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.

Zimko wrote:
Wow, I never realized the assault 2 version did not have rending. I've been playing that wrong. Oops.

I'm unfamiliar with how you deep strike a flyer. If you do so with the Storm Raven, is there anywhere that you can deploy the men inside since there's no spot on the board that the Storm Raven 'moved over?'?

The Psycannon profile was "Assault 2 or Heavy 4, Rending"

My understanding is that everything between a pair of commas go together. (Assault 2 or Heavy 4), Rending. That would mean that Rending applies to all shots made by the Psycannon. Also, there was never an FAQ to say otherwise.

Most of the folks on here seem to have taken the alternate approach and chosen to split the profile at the "or". Assault 2, or (Heavy 4, Rending).

I still hold with the first interpretation, and the new Salvo profile seems to confirm it.

Yea I always played it as Rending either way you fired it

Ditto with the rending.

I've never seen anyone not use Rending on the "assault 2" profile...

 Vaktathi wrote:
I've never seen anyone not use Rending on the "assault 2" profile...

Same here, but most of the threads I've looked at here take that position, and it doesn't make sense to me. It would be very awkward for that to be for format if the Rending was not intended to apply to the Assault 2 profile.

Ah, then maybe I was told the wrong interpretation of the rules because when I was first starting my GK I played against a guy that when I tried to apply Rending to the Assault function he told me it didn't work like that because the rule would of been written like this Assault 2, Rending or Heavy 4, Rending. I do believe I was lied to so that I wasn't about to score the penetrating shot on his vehicle. This was a long time ago but it was my first almost board wipe crushing defeat I had and now I kind of know why. Makes me wonder what else he lied about as I made rules clarifications with him, Leaves me a bit bitter but that was long in the past and I don't play with that gaming group anymore.

In that case, yeah Salvo does hurt non-Terminator units a lot more than I first thought but I will have to see how much it hurts my overall strategy. I still think that with the point lower cost and the Salvo, Terminators are finally worth their points and honestly I think we are going to see the basic allied detachment of GK HQ combined with Terminators and maybe a DK.

HQ Librarian, Terminators and a DK all being allowed to Deep Strike first turn will be a great allied force.

I've been using psycannons on Purifiers in a Rhino. Firing them as Heavy 4 with snap shots at 24" range on the move. Obviously the new Salvo rule puts a complete stop to this. It also nerfs their overwatch killing power for when the Rhino is charged.

So now I'm thinking of using incinerators or psi-lencers but i dread remodelling all those psycannons (10 of them for 5 squads).

For me, it doesn't change much. I might convert over to the incinerators but I am not totally sure whether I would want to do it or not. With the loss of Psybolts, I kind of feel that they are going to need the Psycannons still especially against an armored opponent and unfortunately.

I also used Deep Strike exclusively so this codex works heavily in my favor. I am so glad I didn't get around to converting my Terminators over to Ghost Knights though and I still have a chance of getting the awesome Alpha Strike ability that Mordrak used to have. Although, now it is just re-roll your scatter instead of just putting him where you want. I feel that even with the buff the Purifiers got, they still left them high and dry seeing as they heavily favor deep striking things in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I have been calculating the potential of the Librarian that comes stock with the Warding Staff and his Deny the Witch ability is kind of insane. AW +1, being a Psyker +1, and if the Librarian is a higher Psyker level another +1 to Deny the Witch giving the Librarian and those 12" around him a +3 Deny the Witch for Offensive powers. That is insane and it makes so that the Librarian is going to be a must take HQ for every army.

Zimko wrote:
HQ Librarian, Terminators and a DK all being allowed to Deep Strike first turn will be a great allied force.

I've been using psycannons on Purifiers in a Rhino. Firing them as Heavy 4 with snap shots at 24" range on the move. Obviously the new Salvo rule puts a complete stop to this. It also nerfs their overwatch killing power for when the Rhino is charged.

So now I'm thinking of using incinerators or psi-lencers but i dread remodelling all those psycannons (10 of them for 5 squads).

Same here, I put Purifiers as Combat Squads in a Rhino, so 1 Psycannon Purifier from each combat squad was firing, so they could each manifest their own Cleansing Flame if the enemy got too close to the Rhino. And if the Rhino got popped, there would be 4 Psycannons to punish whatever unit did so.

I have a total of 21 Psycannons modeled on Purifiers (it's a big army). There's no way I'm changing out so many Psycannons, so I'll have to find opponents that will let me sub them as Incinerators.

I forgot all about the Ghost Knights. I have 4 of them painted grey/white with cotton around their feet for a ghostly effect. And now they're not even in the codex. I guess repainting them to normal colors won't be hard...

Zimko wrote:
I forgot all about the Ghost Knights. I have 4 of them painted grey/white with cotton around their feet for a ghostly effect. And now they're not even in the codex. I guess repainting them to normal colors won't be hard...

Why Repaint them?
I would leave them if they look cool.

