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.

Karol wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's crazy talk.

Well what book is more fun to play right now. The DE codex or lets say the balanced IF or if you want to have something newer the GSC book?
in 8th the GK was super internaly balanced, so balanced it didn't even matter that much what you played with. It came out at the start of 8th and had to last the GK player till 2/3ed of 9th. What do you think the fun would be for the GK players if their codex in 8th was on pair with lets say Eldar. Would the GK player have more fun or less fun.

The so called balanced books age really bad, and if they happen to be unlucky durning an edition switch, where one of their core rules or strenghts stops to work, they become very unfun to use. The "OP" books on the other had last for months, sometimes even years and are often still okey in the next edition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
It's karol talk. To be expected from his imaginary gaming　circle

yeah. I remember the 8th ed entry article for GK saying how they tried to balanced everything for them, give them baby smites etc to avoid making them to over powered, and then they started churrning out OP books. Was so fun to have a balanced book. Specialy when the only way for GW to fix stuff from a realy broken book is to put out a new codex. Which again means, that unless you are a marines player, the book you have has to last for years.

the DE codex is the most boring gak i've played since i started playing 40k. I'd much rather play a balanced army than get carried by my codex

idk, on one hand i'm fething pissed at the wargear options being so jank and on Marks/Icons being weirdly restricted

On the other hand, it feels like the codex has so many more build options that are interesting compared to 8th's codex. For what its worth, i play mostly tempest of war so i don't feel the effects of the CP starvation of Nephilim

My Night Lords are much more fun to play in OnePageRules anyway lol

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

VladimirHerzog wrote:My Night Lords are much more fun to play in OnePageRules anyway lol

Have you seen our HH rules Vlad? I can honestly say that they're the best, most fluffy rules we've ever had IMHO. Even better than 3.5. They're honestly that good.

i honestly havnt looked at them not to torture myself lol. Nobody locally seems to be down to try HH because "marines boring" (even if most of them own marines -.- ) I did glance at the HH1.0 rules at one point and yeah, the fluffyness was there

Not Online!!! wrote:


Not just Jumppacks, but also the removal of double shooting and Votwl aswell as not restricting CSM squads loadouts aswell as not removing the specialisation options via combiweapons for either Chosen and terminators.
Further the avoidance of the hairbrained restrictions of Icons and marks and finaly added customizability to the minor HQ as to make them integrate far easier into differing armies, especially for the aspiring champion,

And yeah, it certainly wouldn't have required a scientist to achieve that.

VotLW is still in the dex (although nerfed)


Are you really saying that double shooting + votlw shouldve stayed in the dex? it was most of the reason why the 8th ed codex was gak to play

--------------------------

So i played three games with the new NL yesterday. Felt fething terrible, anything NL-specific felt much worst than in the 8th editon codex + PA and my trait wasn't active except against things that i didnt need it to be (woohoo, wounding skitariis on 2+ with my WarpTalons that already wipe the squad anyway)

The datasheet are stronger, the marks do something now but the fluff feels like gak.

Played a game with creations of bile and it felt more like NL than the actual NL rules.

@Gadzilla at least i started planting the seeds about trying HH 2.0 with a few players so i got that going for me



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

No i am saying that they should^ve been removed, there's still a double shooting for csm if i am not mistaken no?

oh ok, missed what you meant.

The double shooting is only for legionnaires now, so at best you're double shooting 2 different Heavy/special weapons and 8 boltguns

Not Online!!! wrote:
Doesn't matter, it's still a double shooting, it shouldn't exist, period, and i am half willing someone realised that 8 boltguns and 2 reaper chaincannons may be an issue if they got on demand doubled and curbed the specialisation.

you can't have 2 chaincannons but yeah, its dumb that its still there but at least being restricted to legionnaires means the rest of the codex isnt priced assuming its gonna be double shooting all game

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Interesting that you consider CoB more like Night Lords than the actual Night Lords rules. For my part, I think that the Alpha Legion rules are far closer to what Night Lords were in 3.5 than the actual Night Lords rules, myself.

well i started playing 40k with 8th so i never got to experience the mythical 3.5e dex. For me night lords are all about striking fast from the unseen. PA had buffs for charges which made our deepstrike charges more reliable. Now that these are gone, CoB's +1 movement and Advance+charge strat means that i can kinda do the same thing (raptors/warp talons moving 13"+D6 before charging kinda feels like striking from the unseen). And the +1S effectively acts like the +1 to wound against factions for which it matters (Loyalists) where our trait wouldnt actually activate.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


