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.

Full disclosure:
I don't play competitively in any way, so I'm not after any particular interpretations or restrictions by TOs or in the context of specific events. I play and collect casually - that said, I do like to adhere to competitive rule-sets much of the time because I like having a good framework in place as a reference/origin point for all players involved. So while I know I could use narrative/casual rules to finesse things how I see fit I generally prefer not to.

Also while I have read up on all the relevant rules of the current edition/factions relevant to me a lot of it hasn't had time to "sink in". My reading and play time are pretty restricted these days (got a newborn at home) so I'm well aware there are plenty of gaps in my knowledge and I probably just need to be directed to a particular blurb on a page somewhere.

That said, I'm a little confused about where detachments are allowed to source their models from.

For example:
Can a Space Wolves Vanguard Detachment include elite choices from the Forge World Imperial Armour Index for Adeptus Astartes, and still remain battle-forged?
It seems like this should be the case however, for example, Battle Scribe doesn't let you do this - you can only include models from the Space Wolves part of the Imperium index in a detachment and anything from the Forge World index is stuck in a separate detachment with only other Forge World selections.

But this doesn't make sense in the context of the "Relic" rule in the FW index which states that you must have a majority of non-relic choices in your detachments. If that's the case then you can't take make a Vanguard detachment from the FW index because all of the Elite choices are relic vehicles (excepting one character).

To compound confusion on this in the instance of Battle Scribe it does allow you to include codex and FW index selections within the same detachment for other armies - i.e. Eldar. I know Battle Scribe is not an official source or anything but it's one of the easiest points of reference I have for throwing lists together.



Anyway, if anyone knows where to point me to help clear things up on this that would be much appreciated.

Keywords are all that matters, not where the unit comes from. You can include Space Wolves and Forge World units in the same Detachment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kawauso wrote:

It seems like this should be the case however, for example, Battle Scribe doesn't let you do this - you can only include models from the Space Wolves part of the Imperium index in a detachment and anything from the Forge World index is stuck in a separate detachment with only other Forge World selections.

This is why Battlescribe annoys me sometimes. It's possible, just not intuitive and thus people assume it can't be done. You need to add it as a subfaction by clicking the parent detachment, then clicking add. Not to mention that sometimes FW stuff is rolled into the main faction, sometimes it isn't.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Keywords are all that matters, not where the unit comes from. You can include Space Wolves and Forge World units in the same Detachment.

I thought so - hence my confusion.

Thanks for the clarification and the explanation re: Battle Scribe. Like I said it does work that way for some factions - my Eldar list let me include FW flyers in an Air Wing Detachment, for example.

I've been using Battle Scribe for 8th list-building and planning so far and it's pretty good... but it really does cause some headaches. I've been thinking of going back to Army Builder. I'm also hoping the GW app that's supposed to come out at some point is competent and comprehensive.

I really wish list-building was easier when you don't have the time to sit down with several books and comb through them to put things together in a spreadsheet.

Does Army Builder even have people making files for 8th? I thought it was long dead.

But yeah in GW's rush to try and force people to use Power Levels (I heard a story they didn't even have points at the start of the 8th playtesting and the playtesters had to basically riot for GW to re-introduce them) they've made it almost impossible to make an army without a computerised aide.

I don't even know - like I said I'd been thinking of looking back into it. When I was using it last it was pretty good.

For what it's worth I love power levels because they're ideal for throwing list concepts together quickly. Unfortunately I've yet to really find anyone who wants to actually use them.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Does Army Builder even have people making files for 8th? I thought it was long dead.

https://www.ab40k.org/ shows that the latest datafile includes up to Codex Tyranids for 8th edition.

Note that there seems to be some mistaken terminology in this thread. 'Battle-forged' simply means that all models in the army are in a detachment. Then the detachments have an additional requirement that all units in that detachment have the same Faction. Then it's the matched play 'Army Faction' rule that requires all units in the army have a Faction keyword in common. Then you have the requirements in the codices benefit from their special rules (e.g., in order to benefit from Chapter Tactics, etc. it must be a 'Space Marine detachment).