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.

 Lobukia wrote:

 Triton wrote:
Fewer people are buying GW products now than this time last year. They're not bringing in new blood.

So true, their pricing and lack of rules support is killing them (as is the bafflingly bizarre one man store approach and their screw the FLGS tactics). Though a good chunk of the blame is at the feet of the bitter and self destructive vocal minority that's practicing a scorched earth policy on the old interwebz and the unwillingness of club/league/pick up game organizer to set ground rules.

So GW's failing is that not enough of its players are willing to fix its bad rules they paid ridiculous amounts of money for?

Yeah, shame on those guys.

 Triton wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lobukia wrote:
This is a rebalance... and a tweak, cooler heads will prevail, but why does it take us a year to get there, and in all the negative pouting we turn off more people to the game. If people don't like a town, they move, but they don't try to set it on fire on the way out... why are gamers so willing to burn bridges and do damage on the way out?

I find it fascinating you believe it's the "negativity" that's turning potential new people off rather than the $500+ start-up cost to get involved and the availability of cheaper, better alternatives out there.

I find it fascinating you can't read. I've said the same... in this thread.

 Lobukia wrote:
I find it fascinating you can't read.

That's a tad ironic coming from the guy who's been unable to determine why people don't like what they've heard about 7th edition.

 Triton wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

 Triton wrote:
Fewer people are buying GW products now than this time last year. They're not bringing in new blood.

So true, their pricing and lack of rules support is killing them (as is the bafflingly bizarre one man store approach and their screw the FLGS tactics). Though a good chunk of the blame is at the feet of the bitter and self destructive vocal minority that's practicing a scorched earth policy on the old interwebz and the unwillingness of club/league/pick up game organizer to set ground rules.

So GW's failing is that not enough of its players are willing to fix its bad rules they paid ridiculous amounts of money for?

Yeah, shame on those guys.

I bolded the parts you can't understand so that you can at least make clear retorts that aren't already countered in what you're quoting... you're welcome

 Lobukia wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

Makumba wrote:

Not flame bait... seriously. After adding the house rule "2 detachments max, LoW/Fortifications need to have substitute points incase opponent doesn't want to deal with them, Battle forged only, only primary detachment non troops score" I think I'm good. My club won't bat an eye at that restriction and after we get over that this is a really good edition.

But that is like playing a totaly different game then w40k rules say.

And If demons are your main army , then I am sure your happy for 7th , they got better. On the other hand tau got nerfed a lot . My AM won't work unless I take ally . I for example have nothing that can counter a demon spawning list that drops 2-3 squads of horrors per turn , while buffing their invs and stoping my two casters from doing anything.

How'd I get a buff? My herald can't shoot flickering fire in a unit of pink horrors and I can't assault after flying. The hard to drop and daemon summoning might help certain competitive lists though. Still bad to see another nerf to assault.

Besides it basically forced turn 3 assaults, made thirsters worse, made Khornate DP worse, and made assault oriented not FMC we will fly and spam shots and then assault to finish off dramatically worse.

Good points, StarTrotter... and you're proving my point

People who don't play Daemons, think Daemons are broken and will be spawning a hundred blood thirsters.... those who think through the new dynamic realize that for every buff there seems to be a nerf... and things that others are freaked out about are actually pretty tricky to pull off

Bikes got better (increased save) but nerfed (snapfire)

MC got worse, their never before 6th smash rule got knocked back to reasonable levels, but they can move through terrain better, assault through terrain better, and still can really hurt most vehicles.

This is a rebalance... and a tweak, cooler heads will prevail, but why does it take us a year to get there, and in all the negative pouting we turn off more people to the game. If people don't like a town, they move, but they don't try to set it on fire on the way out... why are gamers so willing to burn bridges and do damage on the way out?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I'm not calling the OP a blinded white knight, but he's a blinded white knight.



See how that works?
(I don't actually think that, I'm just making a point about obvious hypocrisy while being simultaneously condescending and dismissive.)

Wow. How about you make a point about avoiding the topic, and ignoring counter points to arguments? That would be even more clever witty and cutting

Because I"m not here to argue. Your original post said that you didn't understand why people are complaining. My post was to explain why they were so you could understand. I even said you might not agree. My further posts were to show that you wouldn't agree because you're being automatically dismissive of the other side.