I think you've missed Not Online's point again, however. What he's getting at is that many people are theorizing that at least one of the reasons for Legionaries being unable to double up on any one special/heavy weapon is the double shoot/fight strategem. Basically, it was seen as too strong with things like ×2 chaincannons/plasma guns, so instead of removing the strategem, they just removed the ability to double up on specials/heavies.

gotcha. yeah, the wargear restrictions feel terrible in the book (and the icon/marks while more interesting than before having more restrictions as to who can use them is dumb as feth)

 Sarigar wrote:
Played two games against the new Chaos Marines and finally got to read through the codex.

I like it. For me, it harkens back to the 3.5 codex, but lacking the Lash Prince or 9 Obliterator lists of 3rd edition. I'm sure folks heavy in the tournament scene will find strong builds and place. It won't come from folks like me who only play once or twice a week.

So, to answer the OP question. Maybe? The Master of Executions feels a bit under costed: my first game I allowed that model a Heroic Intervention and then had my opponent slap my unit with 6 Mortal Wounds. Ouch. I completely underestimated its ability.

After a solid review of the codex, I'm building an Emperors Children army. It's the first Chaos army I've built since 3rd edition. I found an 3d print company who made sonic weapons fit the new Horus Heresy Marines which really inspired me.

GW got me again with a new release.

Master of executions feels like the dumbest unit in the dex right now. So many ways to kit him out where he's an absolute monster in combat. Played a few games with him last weekend and he was killing more than twice his cost in points per turn, no matter his loadout

Voss wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Personally, I find that it's pretty clear as to why some units get icons/marks and others don't as a matter of both internal and external balance.

Well you know best, I guess. Certainly your 'clarity' is better than GW's, who had to edit articles about which units could take icons.

yeah, possessed really shouldnt get marks, makes no sense that dudes blessed by the gods to receive mutations would also be marked by the gods.

Oh and an icon would be really too heavy for a terminator to carry, oh, and we can't have something be more proeminent than the trophy racks.

Raptors would be way too OP if they had access to an icon too, glad GW in their infinite wisdom decided to curbstomp these options

EviscerationPlague wrote:

And here we have it, people complaining about the Master of Executions. The guy moving 6" a turn.

Wait until you guys find out what the duelist equivalents from the Loyalist codex can do!

I legitimately don't know, what can they do?

They have a Bolt Pistol and Relic Blade (S+3, AP-3, D2). They reroll wounds against characters, and on a wound roll of six they inflict 2 Mortal Wounds and the attack sequence ends. I literally only use one because Red Corsairs. Otherwise, what Loyalists can do is significantly better.

I'm not complaining, just pointing out that he's a brutal melee unit, and no, you can kit him out to have a lot more damage output than what loyalists can do. Also, 6" isnt exactly slow when the current mission design basically makes every game into a midfield slapfest anyway.

In my nights lords with no external buffs i can get him :

6+D3 attacks with exploding 6's all game
S8 -3 2 D3+2 damage

Exploding 6's means he basically deals 2 mortals in addition to the regular damage

and thats far from the most output you can get out of that 80pts model.

slap Demonic strength on top and he's now at 8+D3 S10 attacks

 Insectum7 wrote:
Speaking personally, I bought the 7th and 8th ed CSM books, but won't be buying the 9th ed one. I don't like the overall direction of 9th ed books. Should I play chaos I will play either an older edition or get the rules some other way.

i'm done buying codexes altogether. The formatting in them sucks too much and theyre a pain to navigate.

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

I'm not complaining, just pointing out that he's a brutal melee unit, and no, you can kit him out to have a lot more damage output than what loyalists can do. Also, 6" isnt exactly slow when the current mission design basically makes every game into a midfield slapfest anyway.

But with the number of shoting armies around, MW spam , a meq stated character with a milion of attacks is not going to reach melee, unless the opposing army is melee centric only. 6" means that against some of the top armies, he is never going to be in melee unless they want it, and that may mean your opponent thinks he can kill the executioner.

i don't know what world you live in where reaching the midfield with a character isnt possible

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


i don't know what world you live in where reaching the midfield with a character isnt possible

Oh you can reach or try to reach it, but a foot meq character is going to die. In fact I could say the reverse , how can you play vs eldar or tyranids or necron or bloody rose and have your dude not just not die, but trade efficiently. Same with DE, maybe it would work vs orks and ad mecha, espcialy if the ad mecha are played by a bad or avarge player.
And how I know it? I don't use NDKs, all my characters are termintors and they are faster, because they can teleport in.

stick him in a transport, surround him with resilient stuff like terminators, apply pressure with other units that your opponent has to deal with.

