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.

There seem to be a few issues with this Psychic Awakening:

1. Can the new Tempestus doctrines be placed into a Tempestus Drop Force from Vigilus Defiant?

2. It seems that the Precision Drop rule has been changed, unless there are two different iterations now.

3. Can any Tempestus unit use a Boltgun? So far I am only finding Bolt Pistols, so how would the Blessed Boltgun get used?

4. Technically if a person does not have their Psychic Awakening book, then wouldn't the Advisors and Auxilla clarification note be invalid and force them to not benefit from the regular Storm Troopers Doctrine, if said force contains Commissars, Valkyries etc?

5. Do Tempestus lose the ASTRA MILITARUM keyword in regards to Stratagems? Or do they also get access to the new Psychic Awakening Stratagems for regular Astra Militarum?

6. Are close combat weapons also affected by the Lambdan Lions doctrine or just ones with a profile in the codex?

7. Is the Hammer Blow stratagem invalidated when a Necron resurrects itself at the start of their turn?

8. How many 'Backup Warlords' can you make? Vigilus Defiant has the Field Commander, we have the Progency of Conflict in Psychic Awakening, is it simply a case of finding as many supplements as you can and adding Warlords from each, or a maximum of 1 alternative Warlord?


Thus this looks like fun!

7. Necrons ressurect at the start of the necron players turn.

4. The rules don't stop existing just because the book isn't present.

 p5freak wrote:
7. Necrons ressurect at the start of the necron players turn.

Edited, the point still stands.

 Kriswall wrote:
4. The rules don't stop existing just because the book isn't present.

Yeah, but it's kind of difficult to verify if a person does not want to get the (optional) supplement that contains the rule in the first place.

Slayer6 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
7. Necrons ressurect at the start of the necron players turn.

Edited, the point still stands.

 Kriswall wrote:
4. The rules don't stop existing just because the book isn't present.

Yeah, but it's kind of difficult to verify if a person does not want to get the (optional) supplement that contains the rule in the first place.

Are you asking how to handle a situation where a player wants to use rules from an optional supplement, but doesn't actually want to purchase the option supplement? The answer seems pretty straightforward... they can't use the rules. It's kind of hard to use rules that you don't have access to.

Not having read the book... are those rules actually optional? I know, for example, that the new datasheets are mandatory. If I want to run Shadowsun, I need the new PA book.

 Kriswall wrote:

Slayer6 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
7. Necrons ressurect at the start of the necron players turn.

Edited, the point still stands.

 Kriswall wrote:
4. The rules don't stop existing just because the book isn't present.

Yeah, but it's kind of difficult to verify if a person does not want to get the (optional) supplement that contains the rule in the first place.

Are you asking how to handle a situation where a player wants to use rules from an optional supplement, but doesn't actually want to purchase the option supplement? The answer seems pretty straightforward... they can't use the rules. It's kind of hard to use rules that you don't have access to.

Not having read the book... are those rules actually optional? I know, for example, that the new datasheets are mandatory. If I want to run Shadowsun, I need the new PA book.

No, quite the opposite. There are several people I play with who are too cheap to get the PA book.

There are also quite a few pedantic ones who only play by the rules that are in front of them.

Therefore, since there doesn't appear to be an FAQ/Chapter Approved where that clarification is made (despite many of us pestering GW for over a year about it), there isn't really a way for said cheapskates to actually verify that rule, and thus not be allowed to play a Militarum Tempestus Detachment, benefitting from their doctrine in a formation that contains all of the mentioned units (Commissars, Valkyries, Ogryns, etc).

That is the problem. It has also made quite a few rounds on this forum, prior to Psychic Awakening. There does not appear to be a compulsory media that contains said clarification.

Where's BaconCatBug when you need his input?

Well the strictest and fullest answer is that the books are not optional, and that technically you need them if they would impact your army at all.

Whether you want to play without them, and everything that entails, is up to your group and the individuals in it. Most groups have a somewhat relaxed attitude to it. For instance most of my group just go off Battlescribe and while we generally all do own the relevant books dont really refer to them during play much if at all (and for this reason I've become fairly active at reporting issues in BS!).

This really seems like an issue with your group failing to at least implicitly agree on a social contract around rule usage.

1: Raw, no you cannot use anything but stormtroopers doctrine for the vigilus force. This is due to the faq that states to be a Tempestus detachment, you need that doctrine. I think that this is simply an outdated faq that will be fixed, so it comes down to your play group's raw vs rai stance.

2: No idea. I think that both would still be valid? I think there have been examples in the past of rules having the same name but working differently. I know that certain weapons, like the demolisher cannon, have had different rules at the same time.

