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.

whoadirty wrote:
Does the Apothecary become more valuable with the LOS changes?

Well, yes and no. He doesn't gain any value, and is still an expensive upgrade that can't shoot, but he allows the Paladins to function more like they should which is to say, he let's them soak up wounds.

So no. He isn't any more valuable. Instead, he makes an already too expensive unit even MORE expensive, without making them as effective as they were before the FAQ. If we give the efficacy of Paladins an arbitrary number:

Let's call it 315. That's the points value of 5 Paladins with 2 Psycannons and no upgrades. So we'll give them an efficiency score of 315.

After the FAQ, they kinda dropped to about 275. Adding an Apothecary will bump them back up to about 300, but now their actual points cost has gone up to 390.

 jy2 wrote:
--- mini-rant coming ---

Honestly, the pre-FAQ wound allocation with LOS and every model being a character was just broken. I didn't think that was GW's intent on how they should be played and I am glad GW did something to reign them back inline with how I think they were supposed to play. Wound allocation was just breaking the game and turning it into an arms race to see who had the best combos (and this is coming from a competitive player like me). It was also driving out a lot of players who got discourages at these combos and what they perceived to be "broken". IMO, this became a necessary nerf to make the game more balanced. They were trying to get away from wound allocation shenanigans in 6th, but their pre-FAQ 6E rules only made it more abusive.

--- end of mini-rant ---

I disagree. The ability to move wounds around on multi-wound units was necessary to justify their cost, and I welcomed the 4+ LoS! rule in 6th Ed with open arms as a streamlined way to do that.

 l0k1 wrote:
give the a Librarian with either codex powers or Divination powers and you still have a very mean unit.

Well, it'd want to be a mean unit. You're looking at 700 points there, or half your entire army, in a single unit of 6 models.

 l0k1 wrote:
I also think we should stop thinking of Paladins as "let's make these troops and spam" and more like "this is a nice hard hitting/shooting elite unit that we take 1 or two until of".

The problem is that taking one or two units of them is several orders of magnitude more expensive than taking their counterparts. Purifiers shoot better, cost half as much (or less) can take Razorbacks, and are just as effective (if not more-so) in combat. All of which was already true before the FAQ dropped but Paladins, while hard to justify, were still a solid choice. After the FAQ, with their ability to soak up wounds and make use of precision shots gone, they've simply lost too much to justify their exorbitant cost

Coyote81 wrote:Don't the paladins have the brotherhood of psykers rule and therefore when hit by the template only suffer one perils roll. I seem to rememeber that is how it's suppose to work.

jy2 wrote:

Coyote81 wrote:
Don't the paladins have the brotherhood of psykers rule and therefore when hit by the template only suffer one perils roll. I seem to rememeber that is how it's suppose to work.

This is correct. When hit by mindstrike missiles, only 1 model in a BoP unit suffers Perils (either the justicar or 1 random member), not everyone under the template.

This is what I said, however it was ruled that each unit that is underneath the template receives a perils. Therefore I took about 6 perils off the first set of 2 mindstrikes.

If there is some larger tourney that has this in their faq I could show, that would be cool.

 daedalus-templarius wrote:

Coyote81 wrote:Don't the paladins have the brotherhood of psykers rule and therefore when hit by the template only suffer one perils roll. I seem to rememeber that is how it's suppose to work.

jy2 wrote:

Coyote81 wrote:
Don't the paladins have the brotherhood of psykers rule and therefore when hit by the template only suffer one perils roll. I seem to rememeber that is how it's suppose to work.

This is correct. When hit by mindstrike missiles, only 1 model in a BoP unit suffers Perils (either the justicar or 1 random member), not everyone under the template.

This is what I said, however it was ruled that each unit that is underneath the template receives a perils. Therefore I took about 6 perils off the first set of 2 mindstrikes.

If there is some larger tourney that has this in their faq I could show, that would be cool.

Wow, that sucks. What's the point in having BoP if you're not allowed to use it? I'd be mad as gak.

 daedalus-templarius wrote:

jy2 wrote:

Coyote81 wrote:
Don't the paladins have the brotherhood of psykers rule and therefore when hit by the template only suffer one perils roll. I seem to rememeber that is how it's suppose to work.

This is correct. When hit by mindstrike missiles, only 1 model in a BoP unit suffers Perils (either the justicar or 1 random member), not everyone under the template.