Oh and if he does end up dead without connection, its not a big deal since he's 80points.... And you can kit him out where he gets a 2+/4++/ignores first damage per turn if you really want him to survive

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Depends the route you want me to really explain. Loyalists have three duelist characters off the top of my head:
Chapter Champion
Emperors Champion
Judiciar
The second one is not exactly generic of course, but I'll count it since it replaces one of the entries out right if going the Templar route.

The Relic and Warlord Trait access is just astronomically more. Ad I said, if it weren't for the Red Corsairs trait, I wouldn't even look at the Master. Meanwhile, every Marine chapter can make some use of the Champs even if not necessary for the army.

just post a loadout that outperforms the master of execs

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


i don't know what world you live in where reaching the midfield with a character isnt possible

Oh you can reach or try to reach it, but a foot meq character is going to die. In fact I could say the reverse , how can you play vs eldar or tyranids or necron or bloody rose and have your dude not just not die, but trade efficiently. Same with DE, maybe it would work vs orks and ad mecha, espcialy if the ad mecha are played by a bad or avarge player.
And how I know it? I don't use NDKs, all my characters are termintors and they are faster, because they can teleport in.

stick him in a transport, surround him with resilient stuff like terminators, apply pressure with other units that your opponent has to deal with.

Oh and if he does end up dead without connection, its not a big deal since he's 80points.... And you can kit him out where he gets a 2+/4++/ignores first damage per turn if you really want him to survive

But that's the thing. You said initially no external buffs, but that's what you're using. Meanwhile, the Judiciar has a 4++ in melee and won't allow any attacking until he fought first.

external buffs meaning : strats/psychic/auras. I don't count stuff that he himself brings to the table as external, so Relic/Trait is fine.

PenitentJake wrote:

Karol wrote:
Okey, but what happens durning the talk.
Guy A I have 20 rubrics, 10 tzangors and a magnus.
Guy B I don't want you to use the magnus, because it makes you win.
Guy A what am I suppose to do then without magnus I don't have a legal force
etc etc

The whole talk thing works only works for people who both own and carry multiple thousands of points in multiple armies. That is an expiriance a 30+ year old may have, but not a teen. Unless they are using their dads or older brothers armies.

So simple:

If I take Magnus out, you take out the same number of points.

<DONE>

Note: You may have to pull a rubric out of the squad to use as a Lord if you only brought 1 HQ.

alternatively : OK, i'll play Magnus as a demon prince



Automatically Appended Next Post:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:

Karol wrote:
Okey, but what happens durning the talk.
Guy A I have 20 rubrics, 10 tzangors and a magnus.
Guy B I don't want you to use the magnus, because it makes you win.
Guy A what am I suppose to do then without magnus I don't have a legal force
etc etc

The whole talk thing works only works for people who both own and carry multiple thousands of points in multiple armies. That is an expiriance a 30+ year old may have, but not a teen. Unless they are using their dads or older brothers armies.

So simple:

If I take Magnus out, you take out the same number of points.

<DONE>

Note: You may have to pull a rubric out of the squad to use as a Lord if you only brought 1 HQ.

Or they still use Magnus. Why should any player have to remove a model from their army just because the opponent has a hissyfit?

Because Magnus + Start collecting is a lot more points than most other big models + start collecting.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Be sure to write to GW about your decision and how they've invalidated so much of your army.

I encourage all Chaos players to do the same.

Once I've finished my runthrough of the book I'll be collecting my thoughts in a letter as well.

i already complained to them about the loss of my jump pack HQs and about the weird restrictions on combi weapons / power fists /chain fists. I did note that accursed weapons was a good idea IMO tho, i just wish it had been applied to every datasheet so we wouldnt have power axe/maul/sword anymore in the whole dex


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:


indeed. However the Moe specifically is wasted design space.

the fact that the MoE exists, and isn't just another loadout option for an aspiring champion is already a design failure, the fact that like the aspiring champion he has no options to speak of beyond relics or WLT^'s is... euugh.

it's just not a good datasheet.

