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.

 Olthannon wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And they're even more shirtless than the current ones.

 judgedoug wrote:
I'm trying to take "literally ALL" at face value but the Gaunt's Ghosts novels clearly portray cultists as such, which is why when the Blood Pact show up the Sabbat Worlds Crusade forces are in shock because they are now fighting an organized military.

The Blood Pact are even unusual in the realms of cults.

Organised military =/= Chaos Cults.

Chaos Cults are like real cults:

Rabble at the bottom + privileged leadership with all the best stuff (and their bodyguards) at the top.

Yeah as HBMC rightly points out, Blood Pact and Sons of Sek in Gaunt's Ghosts are described as a hardline proper armed force at complete odds with the fanatical cultists from some of the other campaigns. In the books, they make it obvious they are totally different.

I know everyone likes to knee jerk argue, but you're both agreeing with me. Cultists look like rabble and are typically poorly led (some notable exceptions, Sholen Skara and some other magisters) or led through sheer force of personality (again see Sholen Skara); true traitor guard such as the Blood Pact are formidable for the Imperium to fight as they are typically on the same footing as the Guard (or superior, such as the Sons of Sek)

Voss wrote:

It also works well for different legions. Alphas might want to corrupt an existing military, WBs might want the disposable rabble. Its a lot more options than I expected.

I just hope the codex doesn't jack them over the way the current rules do. With this much model support, they need to be a functional part of the codex, not an afterthought that is slowly disqualified from all the benefits while keeping the point hike from when they got some rules support.

I will admit, I am not optimistic about that. GW are experts at making amazing models for an army and then having their rules be absolute gak.

I suspect the Commissar, Ogryn, and the cultist HQ in particular will be trash in-game. But I'm a sucker so I'll be buying them anyway just to paint.

 Scottywan82 wrote:

Voss wrote:

It also works well for different legions. Alphas might want to corrupt an existing military, WBs might want the disposable rabble. Its a lot more options than I expected.

I just hope the codex doesn't jack them over the way the current rules do. With this much model support, they need to be a functional part of the codex, not an afterthought that is slowly disqualified from all the benefits while keeping the point hike from when they got some rules support.

I will admit, I am not optimistic about that. GW are experts at making amazing models for an army and then having their rules be absolute gak.

I suspect the Commissar, Ogryn, and the cultist HQ in particular will be trash in-game. But I'm a sucker so I'll be buying them anyway just to paint.

Oh, yeah. Without some sort of bizarre custom bodyguard rule for units, the HQ has a table lifespan of about 5 seconds against 9th edition firepower.
The commissar can almost certainly hide, but will probably affect combat attrition and not matter.
I'm not sure if the Ogryn will end up as part of a unit or just be a solo character? It'll be weird either way.

But I really want to do a cultist army with minimal marine support (almost definitely some possessed herded into battle, or at least baited into eating the right people), and maybe some ramshackle counts-as tanks.
Or... some possessed tanks like back in the day. Either could be fun, and I hope there are some spare mutations amongst the various sprues.

 judgedoug wrote:

 Olthannon wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And they're even more shirtless than the current ones.

 judgedoug wrote:
I'm trying to take "literally ALL" at face value but the Gaunt's Ghosts novels clearly portray cultists as such, which is why when the Blood Pact show up the Sabbat Worlds Crusade forces are in shock because they are now fighting an organized military.

The Blood Pact are even unusual in the realms of cults.

Organised military =/= Chaos Cults.

Chaos Cults are like real cults:

Rabble at the bottom + privileged leadership with all the best stuff (and their bodyguards) at the top.

Yeah as HBMC rightly points out, Blood Pact and Sons of Sek in Gaunt's Ghosts are described as a hardline proper armed force at complete odds with the fanatical cultists from some of the other campaigns. In the books, they make it obvious they are totally different.

I know everyone likes to knee jerk argue, but you're both agreeing with me. Cultists look like rabble and are typically poorly led (some notable exceptions, Sholen Skara and some other magisters) or led through sheer force of personality (again see Sholen Skara); true traitor guard such as the Blood Pact are formidable for the Imperium to fight as they are typically on the same footing as the Guard (or superior, such as the Sons of Sek)

Sorry I should say as you both point out. Don't think we are disagreeing (maybe HBMC is ) merely following up on what you were saying in response to the earlier post by NotOnline?