This is what I said, however it was ruled that each unit that is underneath the template receives a perils. Therefore I took about 6 perils off the first set of 2 mindstrikes.
If there is some larger tourney that has this in their faq I could show, that would be cool.

You were screwed by TO. Nothing you can do about it, Brotherhood of Psykers is very clear about how any attack that specifically targets psykers is resolved against only single member of the squad.

Hard luck at the tournament mate. Maybe next time.

Here's a quick question:

Building my list around a shooting base of Henchies in an Aegis. What's worth taking alongside the 10 Psykers I already own?

Was thinking of one big mixed bag of Psykers/Jokaero and then Plasma Henchies/Servitors/Jokaero with 5 Strikes hanging around to deter DS.

Oh and I have 5 GKT. Worth taking them up to 10 or not bothering. If so how should they be used? DS?

If you want Psykers to work you need multiple units, as they aren't particularly reliable having to pass Ld8 and then roll 2D6-3 scatter.

As for the mixed Psyker/Jok unit; why?

Sorry I forgot to mention that I can make a few more Psykers. I was thinking either 2x8 or 2x6 would be best.

I've tried psykers and they don't do very much, because as Godless said, they have a lot of things to make good to get results.

Yes, you can be lucky, get a big strike on a SS and hammers termi unit, and kill almost all of them, but then again, you must be lucky.

Instead, try this:

3x Henchmen with plasma
2x Jokaero
3x Servitors with plasma cannon

and the optional thing are:

4x henchmen with bolter (they can get 90 cm of shooting with jokaeros)

4x crusaders (for their weak armor)

Or a mix of them

Also, you can try 3 HB instead of the 3 plasma cannon, they can get really good for anti infantry too, with the jokaeros on his side.

Problem in the case of all Servitor units though is not being able to move and shoot, and needing an Inquisitor to babysit them.

Well, it's a shooty unit, where you want prescience anyways.

And the move and shoot thing, well, I usually take 2 of the unit I've said, and sit in an objective from my side.

I don't see psykers as viable squads. I'm with Godless here. And if I take an Inquisitor - which I generally like to do - I know a lot of better squads for prescience - which really is a help against many different types of targets.

Sad part is that there are too many eldar in my local area so I've had to shelve my psykers but man I really did like them but too easily shut down in practice but looks great on paper. I kind of like IG psykers better due to morale changes though

Is anyone else salty that Abby went back to AP2 while Draigo is still stuck at AP3 status? I'd be happy if he has to strike at Init. 1 just to have our freaking chapter master be able to merc anything he fights...

 Goat wrote:
Is anyone else salty that Abby went back to AP2 while Draigo is still stuck at AP3 status? I'd be happy if he has to strike at Init. 1 just to have our freaking chapter master be able to merc anything he fights...

Maybe they will eventually put out a FAQ that does a weapon profile for the Titansword like they did with the NDH in the latest FAQ.

Its basically a daemon weapon... should be AP2!

Very very pissed off about this, I will have to talk to friends in high places and hold a sign outside of their main HQ with the following:

"Heretical Staffs of GW, I demand the Titansword to be AP2 or there will be many of you with my name engraved on your hearts, and I don't think the dark gods favours you as much as the demon primarch."

The Titansword is still a reforged Nemesis Force Sword whateveway you look at it, so makes sense that it is AP3. Abaddon is different as Daemon Weapons are AP2 in general. We really can't complain anyway; by right of fluff we shouldn't even be able to use Draigo.

by right of fluff we shouldn't even be able to use Draigo.

Or perhaps he should not be an Independent Character and should be compelled to enter via Deep Strike to simulate him appearing alone from the Warp in times of need. Personally I 've no issue at all with his sword being AP3.

Actually doing that and the new change to LOS! whilst keeping paladins as characters would have kept paladins as a reasonably competitive option rather than reducing them to a 4th or 5th choice option as a basis for a Grey Knight force (behind Purifiers, Weaklings, Strikes and -- probably -- Terminators). I know there's a body of opinion that says the 'new' paladins are still very viable as a shooting platform but I rather struggle to see them as even approaching as good value as any of the other options because of their now massively reduced staying power. Ho hum.

I do find it strange that Paladins got distinctly weakened (though new LOS! seems fair enough to me, it's the loss of character status that I find a bit odd -- and I'd say that applies to Wolf Guard and probably Nobz too) whereas the two stronger Grey Knight builds have suffered no degradation.