IMO the codex should have 3 Character datasheet

Exalted Legionnaire
Exalted Cultist
Demon Prince

and then each of them should have ALL relevant weapon/armor/mount/special ability listed on them.

Wanna make a psyker on helstalker, a lord on bike or an exalted champion with two plasma pistol, go for it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sim-Life wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Strange, as the "too many options" complaint wasn't heard once with Tau.

I'm going to assume you mean neither competitive player or casual complained about too many option, which they didn't because it's not clear what you're refering to. All player love options, its about the only time casual and competitive people will agree. But GW thinks simplified rules (in terms of variety such as with Chaos terminator power weapons) are easier to balance. Thats why most special rules now are now some form of +/-1 modifier, reroll aura or whatnot. Balance is something competitive players demand and casual players are fairly "ech" about.

power weapons being merged into accursed weapons was a great idea IMO, Axe/Maul/Sword were too similar anyway, now we actually get more freedom to model them as we want to match the fluff of our legion.

The real annoyance is the limitations on combi-weapons/power fists/chain fists and the fact that we can't take a pair of accursed weapons on every termi. I hate mixed loadouts like that, makes resolving an attack so much longer for no good reason


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:
Didn't the CSM 'dex include something that allowed the Cult units no longer in the book to still be used in Heretic Astartes detachments without breaking 'dex-special-rules?

yes it does, you can add cult marines but they don't benefit from legion traits


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gert wrote:

Sure let me just spend another £90 on three more Codexes for the one unit per book.

just go on wahapedia and print the datasheet (since thats the only relevant part of these codexes for your situation) Or ask a local player that owns these codexes to scan the datasheet. Or use battlescribe. Or manually transcribe the datasheet into excel.

Plenty of ways to have these units in your armies without paying gak to GW

Not Online!!! wrote:
carefull you could enter HH level customisation level which would confuse players and facilitate:

- kitbashing
- actual army lists with an actual strategy and tactic in the field

-and by extention allow 3rd parties again to slip in, wait Monopose already made it easier

oh, HH deals with their characters like that? I was basing myself off OPR's way to design characters

yeah,i really gotta take a look at HH


Automatically Appended Next Post:
so, GW just released (updated?) the legends page for our HQ options

https://bit.ly/3RME2Qj

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah, the Legends doc restores Jump Packs to various things, Lightning Claws to characters, Bolt Pistols and Combi-Weapons to Warpsmiths, and actual options to Exalted Champions...

... in an unofficial, non-tournament legal manner that most people who just play the meta at pickup games will see as "gaining an advantage" or even "cheating" and thus never be allowed outside of groups playing at home.

And it still doesn't let Raptor Champs take Lightning Claws, Chosen take fists, or remove the infuriating and utterly unnecessary quagmire of weapon combinations that Terminators are allowed/not allowed to take.

yeah its not perfect but its something. For me its fine since everyone at my LGS is fine with legends. So at least my characters will make a comeback

Not Online!!! wrote:

Until next edition, where they will be so disfunctional that nobody will accept them, because legends is just a dishonest squating on time. Sincerly former R&H player

well my lord on steed of slaanesh is still legal even if it's been in legends since 8th. Even if my lord on jumppack gets squatted, i'll keep playing him anyway, feth GW's dumbass decisions.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
That legends update is insulting. They fixed Lord weapons and jump pack options, but Chosen and Terminators are still borked and they didn't add Mutilators (and I'm sure there's more that's still screwed up besides those things). Feth me GW, do you think you never sold Mutilators?!?

Just always the absolute bare fething minimum to mollify the loudest complaints. What a load of crap.

pretty sure mutilators were merged with oblits now that they have actual melee weapons


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

I wonder when GW will finally take away Space marine bike HQ and Jumppack HQ, clearly some of them aren't in production anymore and they could provide an unfair advntage...
Oh wait, that's not how this works.

It's mindboggling and i hope GW will get gak on for this, but then again the community dind't give to gaks when three whole factions got Legended, watch the community at large being A O K with this aswell

these exist

no excuses for the bikes.