Loving those new Sontarans, I mean Squats.

 judgedoug wrote:
I know everyone likes to knee jerk argue, but you're both agreeing with me. Cultists look like rabble and are typically poorly led (some notable exceptions, Sholen Skara and some other magisters) or led through sheer force of personality (again see Sholen Skara); true traitor guard such as the Blood Pact are formidable for the Imperium to fight as they are typically on the same footing as the Guard (or superior, such as the Sons of Sek)

To be fair, I was more responding to Not Online's incredulity over the notion that Chaos Cults aren't fully clothed.

Voss wrote:


Oh, yeah. Without some sort of bizarre custom bodyguard rule for units, the HQ has a table lifespan of about 5 seconds against 9th edition firepower.
The commissar can almost certainly hide, but will probably affect combat attrition and not matter.
I'm not sure if the Ogryn will end up as part of a unit or just be a solo character? It'll be weird either way.

My money is on he's solo, but doesn't use a force org slot. I bet he counts as two selections in the kill team too.

I cannot stop planning out some Word Bearer cult army, though. Want to get the Servants of the Abyss box and the Cultists of the Abyss box again. I can convert up the firebrand as the cult leader, use the Rogue Psyker instead of that creepy head on a stick, the two Negavolt Cultists as the sword-dudes, and convert a beastman into the icon bearer. Still agree they will probably be demolished, but it would look neat!

BSF cultists looks pretty well armed, even have big dude with customised flamer.

Voss wrote:

But I really want to do a cultist army with minimal marine support (almost definitely some possessed herded into battle, or at least baited into eating the right people), and maybe some ramshackle counts-as tanks.
Or... some possessed tanks like back in the day. Either could be fun, and I hope there are some spare mutations amongst the various sprues.

That would look so damn cool. Maybe just Dark Apostle or a Master of Possession to guide the rabble. Or kitbash Dark Mechanicus if you want to proxy any of the chaos marine units. The conversion opportunity would be off the charts.

 Azreal13 wrote:


I'm talking about expendable, low point cost, low stat meat shields that you throw wherever you feel something more valuable needs protection. Not the Sandford Parish Council.

Sandford Parish Council?

Surely they were Tau sympathisers not Chaos.

"For The Greater Good"

Looks like I'm in the market for that Killteam Box. New Traitor Guard and the terrain set I just missed out on. Plus some Incursors for my new Howling Griffons force.

 Scottywan82 wrote:

Voss wrote:

But I really want to do a cultist army with minimal marine support (almost definitely some possessed herded into battle, or at least baited into eating the right people), and maybe some ramshackle counts-as tanks.
Or... some possessed tanks like back in the day. Either could be fun, and I hope there are some spare mutations amongst the various sprues.

That would look so damn cool. Maybe just Dark Apostle or a Master of Possession to guide the rabble. Or kitbash Dark Mechanicus if you want to proxy any of the chaos marine units. The conversion opportunity would be off the charts.

Look up FaithfulSon on Reddit. That to me is what a good rabble Cultist army should look like.

Interesting. The Warcom article lists the Traitor Guardsmen's Killteam faction as "Militarum Traitoris", but it also goes on to mention that they'll "Make a good addition to your CSM army". So, are they a separate faction from CSM, or will they be in the CSM codex?

 Grimtuff wrote:


Look up FaithfulSon on Reddit. That to me is what a good rabble Cultist army should look like.

SWEET BABY JEEBUS. That is... Wow! Just crushed it and knocked it out of the park and all the metaphors for success!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Interesting. The Warcom article lists the Traitor Guardsmen's Killteam faction as "Militarum Traitoris", but it also goes on to mention that they'll "Make a good addition to your CSM army". So, are they a separate faction from CSM, or will they be in the CSM codex?

Probably just a keyword, I expect.

 Scottywan82 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Chaos Cults are like real cults:

Rabble at the bottom + privileged leadership with all the best stuff (and their bodyguards) at the top.

What's the dividing line between a cult and a church, again?

Blurry at best.

Tax status.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Int: GW Studio.