I liked 6th, Escalation, and Stronghold Assaults, so I'll like 7th.

What we have been delivered is 6th with Escalation and Stronghold Assaults, a couple new spell charts, and a new Psyker Phase.

I think the new Psyker Phase looks fun, and I'm looking forward to trying it out...that seems to be the only real change to 6th I see other than minor rules and chart twerks.

Yet another Dakka Thread that has devolved into arguments and insults...

 Murdius Maximus wrote:
Yet another Dakka Thread that has devolved into arguments and insults...

True... taking a breather.

My major issue with 7th is that they have done very little to fix the weakness of assault armies. Heck, changing WS to mean something, having assault grenades effect overwatch, making a set charges range, terrain giving a set int penalty (like -2 or -3) would have done a lot. Melee units are still priced like they were in 4th.

Lets look a the genestealer. Correct me if I am wrong, but they have been getting progressively worse since 3rd. They used to be boss, but now they are just sad.

 AdeptSister wrote:
My major issue with 7th is that they have done very little to fix the weakness of assault armies. Heck, changing WS to mean something, having assault grenades effect overwatch, making a set charges range, terrain giving a set int penalty (like -2 or -3) would have done a lot. Melee units are still priced like they were in 4th.

Lets look a the genestealer. Correct me if I am wrong, but they have been getting progressively worse since 3rd. They used to be boss, but now they are just sad.

Its true, but placing objective before choosing sides alone will help assault armies quite a bit. Is it enough? Who knows, but it might be. I will say, I run mostly assault armies and in all but GT top table stuff, they do quite well.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Not flame bait... seriously.
Don't mean to sound dismissive, but what's all the troubles gents? I've read every stinking post in the News Rumors threads and most here, and I'm just not seeing any problems once you get over the FoC issues. The rage quitters and edition banners just seem to be generating nerd-rage white noise. Seriously, look at the armies I play (sig). The ones I run the most are Daemons/CSM allies (lots of FMC), SM varieties, Guard. I play against/with a ton of Tau, Cron, Eldar, Nids. I don't see any of these getting overtly nerfed.

All in all this a fairly subtle and needed edition change. I don't see these rules as complex (not at all). Come on. I think a deep breath, a moment of mature calm reflection, and taking a step back is needed for the DakkaDakka community as a whole. IMO 6th was the best edition yet (played at least a little of all, owned models since the RT days) and in 7th I see only improvements if you have a club of even barely socially aware, reasonable people. If you don't why would you play there anyway?

If you've looked at my posts, I'm hardly a glass half full guy or a GW apologist (those epic, morons), but I'm a big enough man to give the rules a fair shake and it looks good to me.

Says he's not flame baiting, then calls anyone with a criticism "rage quitters."
Okay, ignoring the obvious flame baiting....
So, you read 200+ pages of the news and rumors thread and you're still clueless as to what the criticisms actually are?

Okay, I'll break it down for you, though its been broken down by people in that previous thread and far more eloquent than I can manage.

For one, you've made a lot of house rules to make the game playable. You've said that you had a game club of like minded individuals. Of course you're going to be OK with this edition. That's who 7th was made for. For everyone that's not in your exact same situation (yes, there are actually people like that) people that have to rely on pickup games, it's made the pre-game negotiation much more difficult and the chances for an actual fair game far less likely. "So, are super heavies in? What about unbound or Battle forged? D weapons? FOC shennanigans? Etc etc...) No one I know brings their whole collection to a pick up game just to see what they're actually able to play.

Fluff breakage. This is a big one for me. Oh, Ultramarine librarians summoning deamons? Totally legit now. That goes against everything 40k has been about since my RT days. Yes, I know a marine will occasionally fall to Chaos, but not to the point where it should ever be represented on the tabletop like this. Unbound armies with Wraithknights, riptides and Vendetta all working together? Sure. That's totally narrative.

It's too soon for me for a new edition, especially not at this price range. For some, it's worth it. But not for me.

Unbound and demon summoning weren't added to improve the game. It's all just an obvious cash grab by a increasingly desperate GW.