And you want to know why the community at large didnt throw a fit when R&H, corsairs and whatever the third one is got squatted? because the community at large doesn't play these factions (or know people that play these factions). It sucks but people will rarely go on "crusades" for things that don't directly affect them.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


pretty sure mutilators were merged with oblits now that they have actual melee weapons

GW may consider it that way, but mutilator models (including my converted ones) have never had ranged weapons, so that's a pretty gakky way to squat them.

Genuinely asking: arent oblits and mutilator the same deal in the lore? Dudes with the techno something virus, that can manifest any weapon from their bodies? I'd say its weird if a dude can spawn a chainsword but not a heavy bolter (or vice-versa)




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


HH does soooo many things better than 40k. Terrain, cover, LoS, vehicles, Initiative instead of fights first/last confusion.

Infantry can even Embark in Buildings. Wasn't that something you were pushing for recently, Vlad?

alright alright, lemme text some friends to organise a trial of HH this weekend :p

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


Yeah, sure, but why couldn't they have just, y'know, put this stuff in the codex? If this stuff is perfectly fine here, why not there? Legends are completely ok for all types of play, right? So why wasn't this ok for the damned codex?

oh for sure it shouldve been in the codex, its dumb as feth to remove them

Not Online!!! wrote:
Piracy is a Service problem and NOT a custommer problem.
Gabe Newell.

Gw brought this to themselves, same with 3rd parties and chinacast being favoured in countries suffering from magic GW currency exchange rates.

yeah, as a customer, i don't give 2 gaks about the money big corporations like GW make. If they can't provide me with good content, i'm not gonna pay for it

CadianSgtBob wrote:

ccs wrote:
But you want people to give GW gak because now instead of no one getting to use their jump pack chaos lords, some people who don't play with do? ???
You're mad you don't get to use your R&H or whatever other Legends pieces you own? Then be upset with those you choose to play with who tell you no. Get pissed off at those tourneys you attend that tell you no.

No, get mad at GW for writing error-filled garbage for the legends rules and never bothering to update them. People and events that ban legends rules do so because of the incredibly poor quality of those rules, if they weren't so completely broken they'd see a lot more use.

???

What is broken (in a strong way) in legends? Most of the stuff in there is underpowered so wouldnt break anything

tneva82 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

IMO the codex should have 3 Character datasheet

Exalted Legionnaire
Exalted Cultist
Demon Prince

and then each of them should have ALL relevant weapon/armor/mount/special ability listed on them.

Pity anybody wanting 4 marine characters in their army then

Its almost like the rule of 3 is a gakky bandaid mechanic that GW applied to the game

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Might as well ask my question here.

I’m quite enamoured with the Cultist and Possessed type kits.

How doable is a Possessed and Cultist and Gribbly Mutant army?

Not fussed if it sucks on the board or not. Just interested if it’s possible to construct such a list, with an effective list being a pleasant bonus.

not even doable without taking tax units sadly (well, the "tax" units are pretty good).
I expect we'll get an army of renown built around cultists

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Or we can just pirate the codex since paying $50+ for rules that are invalidated less than a month after release is bad personal finance, let alone paying it for a single unit because GW couldn't be bothered to print 3 of those units in the codex itself.

but nononono, muh poor GW is gonna go out of business!!!!

Dudeface wrote:
If you can hand wave away copying a page of a book you don't own to use to circumvent a purchase, why stop there? Just copy the whole book? I don't understand how you can view pirating a bit of a book as any different than the whole thing.

I did say earlier in the thread I'd be fully understanding if someone went down that route in this circumstance but I don't promote piracy.

Because copying a few pages is fine according to law, copying a whole book isnt

Dudeface wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
If you can hand wave away copying a page of a book you don't own to use to circumvent a purchase, why stop there? Just copy the whole book? I don't understand how you can view pirating a bit of a book as any different than the whole thing.

I did say earlier in the thread I'd be fully understanding if someone went down that route in this circumstance but I don't promote piracy.

Because copying a few pages is fine according to law, copying a whole book isnt

It isn't though, nobody in here has given a fair reason beyond journalistic use, which in return also doesn't limit the number of pages.

Literally the main defence is "they cba to sue you for it don't worry", which is definitely true, but it isn't justification.

Non-commercial research and private study
Text and data mining for non-commercial research
Criticism, review and reporting current events
Teaching
Helping disabled people
Parody, caricature and pastiche
Fair dealing

Or do you want us to find a law that litterally states "You may make copies of up to 3,75 pages of a Game Workshop (tm) Codex (tm)"?