Well guys, we're bringing back Squats, but aside from giving them a name that's somehow more unique and less memorable, we don't want people to confuse them with any old, common or garden dwarves.

I know, how about we just shave off all the beards?

To be fair, some of them have beards. And goatees.

But the remarkable quality to NuSquats is the helmets. They look like a paint pot caps, I'm betting the models will be exactly the same height.

GW is giving us something novel and unique, the ability to proxy paint pots for infantry.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Interesting. The Warcom article lists the Traitor Guardsmen's Killteam faction as "Militarum Traitoris", but it also goes on to mention that they'll "Make a good addition to your CSM army". So, are they a separate faction from CSM, or will they be in the CSM codex?

Or there's a keyword swap ability.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Interesting. The Warcom article lists the Traitor Guardsmen's Killteam faction as "Militarum Traitoris", but it also goes on to mention that they'll "Make a good addition to your CSM army". So, are they a separate faction from CSM, or will they be in the CSM codex?

White Dwarf article giving them 40K rules?

Voss wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Int: GW Studio.

Well guys, we're bringing back Squats, but aside from giving them a name that's somehow more unique and less memorable, we don't want people to confuse them with any old, common or garden dwarves.

I know, how about we just shave off all the beards?

Of the two models they've shown, one has a beard and one doesn't.

Today's 'actual squats' models are a mishmash of facial hair. Beardless chin, goatee, full beard, mutton chops and hidden chin, and 4 where there's no way of knowing.

Or, to put it another way, only 2 of the new models possess what many would list right near the top of defining characteristics for the race. If this was a fantasy release (where some contemporaries have armoured beards) people would be scratching their heads.

Meh? 'Our Dwarves/dwarfs/(elfs) are Different' is a cliche for a reason. Dark Sun went full 'no hair whatsoever.' for dwarves. Or maybe just the half-dwarves.

But still, you've got to admit, 2 of 6 (with additional levels of facial hair on two more) is pretty different from your starting position of 'shave off all the beards!'

It's really depressing when people don't understand the difference between facts and exaggeration for comic effect. Or they do, but are so desperate for conflict they don't see it.

alphaecho wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Interesting. The Warcom article lists the Traitor Guardsmen's Killteam faction as "Militarum Traitoris", but it also goes on to mention that they'll "Make a good addition to your CSM army". So, are they a separate faction from CSM, or will they be in the CSM codex?

White Dwarf article giving them 40K rules?

Or the CSM book has a thing letting you tag [Regiment] units with [Militarum Traitoris] instead...

Adam did say they could be used for veterans or infantry squads.

A good day for skirmish games, with Necromunda stealing the whole Festival by far. With a £65 starter set( like Kill Team ) I could be enticed into the game...

Strangely enough, I'm disappointed by Warcry even though all I had wished for was a new monster and GW has delivered a nice one at that. Not sure why. As I suspected, Warcry seems to be heading into a new edition and glad I held off. Whatever is happening, I look forward to more monsters and beasts...

While I like the contents of the new Kill Team expansion, I still have no interest in investing in the current edition. It'll be pricey, but I'll pick up the individual traitor pack for use with BSF and Stargrave, when that sees the light of day.

The bear is cool but not bothered about MiddleEarth.

Can't say I'm all that interested for tomorrow's The Horus Heresy. Titanicus caters to that era and has Titans, which are the most awesome thing about it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

alphaecho wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Interesting. The Warcom article lists the Traitor Guardsmen's Killteam faction as "Militarum Traitoris", but it also goes on to mention that they'll "Make a good addition to your CSM army". So, are they a separate faction from CSM, or will they be in the CSM codex?

White Dwarf article giving them 40K rules?

Or the CSM book has a thing letting you tag [Regiment] units with [Militarum Traitoris] instead...

Adam did say they could be used for veterans or infantry squads.

I want rules for my mishmash of BSF models and kitbashed Blood Pact with their Rampart Wolverine tanks.

alphaecho wrote:

I want rules for my mishmash of BSF models and kitbashed Blood Pact with their Rampart Wolverine tanks.

Spoiler:

Those are great! One of my buds and I bought some aftermarket bits and kitbashed and painted a small Blood Pact force for our other bud for last Christmas, with our take on an AT-70 Reaver and SteG-4.
He mainly uses the Pact as Vet Guard in Kill Team but also as some guard mixed with a World Eaters army he has for 40k.