I'm not happy with the pyschic phase thing because neither of my armies have psykers and that seems to be a handicap now. Also, its adding a lot more complexity and an additional turn to the game.

Random charts for everything. They love the term "narrative" but don't actually know what it means. Random charts aren't narrative.

GW business practices help keep me away.

Basically its become a huge unbalanced mess that moves further and further away from a well balanced, good rule set and more into a "feth it, just do whatever you want" kind of ruleset. Not paying $85 for that.

Does that clear it up for you or are you still going to pretend problems don't exist? You may disagree with some, but at least try to see why people have criticisms.
I'm not a GW hater, I've been playing since I was 9 years old. I love the game and the universe of 40k, but I hate what the game's becoming because of shady, poor and ill conceived business practices by GW.

So, yes, I'm sitting 7th out.
(Side note: Still no friggin' legions and still NOTHING new for Sisters of Battle.)

"Fluff breakage. This is a big one for me. Oh, Ultramarine librarians summoning deamons? Totally legit now. That goes against everything 40k has been about since my RT days. Yes, I know a marine will occasionally fall to Chaos, but not to the point where it should ever be represented on the tabletop like this. Unbound armies with Wraithknights, riptides and Vendetta all working together? Sure. That's totally narrative. " So because you don't want to field a freshly or nearly corrupted librarian, nobody else should be allowed to either? So because you don't want to field a Gue'vesa/Tau and Eldar temporarily allying to stop a hive fleet, or chaos incursion, nobody else should? The daemon summoning is part of the fluff. Psychic powers go wrong all the time, maybe that Wyrdvane psyker squad accidentally spewed Khornates in the enemy's lap and is about to get a Commissar breathing down their collective necks. (And sure, none of this applies to none narrative games, but then the criticism of anti-fluff can't apply to non narrative games because winning, not fluff, is the measured used.

"Unbound and demon summoning weren't added to improve the game. It's all just an obvious cash grab by a increasingly desperate GW." Who would have expected a company to maximise profits whilst simultaneously giving consumers new ways of using their product? It's as if GW isn't a charity or something.

"I'm not happy with the pyschic phase thing because neither of my armies have psykers and that seems to be a handicap now. Also, its adding a lot more complexity and an additional turn to the game." It's literally no more of a handicap now than it was before, if anything the armies without psykers got improved because casting psychic powers got more difficult, more risky and fewer in number (check out the threads of psychic power probabilities. If you were happy to use non-psyker armies before, you're situation has only improved since. The last point will need time to tell. It could be that moving all the psychic powers into their own phase will mean players don't forget them and actually become quicker by not using them at all manner of different times of the turn.

"Basically its become a huge unbalanced mess that moves further and further away from a well balanced, good rule set and more into a "feth it, just do whatever you want" kind of ruleset. Not paying $85 for that." It's always been unbalanced. Rhino Rush, Draigowing, Leafblowers, Herohammer, etc.

The rest of the stuff I didn't comment I totally agree with. If only they'd be a nice company. That doesn't stop the criticisms I'm reading seeming absurd and premature to me.

God In Action wrote:
So because you don't want to field a freshly or nearly corrupted librarian, nobody else should be allowed to either? So because you don't want to field a Gue'vesa/Tau and Eldar temporarily allying to stop a hive fleet, or chaos incursion, nobody else should? The daemon summoning is part of the fluff. Psychic powers go wrong all the time, maybe that Wyrdvane psyker squad accidentally spewed Khornates in the enemy's lap and is about to get a Commissar breathing down their collective necks. (And sure, none of this applies to none narrative games, but then the criticism of anti-fluff can't apply to non narrative games because winning, not fluff, is the measured used.

A "freshly or nearly corrupted librarian" would be quite well-covered by Chaos Space Marines. Because that's what they are. Chaos Space Marines.

You're making a very specific argument that we absolutely need to have guys who turn traitor in the middle of a battlefield codified into rules. That's a new one. Points for creativity, at least.

And none of it addresses why the Great Unclean One you just summoned would fight for your loyalist Ultramarine brothers against, say, the Death Guard on the other side of the table. It's an incredibly stupid addition to the game. I understand that people who don't particularly care about the fluff or want to battle sounds as they move their guys across the table feel the need to argue in favor for it, but there's no justification found in the fluff.