3: No Gorgonnes models can have bolt guns, so you can't use the relic. Harder to even know what RAI would be. I'm guessing the FAQ will just change it to bolt pistol, as it is the easiest change to make that fixes it.

4: The codex still has an advisors and auxilla section, which lets tempestus use the doctrine even with the additional units.

5: They still have the Astra Militarum keyword, so can use the stratagems.

6: CC weapons get the bonus.

7: No idea. I would look for precedence in other rules with persistant effects, and if they are wiped when a unit is "destroyed". I'm sure the topic has come up before. I don't really face Necrons so have not had to look into it.

8: As many as you find rules that allow you. However, if this is anything to do with tank aces I can add that you can only change your actual warlord's trait for an ace. None of the additional ones can be replaced.

 Trickstick wrote:
1: Raw, no you cannot use anything but stormtroopers doctrine for the vigilus force. This is due to the faq that states to be a Tempestus detachment, you need that doctrine. I think that this is simply an outdated faq that will be fixed, so it comes down to your play group's raw vs rai stance.

Of course RAW the new doctrines are in addition to old doctrine...

tneva82 wrote:
Of course RAW the new doctrines are in addition to old doctrine...

I do understand that perspective but the point is highly debatable. It says that they gain a doctrine from the page opposite. Storm troopers is on that page, so you would be gaining two from the page opposite. Enough RAW to argue over until 9th.

 Trickstick wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Of course RAW the new doctrines are in addition to old doctrine...

I do understand that perspective but the point is highly debatable. It says that they gain a doctrine from the page opposite. Storm troopers is on that page, so you would be gaining two from the page opposite. Enough RAW to argue over until 9th.

Aww man, the FAQ is the 9th?????

 Trickstick wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Of course RAW the new doctrines are in addition to old doctrine...

I do understand that perspective but the point is highly debatable. It says that they gain a doctrine from the page opposite. Storm troopers is on that page, so you would be gaining two from the page opposite. Enough RAW to argue over until 9th.

Not really. It says you can only replace Tempestus Regiment with one of the six new ones. It doesn’t allow you to replace it with Stormtroopers.
So you can’t select it. So you get one of the new ones and Stormtroopers.

thats's the text of the rule...
There is no point, that leads me to think I could get two of the doctrines (the original "storm troopers" is listed as one of them).

Nibbler wrote:

Spoiler:

If your army is Battle-forged, all
<TEMPESTUS REGIMENT> units in a
MILITARUM TEMPESTUS Detachment
gain a Regimental Doctrine selected
from those presented on the page
opposite, so long as every unit in that
Detachment (excluding the Advisors and
Auxilla mentioned below) has the same
<TEMPESTUS REGIMENT> keyword.

thats's the text of the rule...
There is no point, that leads me to think I could get two of the doctrines (the original "storm troopers" is listed as one of them).

If you only read this paragraph, then yes, I can see how you can be so lost. If you read the entire page, and the original codex, then we can fully understand why you get both Stormtroopers and one of the new ones.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This book does not assert that it replace the original codex, rules, for one thing.
Second

That is the wording straight from the book explaining the rules for <TEMPESTUS REGIMENT>.
It quite literally says you can only choose one of the new regiments for your keyword. Then, in the next paragraph, it allows you to select from the next page, however, Stormtroopers isn’t actually one of your selectable options, as you can’t replace <TEMPESTUS REGIMENT> with it. The rules concerning how you get Stormtroopers from the original codex still stand, so you get both until the FAQ it.

I'm definitely curious, how this will be solved by GW.
I can see a point in your argumentation Apple Peel, and also within Tricksticks post...

I'm a little more leery about (8.)... Having a Vigilus Defiant Tempestus Drop Force detachment with a Field Commander is plain brutal, if only for a Plasmagun suicide drop.

Now if you combine that with a separate detachment of Lambdan Lions with a Progeny of Conflict WL with Keys to the Armoury and another couple of squads with more Plasmaguns...

Adding an Ordo Minoris Inquisitor and giving it Inquisitorial Mandate means adding a potential 3rd WL trait.

And then to cap it all off, let's add Roboute Guilliman to the mix!