 Kanluwen wrote:

alphaecho wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Interesting. The Warcom article lists the Traitor Guardsmen's Killteam faction as "Militarum Traitoris", but it also goes on to mention that they'll "Make a good addition to your CSM army". So, are they a separate faction from CSM, or will they be in the CSM codex?

White Dwarf article giving them 40K rules?

Or the CSM book has a thing letting you tag [Regiment] units with [Militarum Traitoris] instead...

Adam did say they could be used for veterans or infantry squads.

Which is what I'm hoping for. Also, they could build Marauders. The big difference between Marauders and Infantry/Veteran squads was: better stats, a few special rules, and the ability to include Ogryns in the squad. And looky, looky, looky.......

Thank you.

Those ones are a confection of bits fron Victoria Minitures, Anvil, Wargames Atlantuc, GW and Curious Constructs for the heads.

I mean if the article is saying they'll go along with CSM probably means they'll be in the Codex. Just like all the other Kill Teams (or in a free PDF like the Sisters one).

alphaecho wrote:

Thank you.

Those ones are a confection of bits fron Victoria Minitures, Anvil, Wargames Atlantuc, GW and Curious Constructs for the heads.

Nice! I know my plan is to get these new Traitor Guard and build Sons of Sek because I _love_ Anakwanar Sek and absolutely want to recreate the power struggles in the Archonate between Sek and Urlock Gaur and challenge my pal's Blood Pact.

 judgedoug wrote:

alphaecho wrote:

Thank you.

Those ones are a confection of bits fron Victoria Minitures, Anvil, Wargames Atlantuc, GW and Curious Constructs for the heads.

Nice! I know my plan is to get these new Traitor Guard and build Sons of Sek because I _love_ Anakwanar Sek and absolutely want to recreate the power struggles in the Archonate between Sek and Urlock Gaur and challenge my pal's Blood Pact.

"its not Teamkilling, blue on blue, or intrigue, its a competition to rise trough the ranks and achieve immortality." some random bloodpact and Sons of Sek commanders shortly before shooting eachother infront of some guardsmen probably,.

Not Online!!! wrote:
"its not Teamkilling, blue on blue, or intrigue, its a competition to rise trough the ranks and achieve immortality." some random bloodpact and Sons of Sek commanders shortly before shooting eachother infront of some guardsmen probably,.

That scene is an accurate depiction of what is going on in Mabbon Etogaur's head

 judgedoug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
"its not Teamkilling, blue on blue, or intrigue, its a competition to rise trough the ranks and achieve immortality." some random bloodpact and Sons of Sek commanders shortly before shooting eachother infront of some guardsmen probably,.

That scene is an accurate depiction of what is going on in Mabbon Etogaur's head

it's literally standard for all R&H commanders, afterall the path is clear, you only require the strength to take it.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Int: GW Studio.

Well guys, we're bringing back Squats, but aside from giving them a name that's somehow more unique and less memorable, we don't want people to confuse them with any old, common or garden dwarves.

I know, how about we just shave off all the beards?

Of the two models they've shown, one has a beard and one doesn't.

Today's 'actual squats' models are a mishmash of facial hair. Beardless chin, goatee, full beard, mutton chops and hidden chin, and 4 where there's no way of knowing.

Or, to put it another way, only 2 of the new models possess what many would list right near the top of defining characteristics for the race. If this was a fantasy release (where some contemporaries have armoured beards) people would be scratching their heads.

Meh? 'Our Dwarves/dwarfs/(elfs) are Different' is a cliche for a reason. Dark Sun went full 'no hair whatsoever.' for dwarves. Or maybe just the half-dwarves.

But still, you've got to admit, 2 of 6 (with additional levels of facial hair on two more) is pretty different from your starting position of 'shave off all the beards!'

It's really depressing when people don't understand the difference between facts and exaggeration for comic effect. Or they do, but are so desperate for conflict they don't see it.

When people really, actually hold absurd positions (spend 5 minutes in 40k general, or take a peek in the squat thread in this very forum for some of the usual ranting about female models), exaggeration for comic effect does not work. There's nothing to go on except what people say.