Who would have expected a company to maximise profits whilst simultaneously giving consumers new ways of using their product? It's as if GW isn't a charity or something.

They're getting pretty close to a charity (or at least a non-profit) in terms of their P/L. As has been said before in this thread, they're not gaining new customers, and they're losing a lot of established ones as the editions go by. You like the, "Take anything you want, we've decided that bloodletters and Gray Knights fight side by side all the time!"-style changes? Great. I'm genuinely happy for you. But other people don't. Other people don't like the unjustifiably high prices, the patently obvious cash grab releases, etc. You can argue against them all you like, but they're not listening. They're too busy taking their money elsewhere.

I find the anti-fluff argument just somewhat odd. Think of it this way. If the vast new options available don't fit people's vision of the fluff, they shouldn't do it- problem solved. If they are doing something against the fluff- well the fluff isn't their main concern in the first place so how can they be using it is a criticism? Those that care about fluff will follow it, and those that don't won't. (I admit, there'll be problems in pick up games, but that's a universal problem of finding a player that wants the same sort of game as you, and not specific to daemon summoning).

I don't like using Bloodletters and Grey Knights side by side so I never will be, but if someone else wants to it isn't hurting me. More power to them if that's what's fun.

And definitely vote with your money. I' too skipped several GW purchase for other products because of price, for example. This doesn't relate to the merits of 7th as a ruleset though- only to the initial purchase (and there's other options than buying the £50 book tomorrow).

God In Action wrote:
I find the anti-fluff argument just somewhat odd. Think of it this way. If the vast new options available don't fit people's vision of the fluff, they shouldn't do it- problem solved.

Well, then let's not divide units up into factions at all. I mean, if someone wants to take a Space Marine only force, they can do it. Everyone else can enjoy the vast new options available by having a hive tyrant lead crisis suits, orks, Plague Marines, and Blood Angels into battle.

Grey Knights cannot use Malefic powers, if I'm reading the chart correctly.

Exorcists are loyalist marines who are "possessed" by a summoned daemon in the fluff before being exorcised, so yes, summoning daemons is known even to loyalists.

Unbound lists need to be agreed with the opponent, and most people who play them will either be doing some sort of theme (Pedro Kantor leading an army of Sternguard = Deathwatch) or just doing a "run what you brung" event. Since they're agreed to, they'll often be against Unbound lists, and massed Riptides fighting massed Tyranid Monstrous Creatures has a very Pacific Rim vibe to it.

For myself I'm quietly hopeful.

Not a long time player (started at the dawn of 6th), but I am liking 7th quite a bit so far. I agree with your assessment, Lobukia, completely. My group won't bat an eye about not using Unbound and will likely rein in the FoC spam for Battleforged armies. Other than that, I think this edition has much promise.

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:
Grey Knights cannot use Malefic powers, if I'm reading the chart correctly.

No, but they can certainly fight alongside summoned daemons.

Exorcists are loyalist marines who are "possessed" by a summoned daemon in the fluff before being exorcised, so yes, summoning daemons is known even to loyalists.

And that's a secret that they keep extremely quiet, because it's, you know, heresy, and they'd be purged if it got out.

I mean, sure, we absolutely needed rules to allow us to play Exorcists who went well beyond what they're doing in the fluff and summoned daemons to fight for them rather than just allowing temporary possession.

I'm happy with it mostly so far. My problem with 6th was random charge and overwatch potency...seeing how that's not going anywhere anytime soon, I accept it 2 years later.

There isn't a new rule yet I don't like. So far as far as core rules go, everything seems pretty black and white with little confusion like past books. Once all the codex gets tossed into the rules though is where it gets wonkey.

Kal-El wrote:
I'm happy with it mostly so far. My problem with 6th was random charge and overwatch potency...seeing how that's not going anywhere anytime soon, I accept it 2 years later.

There isn't a new rule yet I don't like. So far as far as core rules go, everything seems pretty black and white with little confusion like past books. Once all the codex gets tossed into the rules though is where it gets wonkey.

Yeah the FAQs will be telling. Don't know why they're not out yet.