I tried this combination in a 2000pt battle today:
Literally 1 Plasma Scion Command Squad + 1 minimum size Plasma Scion Squad with 2 Plasmaguns + Pistol, together with a Command Rod Field Commander (with Laurels) dropped from a Valkyrie with the Vigilus Precision Drop using Take Aim, and Elimination Protocols (rolled 4+ for Laurels on both) on them allowed me to virtually eliminate the enemy Baneblade as a threat straight off the bat at the start of Turn 2.
I was then able to drop the Lambdan Lions WL with same same composition squad next to the enemy Stormlord with the other Precision Drop stratagem and didn't quite do as well, still dropped it down to 13W (one of the Hotshots managed a W!).
I also dropped a full squad of Iotan Gorgonnes with Meltaguns using the Daring Descent stratagem between his Manticores and erased them (lost 3 on the drop).
This was also in the same phase, so in a 2000pt game, both of the enemy's big hitters, and heavy artillery went down after a single shooting phase.

I didn't have Guilliman in this battle, but using the Inquisitor as an impromptu Commissar with Formidable Resolve helped my forces hold their own before my 2nd turn started. Yarrick (actual designated Warlord) held the others in line.

My opponent didn't agree with all the extra (expendable) Warlords, and forfeited before his 2nd turn started.

Slayer6 wrote:
I'm a little more leery about (8.)... Having a Vigilus Defiant Tempestus Drop Force detachment with a Field Commander is plain brutal, if only for a Plasmagun suicide drop.

Now if you combine that with a separate detachment of Lambdan Lions with a Progeny of Conflict WL with Keys to the Armoury and another couple of squads with more Plasmaguns...

Adding an Ordo Minoris Inquisitor and giving it Inquisitorial Mandate means adding a potential 3rd WL trait.

And then to cap it all off, let's add Roboute Guilliman to the mix!

I tried this combination in a 2000pt battle today:
Literally 1 Plasma Scion Command Squad + 1 minimum size Plasma Scion Squad with 2 Plasmaguns + Pistol, together with a Command Rod Field Commander (with Laurels) dropped from a Valkyrie with the Vigilus Precision Drop using Take Aim, and Elimination Protocols (rolled 4+ for Laurels on both) on them allowed me to virtually eliminate the enemy Baneblade as a threat straight off the bat at the start of Turn 2.
I was then able to drop the Lambdan Lions WL with same same composition squad next to the enemy Stormlord with the other Precision Drop stratagem and didn't quite do as well, still dropped it down to 13W (one of the Hotshots managed a W!).
I also dropped a full squad of Iotan Gorgonnes with Meltaguns using the Daring Descent stratagem between his Manticores and erased them (lost 3 on the drop).
This was also in the same phase, so in a 2000pt game, both of the enemy's big hitters, and heavy artillery went down after a single shooting phase.

I didn't have Guilliman in this battle, but using the Inquisitor as an impromptu Commissar with Formidable Resolve helped my forces hold their own before my 2nd turn started. Yarrick (actual designated Warlord) held the others in line.

My opponent didn't agree with all the extra (expendable) Warlords, and forfeited before his 2nd turn started.

The only thing that makes me hesitate about doing a mono scion force are Valkyries getting wiped off the board....this post tempts me, but still....

General Hobbs wrote:


The only thing that makes me hesitate about doing a mono scion force are Valkyries getting wiped off the board....this post tempts me, but still....

The main thing about that battle was that the Valkyries were positioned at the edges rather than the back of the middle of my army. I also had some Taurox Primes positioned closer, as well as a force of 6 Crusaders, 2 Eversors and 2 Culexus positioned right opposite his main force to keep him interested - he actually fired on the 2 Vindicares first, after they took out one of his Lord Commissars. In a sense, the Assassins were there purely to draw initial fire until my deepstrike from hell arrived - it worked!

You don't really have the units to be able to run a large solo Scion force given the Rule of 3 - so 3 Primes, 3 Command Squads - that's at most 3 detachments, with a Lord Commissar or Primaris Psyker taking up the other slot. I mean sure the new Deep Strike doctrines sure are handy - hell, you could field a Battalion of just 5 10 man Scion Squads, replete with 4 Flamers in each and 2 Advisors as HQ's, and give them the Iotan Gorgonnes Regiment. This gives you 5 turns of Daring Descent drops within 5" of an enemy unit - with the flamers in range! The extra bodies are simply to protect against 1's. Of course 94 points can be a bit pricey, but its just hilarious when the target happens to be something like a big force of Genestealers who suddenly eat 4D6 S4 shots that autohit... Hell, if there are any survivors who plan on charging the squad (and they don't have any ranged weapons), they can now eat 4D6 of overwatch flamers that autohit again!

Slayer6 wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:


The only thing that makes me hesitate about doing a mono scion force are Valkyries getting wiped off the board....this post tempts me, but still....

