are you with cheating/modifying the rules' poll.

The OP even states (incorrectly) that 'this one won't have a RAW answer', except it totally does. You cant take a formation from one faction and put in models from a different faction.

If someone opens this threat, looks at the title, reads the OP and looks at the poll result they will think 'oh hey, I can totally use these new deathwatch guys in my normal army'. Thats not what this part of the forum should be about imo.