I was looking forward to the new rules, but then they axed my chariots. Well, not literally axed, but the mechanic of one dead=both dead is a show stopper for me. I'm trying to keep a positive outlook though. All my Necron lists have an extra 160 points to play with. I just need to figure out how to footslog Overlords again.
I'm just sad because my double CCB rush with scarab swarming behind was such a fun dynamic.

 Fafnir13 wrote:
I was looking forward to the new rules, but then they axed my chariots. Well, not literally axed, but the mechanic of one dead=both dead is a show stopper for me. I'm trying to keep a positive outlook though. All my Necron lists have an extra 160 points to play with. I just need to figure out how to footslog Overlords again.
I'm just sad because my double CCB rush with scarab swarming behind was such a fun dynamic.

Our local Nercon player was pumped. Said necron chariots were better and that he as allowed to split allocation until one died... and that if reanimated both chariot and 'cron came back with 1 HP/W each. Maybe he's just reading it wrong or despite that they're still "axed"??

I'll admit, of all the codices I am weakest on the Necrons, so I may not even be passing his reading of the rules on correctly. I don't have book in hand yet, so I'm simply a second hand repository at the moment.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Not flame bait... seriously.
Don't mean to sound dismissive, but what's all the troubles gents? I've read every stinking post in the News Rumors threads and most here, and I'm just not seeing any problems once you get over the FoC issues. The rage quitters and edition banners just seem to be generating nerd-rage white noise. Seriously, look at the armies I play (sig). The ones I run the most are Daemons/CSM allies (lots of FMC), SM varieties, Guard. I play against/with a ton of Tau, Cron, Eldar, Nids. I don't see any of these getting overtly nerfed.

All in all this a fairly subtle and needed edition change. I don't see these rules as complex (not at all). Come on. I think a deep breath, a moment of mature calm reflection, and taking a step back is needed for the DakkaDakka community as a whole. IMO 6th was the best edition yet (played at least a little of all, owned models since the RT days) and in 7th I see only improvements if you have a club of even barely socially aware, reasonable people. If you don't why would you play there anyway?

If you've looked at my posts, I'm hardly a glass half full guy or a GW apologist (those epic, morons), but I'm a big enough man to give the rules a fair shake and it looks good to me.

Says he's not flame baiting, then calls anyone with a criticism "rage quitters."
Okay, ignoring the obvious flame baiting....
So, you read 200+ pages of the news and rumors thread and you're still clueless as to what the criticisms actually are?

Okay, I'll break it down for you, though its been broken down by people in that previous thread and far more eloquent than I can manage.

For one, you've made a lot of house rules to make the game playable. You've said that you had a game club of like minded individuals. Of course you're going to be OK with this edition. That's who 7th was made for. For everyone that's not in your exact same situation (yes, there are actually people like that) people that have to rely on pickup games, it's made the pre-game negotiation much more difficult and the chances for an actual fair game far less likely. "So, are super heavies in? What about unbound or Battle forged? D weapons? FOC shennanigans? Etc etc...) No one I know brings their whole collection to a pick up game just to see what they're actually able to play.

Fluff breakage. This is a big one for me. Oh, Ultramarine librarians summoning deamons? Totally legit now. That goes against everything 40k has been about since my RT days. Yes, I know a marine will occasionally fall to Chaos, but not to the point where it should ever be represented on the tabletop like this. Unbound armies with Wraithknights, riptides and Vendetta all working together? Sure. That's totally narrative.

It's too soon for me for a new edition, especially not at this price range. For some, it's worth it. But not for me.

Unbound and demon summoning weren't added to improve the game. It's all just an obvious cash grab by a increasingly desperate GW.

I'm not happy with the pyschic phase thing because neither of my armies have psykers and that seems to be a handicap now. Also, its adding a lot more complexity and an additional turn to the game.

Random charts for everything. They love the term "narrative" but don't actually know what it means. Random charts aren't narrative.

GW business practices help keep me away.

Basically its become a huge unbalanced mess that moves further and further away from a well balanced, good rule set and more into a "feth it, just do whatever you want" kind of ruleset. Not paying $85 for that.