The main thing about that battle was that the Valkyries were positioned at the edges rather than the back of the middle of my army. I also had some Taurox Primes positioned closer, as well as a force of 6 Crusaders, 2 Eversors and 2 Culexus positioned right opposite his main force to keep him interested - he actually fired on the 2 Vindicares first, after they took out one of his Lord Commissars. In a sense, the Assassins were there purely to draw initial fire until my deepstrike from hell arrived - it worked!

You don't really have the units to be able to run a large solo Scion force given the Rule of 3 - so 3 Primes, 3 Command Squads - that's at most 3 detachments, with a Lord Commissar or Primaris Psyker taking up the other slot. I mean sure the new Deep Strike doctrines sure are handy - hell, you could field a Battalion of just 5 10 man Scion Squads, replete with 4 Flamers in each and 2 Advisors as HQ's, and give them the Iotan Gorgonnes Regiment. This gives you 5 turns of Daring Descent drops within 5" of an enemy unit - with the flamers in range! The extra bodies are simply to protect against 1's. Of course 94 points can be a bit pricey, but its just hilarious when the target happens to be something like a big force of Genestealers who suddenly eat 4D6 S4 shots that autohit... Hell, if there are any survivors who plan on charging the squad (and they don't have any ranged weapons), they can now eat 4D6 of overwatch flamers that autohit again!

Would rule of 3 be circumvented by 3 Eagles Tempestor Primes, 3 Lions, and 3 Dragons? The datasheet is technically changed for those guys.

General Hobbs wrote:
Would rule of 3 be circumvented by 3 Eagles Tempestor Primes, 3 Lions, and 3 Dragons? The datasheet is technically changed for those guys.

I'm pretty sure that isn't changing the datasheet, just changing the faction keyword.

General Hobbs wrote:


Would rule of 3 be circumvented by 3 Eagles Tempestor Primes, 3 Lions, and 3 Dragons? The datasheet is technically changed for those guys.

No, each Militarum Tempestus unit merely has the <TEMPESTUS REGIMENT> keyword added to their datasheet, and you then have to pick a regiment keyword to fill in from the options presented. The datasheet is still for a Tempestor Prime, and thus you'll only be able to take three (if using the Organised Play suggested limitations, of course).

The beauty of Advisors means that you don't actually NEED a Tempestor Prime in each Tempestus detachment... You can simply use Primaris Psykers, Lord Commissars, Yarrick or Aradia instead with 3 Scion squads and still give the Scions a Tempestus doctrine! And since Scion squads are now Troops, this exempts them from the Rule of 3... Actually, unless you are using the Tempestus Command Squads in a Valkyrie for Precision Drop with a Prime, using the squads is actually better as you can protect your special weapons from 1's with ablative wounds.

I have done this for 3 full squads of Scions, 2 with 4 flamers each and the last with 4 meltaguns, and given them the Iotan Gorgonnes doctrine. This means that come Turn 3, I have been able to use the Daring Descent stratagem twice (or even 3 times) to hit a couple of enemy units.

Slayer6 wrote:
I have done this for 3 full squads of Scions, 2 with 4 flamers each and the last with 4 meltaguns, and given them the Iotan Gorgonnes doctrine. This means that come Turn 3, I have been able to use the Daring Descent stratagem twice (or even 3 times) to hit a couple of enemy units.

You cannot use the same stratagem more than once in a phase in matched play.

 p5freak wrote:

Slayer6 wrote:
I have done this for 3 full squads of Scions, 2 with 4 flamers each and the last with 4 meltaguns, and given them the Iotan Gorgonnes doctrine. This means that come Turn 3, I have been able to use the Daring Descent stratagem twice (or even 3 times) to hit a couple of enemy units.

You cannot use the same stratagem more than once in a phase in matched play.

And he can use it twice by turn 3 (once in turn 2, once in turn 3). Won't be able to use it a third time though; except in non-matched play of course.

Well #3 was answered in the FAQ, it is now the Blessed Bolt Pistol and is changed to pistol 2, replaces a bolt pistol.

#1 seems to be a no, only Stormtroopers can be in Drop Force. This would have to wait for a Vigilus FAQ update I think, but that may never come.

Edit: You know what, I'm going to spin off a thread for #1 as it seems to be causing arguments.

 Trickstick wrote:
Well #3 was answered in the FAQ, it is now the Blessed Bolt Pistol and is changed to pistol 2, replaces a bolt pistol.

#1 seems to be a no, only Stormtroopers can be in Drop Force. This would have to wait for a Vigilus FAQ update I think, but that may never come.

Edit: You know what, I'm going to spin off a thread for #1 as it seems to be causing arguments.

If use RAI its obviously

But unfortunately as i said before people so strictly rely on RAW...