I didn't find the new LOS rules to change much at all in the last tournament.

I lost based on completely different things. LOS wouldn't have done anything vs a rampaging bloodthirster, nor the misinterpretation by my opponent of how Mindstrike missiles affect squads of GK(Paladins).

Only in my 2nd game did they end up taking a lot of fire, and then LOS seemed to work fine as long as I shuffed them around in the movement phase.

That was based solely on your draws though. Start facing a lot of AP2 weaponry though and it makes a huge difference. Even mroe still, face Guard or DE and see your Paladins melt to AP2 ID weapons, which they before had a 50% chance to pass on to Draigo.

Paladin competitive game is gone. Of course, it can still win somehow, but with the other options is better/easier/whatever.

Doesn't Abaddon's sword attack himself? Can't really complain about another character having AP2 when he hits himself with it. Draigo is still a monster.

I think if the Titansword is to remain AP3, they should at least say its a real Nemisis Force Sword and allow Draigo a 2+ invuln in melee.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
That was based solely on your draws though. Start facing a lot of AP2 weaponry though and it makes a huge difference. Even mroe still, face Guard or DE and see your Paladins melt to AP2 ID weapons, which they before had a 50% chance to pass on to Draigo.

Well if that is what you're facing, you'd better have Draigo positioned well; also the 4+ pass to Draigo literally failed every time for me, heh.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
That was based solely on your draws though. Start facing a lot of AP2 weaponry though and it makes a huge difference. Even mroe still, face Guard or DE and see your Paladins melt to AP2 ID weapons, which they before had a 50% chance to pass on to Draigo.

Against guard Draigo can take point and los non id wounds to unwounded paladins.

Deep striking solodins with a hammer are a menace to msu armies, and a scoring unit. With a 2+ armor save they can safely ds into terrain. Also being a 55 point unit they can afford to go to ground when shot at by a lance/lascannon. 3 s10 hammer attacks on the charge is enough to break many units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Also many draigowing builds already include a librarian or xenos inquisitor for a plasma siphon, rad, and psych grenades. That's a 2nd ic that can los on a 2+.

schadenfreude wrote:Against guard Draigo can take point and los non id wounds to unwounded paladins.

It's not that simple anymore. He can only be at the front to one facing, so it is very easy for the enemy to move to make sure the Paladins are the closest models, and that's where the LOS is sorely missed. Both the armies suggested (DE and IG) can do this ridiculously easily, and they are just the more extreme examples.

schadenfreude wrote:Deep striking solodins with a hammer are a menace to msu armies, and a scoring unit. With a 2+ armor save they can safely ds into terrain. Also being a 55 point unit they can afford to go to ground when shot at by a lance/lascannon. 3 s10 hammer attacks on the charge is enough to break many units.

A menace? Really? With overwatch and more than likely a vast outnumbering if a unit can't beat a single Paladin on the charge then it's not worth taking. You also are claiming that he alone can break most units but you are ignoring that most units in this game have ATSKNF, making it meaningless.

schadenfreude wrote:Also many draigowing builds already include a librarian or xenos inquisitor for a plasma siphon, rad, and psych grenades. That's a 2nd ic that can los on a 2+.

Not the competitive ones. Not that full on Draigowing was doing very good at any tournaments in 6th anyway, but the ones that had a chance didn't spend so much points on unnecessary items hat were essentially just overkill. As for buying them now, maybe they will help, but once again its someone saying, 'well if you spend this many more points they are just as good as before', which in itself says they aren't as good as they used to be at all.

As for the second LOS thing, it makes no difference to the AP2 ID problem, because that's just even more points for that one Dark Lance to take with ease.

 Goat wrote:
Is anyone else salty that Abby went back to AP2 while Draigo is still stuck at AP3 status? I'd be happy if he has to strike at Init. 1 just to have our freaking chapter master be able to merc anything he fights...

This is a problem for a lot of HQ's with power weapons. I personally can't get over the fact that the Draigo, the best guy out of a whole chapter of the best space marines, which are the best, with his legendary titan sword... is ap3 in cc

Paladins aren't quite dead.

At NOVA I only lost more than half the Paladins in one game. Most games they didnt even lose half their wound pool. With two IC's at the front and through meticulous positioning you can still place those ID wounds on wounded models. The two units that will be most dangerous are probably the Doom Scythe and Vendetta because they have the speed to target you from vulnerable angles.