Does that clear it up for you or are you still going to pretend problems don't exist? You may disagree with some, but at least try to see why people have criticisms.
I'm not a GW hater, I've been playing since I was 9 years old. I love the game and the universe of 40k, but I hate what the game's becoming because of shady, poor and ill conceived business practices by GW.

So, yes, I'm sitting 7th out.
(Side note: Still no friggin' legions and still NOTHING new for Sisters of Battle.)

I got the book Wednesday and couldn't be bothered with it, its a $100 copy paste job they did in a month to desperately try and make it look they are profiting, best part is GW stores wont let you return them with the wrap is open.

loving it, cant wait to put the maelstrom missions through their paces

Also chariots got super buffed so I would not worry about wanting to play them. Seriously read the shooting allocation and then get back to me.

"O your shot can hurt my armor, I will take it on my 2+/3++ character, if not it is on my chariot" Seriously really the new chariot rules, they are CRAZY.

What if I don't agree with your tweaks? For you making "tweaks" in the first place is showing you are not that excited to begin with, but have reservation, or dislike to begin with.
So your title is a lie, or flame bating even if that is not your intent. At least be truthful with your title.


So how can we agree if you are already changing the rules?

 Lobukia wrote:

 Fafnir13 wrote:
I was looking forward to the new rules, but then they axed my chariots. Well, not literally axed, but the mechanic of one dead=both dead is a show stopper for me. I'm trying to keep a positive outlook though. All my Necron lists have an extra 160 points to play with. I just need to figure out how to footslog Overlords again.
I'm just sad because my double CCB rush with scarab swarming behind was such a fun dynamic.

Our local Nercon player was pumped. Said necron chariots were better and that he as allowed to split allocation until one died... and that if reanimated both chariot and 'cron came back with 1 HP/W each. Maybe he's just reading it wrong or despite that they're still "axed"??

I'll admit, of all the codices I am weakest on the Necrons, so I may not even be passing his reading of the rules on correctly. I don't have book in hand yet, so I'm simply a second hand repository at the moment.

He's most likely being overly optimistic with the resurrection bit. I don't have the rule book, so perhaps there's some special note in it about the chariot getting special rules from the character. I highly doubt that though....

The changes to chariots help it survive the shooting phase better, especialy vs Melta. The problem is in close combat where a chariot is supposed to be doing it's thing. If what I've read on DakkaDakka is correct, the enemy is still delegating where their attacks go. The chariot now gets it's FA vs melee attacks, but you'd be surprised how many STR 10 Ap 2 things are out there (with the new Sanctic table, even more things...). With open topped, the Catacomb Command Barge is too easy for the big guys to pop with no saves to keep that from happening. Used to be I would at least get the consolation prize of having my Overlord around to feth with things.

The biggest issue for me is I've had too many fun experiences with the old mechanics. Just the other day, I rolled the Outflanking warlord trait for one of my Bargelords. Since I had a good unit of Immortals in that game, I popped him in with those and had a nice backfield gunline turn 2. Meanwhile, the empty chariot charged up with the other Bargelord. It turned out really well for him as His ride got blasted by some Stormraven Melta. He just hopped in the other chariot and continued to have a jolly old time.
Another time, two landraider's worth of paladins and terminators got the charge off on my two Bargelords. One had his chariot bashed out, the other got gibbed by a hammer and didn't rez. The surviving Overlord piled into the now empty barge, scythed a couple terminators, and blew up a Landraider in the following turn. That chariot then got blasted out from underneath him, but he still managed to get another landraider and then contested a key objective whilst in a challenge for the rest of the game.

I'm just really bummed crazy stuff like that really can't happen anymore. It strips out a lot of flexibility which made the unit so much fun for me to use.

It specifically says under chariots that everliving can bring the rider and chariot back

huh, consider me surprised. Thanks for the info.
Ok, I'll still complain about the loss of flexibility, but I'll at least give some Bargelords with ressurecction orbs a try. I'll withdraw my "axed" comment for now

 Triton wrote:

A "freshly or nearly corrupted librarian" would be quite well-covered by Chaos Space Marines. Because that's what they are. Chaos Space Marines.

Except that they wouldn't. He's making a very valid point that you just dismiss without at least trying to understand what he wrote. It's been repeatedly stated that Codex: Chaos Space Marines is not a good way of playing a recently corrupted Space Marine chapter unless you want to play a mutation-heavy one like the Crimson Slaughter. Overall playing Codex: Space Marines as renegades with a daemonology Librarian is a much, much smarter and better way to represent Renegade Chapters than CSM will ever be. And if you still need a better example, think about Blood Ravens from Dawn of War 2 when their Chapter Master got corrupted and turned the majority of the chapter traitor. They didn't suddenly start mutating, they didn't grow horns and spikes - they were regular Space Marines with the Librarian Chapter Master going corrupted by Chaos.

 Triton wrote:
You're making a very specific argument that we absolutely need to have guys who turn traitor in the middle of a battlefield codified into rules.

We don't need it. We also don't need half of the armies or units in Codexes. It's there to give some players options, as simple as that. Get it now? Option. For those who want to use it. Yeah.

 Triton wrote:
That's a new one. Points for creativity, at least.

Not sure if douchebaggy sarcasm. I hope not, otherwise I'll donate all my money towards internet slap technology research. If it's low sarcasm like that, it's despicable and should be reflected upon.

 Triton wrote:
And none of it addresses why the Great Unclean One you just summoned would fight for your loyalist Ultramarine brothers against, say, the Death Guard on the other side of the table.

Yes, that's the downside of that option, but it's something that can't be predicted while making a fluffy renegade chapter army with daemonology. And even then it's possible to justify through a proper narrative. "Brother-Librarian [insert name] felt that doom was upon his brothers as he saw the relentless advance of the Traitor forces merely heralding a much greater Chaos offensive. In a final act of sacrifice he decided to damn himself to protect his brethren and mock the vile traitors by using all of his psychic powers to conjure up the very creature they revered and order it against them even if it costs him his name and his very soul. The Emperor protects." See? That hard? Cheesy, you say? I made it up on the spot. Could do better if I had enough time. Remember that Possession removes the psyker and replaces him with the Greater Daemon, you don't just 'summon it'.

 Triton wrote:
It's an incredibly stupid addition to the game.

Only when stupid people use it in stupid ways. You can also jam a knife in your eye, but you won't, right? The option still remains there.

 Triton wrote:
I understand that people who don't particularly care about the fluff or want to battle sounds as they move their guys across the table feel the need to argue in favor for it, but there's no justification found in the fluff.

I just did. I know 40k fluff well enough to know that it's plausible.

 Triton wrote:
You like the, "Take anything you want, we've decided that bloodletters and Gray Knights fight side by side all the time!"-style changes? Great. I'm genuinely happy for you. But other people don't.

Except that they don't. GK as far as I remember are not going to be able to take powers from Malefic Daemonology just like Daemons can't take powers from Sanctic. Unless you mean Unbound, but again - it's just GW's courtesy to give some players some optional free will to have a little creative fun with Unbound armies. Be it for lulz with random crap slapped in, for ultra-powergaming(which was somewhat debunked lately in most threads) or.. sic! For some wild fluffy combinations that the particular player might find interesting!

Before you dismiss it, think of a friendly agreement to play Gue'vesa army. Or combined Chaos forces with renegade Guard, CSM and Daemons. Or even the very simple idea of adding a Knight to a Chaos army, because why not! It's not like Chaos didn't have them, right? Now you can put them in your Chaos force if you want. See - just because it allows you to make unfluffy combinations it doesn't mean that it can't be used as an official statement from GW that you can actually have such fun as long as your opponent doesn't mind playing it. Now I'll get the "we don't need GW to allow us to do it" reply, but it's silly - GW didn't officially 'allow' Forge World and see how many people have problems with it, honestly.

 Triton wrote:
Other people don't like the unjustifiably high prices, the patently obvious cash grab releases, etc. You can argue against them all you like, but they're not listening. They're too busy taking their money elsewhere.

At least I can agree here, but then again there always will be people that are genuinely interested in some of those things and they're okay with paying for them. I, for one, want to play Codex: Stormicus Trooperus because I like it and no amount of "BUT THEY COULD ROLL IT INTO CODEX: ASTRA MILITARUM!" will ever convince me that GW would ever do that these times. The golden era of White Dwarf 'supplement' releases is gone. It can be back, but it's not at the moment, so.. yeah. If you want it, you buy it. If you don't feel that the price is justified/is going to be paid back in sheer fun, you don't buy it. Applies to wargaming, video games, cars, holiday vacations, everything. It's the wallets that decide nowadays.