DE crap on Paladins, this has always been true and will continue to stay that way. But honestly, DE suck now. Plain and simple. I wouldnt worry about them. Guard are the biggest Paladin threat. If you can plan accordingly, you should be able to run the Paladins with some success.

Also keep in mind that as the meta shifts to less Str 8 spam, you will find there are less things that really threaten the Paladins. I'd rather be shot at by Plasma than Str. 8+.

This isn't a pure GK list but this is what I am now playtesting:
Rune Priest Runic Armor, Combi-Melta 130

9 Grey Hunters Melta, Standard, Pod 185
10 Grey Hunters 2 Plasma, Standard, Pod 205
10 Grey Hunters 2 Plasma, Standard, Pod 205
5 Grey Hunters Flamer, Pod 110
5 Grey Hunters Flamer, Pod 110
5 Long Fangs 4 Missiles 115
5 Long Fangs 4 Missiles 115

Coteaz 100

10 Purifiers 4 Psycannon, 1 Hammer 285
10 Strikes 2 Psycannon 220
10 Strikes 2 Psycannon 220
2000

Very boring but incredibly resilient and puts out a ton of fire power. There are over 50 bolters in that list.

RE: Draigo and his Titansword.
I think it is appropriate. He is the anvil, not the hammer. Besides, it's not like he needs AP2 for fighting Daemons, which fluff dictates are his usual enemies.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Against guard Draigo can take point and los non id wounds to unwounded paladins.

It's not that simple anymore. He can only be at the front to one facing, so it is very easy for the enemy to move to make sure the Paladins are the closest models, and that's where the LOS is sorely missed. Both the armies suggested (DE and IG) can do this ridiculously easily, and they are just the more extreme examples.

schadenfreude wrote:Deep striking solodins with a hammer are a menace to msu armies, and a scoring unit. With a 2+ armor save they can safely ds into terrain. Also being a 55 point unit they can afford to go to ground when shot at by a lance/lascannon. 3 s10 hammer attacks on the charge is enough to break many units.

A menace? Really? With overwatch and more than likely a vast outnumbering if a unit can't beat a single Paladin on the charge then it's not worth taking. You also are claiming that he alone can break most units but you are ignoring that most units in this game have ATSKNF, making it meaningless.

schadenfreude wrote:Also many draigowing builds already include a librarian or xenos inquisitor for a plasma siphon, rad, and psych grenades. That's a 2nd ic that can los on a 2+.

Not the competitive ones. Not that full on Draigowing was doing very good at any tournaments in 6th anyway, but the ones that had a chance didn't spend so much points on unnecessary items hat were essentially just overkill. As for buying them now, maybe they will help, but once again its someone saying, 'well if you spend this many more points they are just as good as before', which in itself says they aren't as good as they used to be at all.

As for the second LOS thing, it makes no difference to the AP2 ID problem, because that's just even more points for that one Dark Lance to take with ease.

DE lance spam really struggles against a lot of the new 6e armies, so while it is a hard counter I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Forgot about the 2nd LOS faq. With the 2nd LOS faq the inability to drop wounds whenever a 2 wound model wants within 3" means 2 wound shinanigans is pretty much over. Guess what...the unit still has 2 wounds per model. That's a very effective defense against volume of attacks (just ask TH/SS players how effective that is) and an effective defense against plasma (it takes 3 plasma wounds to drop 1 paladin with a 5+ invo). Paladins are still an effective unit with solid melee and shooting ability what is it 8 psycannons on the move with 2 rerolls to hit per 325 points?

Is a single paladin a menace to most units? Well let's define most.

If it has an AV value but doesn't have a DCCW then yes. That's pretty much everything except a standard dreadnought including the BA Cuisinart.
Is it a troops choice? If the answer is yes then most troops can't handle a single paladin, especially now that sergeants with a power fist have gone out of style. Some troops have melta, but even the dreaded melta vets only have a 15/54 (27.7%) chance of killing the paladin with 3 snap fired melta guns. 1/6 to hit* 5/6 to wound *2/3 to fail armor save = 10/108=5/54 then*3shots=15/54= 27.7%. It's less than 10% per melta gun. Sure 3 melta guns can melt 1 paladin out in the open, but they are should be focused on the main squad of paladins.

Is it a non AV heavy support choice? Long fangs, lootas, dev squads, TFC all dead.

For 55 points a single paladin is a mean unit to deepstrike into an opponent's backfield.