Long story short - just because you can't think of something such as fluffy explanation doesn't mean there aren't any. People generally come up with plausible ideas for stuff they can't field normally, GW just gives the opportunities and if players only use them for stupid exploits, then it's the players that are douchebags and THEY should be branded as butthats by the community. At my FLGS guys like that would be told to get lost and noone would play with them if they ruin the game for others, as simple as that.

 Leth wrote:
loving it, cant wait to put the maelstrom missions through their paces

Also chariots got super buffed so I would not worry about wanting to play them. Seriously read the shooting allocation and then get back to me.

"O your shot can hurt my armor, I will take it on my 2+/3++ character, if not it is on my chariot" Seriously really the new chariot rules, they are CRAZY.

Interesting... I will check it up. Some Daemon Chariots may see some action.


@Klerych: sorry but there is absolutely no way you can justify Farseers or loyal Librarians summoning Daemons and using them as if they were part of the same army. We are not talking about a psyker being devoured by a Daemon and then the Daemon materializing and killing everything. This is a formerly loyal psyker who summon Daemons, which in 99% of the cases means dooming the entire world, and then the Daemons obey his orders and the rest of the army is OK with that. It is the ultimate heresy, the definite step towards damnation. And the rest of the army does nothing? And how did the loyal Librarian learn how to control Daemons? Does he have an entire section about Daemons in the Librarium or is he a natural who hear demonic voices since he is a child?

Also... what´s the point? You stopped the Orks so now the Doors of Hell are open and the entire planet is devoured by Daemons or doomed by Exterminatus? And your Dark Angels are now Chaos Space Marines? In which sense is this a victory? How do you forge a narrative about that?

And Grey Knights can do it too. They can get some IG psykers as allies and fight side by side with Daemons.

I understand the 'do not do it if you think it is not correct' argument, but trying to justify this butchering of the setting by saying that this is something that may occur in the setting... no way. It makes no sense. If you play because you like the background, this rule is badly damaging the game.

 da001 wrote:

 Leth wrote:
loving it, cant wait to put the maelstrom missions through their paces

Also chariots got super buffed so I would not worry about wanting to play them. Seriously read the shooting allocation and then get back to me.

"O your shot can hurt my armor, I will take it on my 2+/3++ character, if not it is on my chariot" Seriously really the new chariot rules, they are CRAZY.

Interesting... I will check it up. Some Daemon Chariots may see some action.


@Klerych: sorry but there is absolutely no way you can justify Farseers or loyal Librarians summoning Daemons and using them as if they were part of the same army. We are not talking about a psyker being devoured by a Daemon and then the Daemon materializing and killing everything. This is a formerly loyal psyker who summon Daemons, which in 99% of the cases means dooming the entire world, and then the Daemons obey his orders and the rest of the army is OK with that. It is the ultimate heresy, the definite step towards damnation. And the rest of the army does nothing? And how did the loyal Librarian learn how to control Daemons? Does he have an entire section about Daemons in the Librarium or is he a natural who hear demonic voices since he is a child?

Also... what´s the point? You stopped the Orks so now the Doors of Hell are open and the entire planet is devoured by Daemons or doomed by Exterminatus? And your Dark Angels are now Chaos Space Marines? In which sense is this a victory? How do you forge a narrative about that?

And Grey Knights can do it too. They can get some IG psykers as allies and fight side by side with Daemons.

I understand the 'do not do it if you think it is not correct' argument, but trying to justify this butchering of the setting by saying that this is something that may occur in the setting... no way. It makes no sense. If you play because you like the background, this rule is badly damaging the game.

Except there are plenty of cases in the fluff of loyalist psykers summoning deamons, either because they've turned or they think it'd help defeat chaos. If you're complaining about a loyal, by-the-book librarian summoning demons, then complain about the player who's summoning, not the rules that allow you to do so. The 40k rules also allow a loyalist Space Marine chapter to fight and destroy a unit of Grey Knights, does that mean GW doesn't care about the fluff too?