Well I only have 4 of them so they'd only fit in as a paladin squad. The 5th model in the box was used to make Mordrak who now is a Grand Master with a hammer and cape.

I probably won't repaint them and just keep them around as a novelty.

Thought units firing out of transports counted as "relentless"

Or am I thinking of something else?

Zimko wrote:
Well I only have 4 of them so they'd only fit in as a paladin squad. The 5th model in the box was used to make Mordrak who now is a Grand Master with a hammer and cape.

I probably won't repaint them and just keep them around as a novelty.

Or add a couple to make a cool bodyguard for your new Grand Master.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Thought units firing out of transports counted as "relentless"

Or am I thinking of something else?

No, but they do get "fearless". If the vehicle moves at all then the unit inside counts as moving. If it moves at cruising speed then they can only make snap shots.

Ok that must have been what I was thinking then

Buying a cheap Comms Relay and having a Shuntknight or Interceptors man it might be a good combo with omni-Deep Strike. Everything comes in on a 3+ with rerolls and then you just shunt to support. Most of your army'd be murdering a flank turn 1. Same principle as Mordrak-bomb, although there's still scatter to worry about.

Yeah, this codex hurts. GKs were already struggling to compete, but this just shoves them down even further. A lot of their unique wargear got dumbed down (nemesis weapon nerfs) while others got removed (psybolts, mindstrike missiles). Very little in compensation in terms of new wargear, units, or abilities that were not present before. Honestly, they should have just skipped making this codex until they had a better idea of how to make GK unique without being OP. As of now, they could have just tacked the DK and a generic GK squad into the SM codex with how bad this codex is.

 zephoid wrote:
Yeah, this codex hurts. GKs were already struggling to compete, but this just shoves them down even further. A lot of their unique wargear got dumbed down (nemesis weapon nerfs) while others got removed (psybolts, mindstrike missiles). Very little in compensation in terms of new wargear, units, or abilities that were not present before. Honestly, they should have just skipped making this codex until they had a better idea of how to make GK unique without being OP. As of now, they could have just tacked the DK and a generic GK squad into the SM codex with how bad this codex is.

I am really trying to not have this view. I understand we lost stuff but I would like to think it isn't this crippling and the fact is that we got some awesome stuff in the Codex as well. It certainly makes some units worth more than others but I don't think it has destroyed the army. DKs dual wielding Psycannons and Incinerators with Greatsword and Teleporter are definitely going to be the big thing now and I think Terminators are going to come back in a big way but I don't feel like the army got destroyed, we just didn't get the self sufficiency that some wanted but others feel were OP. There were a lot of complaints about Psybolt ammo apparently saying it gave GK too much of an advantage. I happen to think they are wrong but I feel like GK players will be able to adapt and move on. Do really want to start sounding like CSM players?

About the psycannon:

Take the profile of an assault cannon for example.

It says: Heavy 4, Rending.

Not Heavy 4 Rending

Thus, if the Psycannon were to always be rending, GW would have to write it longhand: Assault 2, Rending or Heavy 4, Rending.

 Sir Arun wrote:


Thus, if the Psycannon were to always be rending, GW would have to write it longhand: Assault 2, Rending or Heavy 4, Rending.

Or you could take it as follows:

(Type and number of shots), (Special Rules), as in (Assault 2 or Assault 4), (Rending).

 Sir Arun wrote:
About the psycannon:

Take the profile of an assault cannon for example.

It says: Heavy 4, Rending.

Not Heavy 4 Rending

Thus, if the Psycannon were to always be rending, GW would have to write it longhand: Assault 2, Rending or Heavy 4, Rending.

See this is what I always thought so I seeing the fact that even though the Psycannon went Salvo, we at least get Rending on it no matter what. Still a nerf but not as bad of a nerf.

I am very intrigued to see how the new Grey Knights turn out, as I currently only have 7x Grey Knight Models (Strike Marines, 6x SB, Nemesis Sword, 1x SB, Daemon Hammer), and I look forward to the new book. Biggest thing I am really curious about is to see how the Crowe formation turns out, as I have always been intrigued by the Purifier list, however I am also curious to see what GW will do to make the Strike Squads a more appealing choice. Will be nice to see how it turns out so that we can see more variety other then the traditional Terminator or Draigo-Wing lists.

As for the Psycannon, I have always rolled the Assault version as Rending, as it clearly says Heavy 4, Assault 2, Rending. Doesn't specify that the Heavy 4 is the only rending shot, as if that where case, it wold read as such: Heavy 4, Rending, Assault 2. Anyone who tries to argue that it isn't is clearly trying to cheat you out of your weapons ability, which isn't right at all and I hate people who do that. That being said, with Psybolt Ammo apparently gone, does that mean that our weapons will automatically come with it then?

 Rommel44 wrote:
I am very intrigued to see how the new Grey Knights turn out, as I currently only have 7x Grey Knight Models (Strike Marines, 6x SB, Nemesis Sword, 1x SB, Daemon Hammer), and I look forward to the new book. Biggest thing I am really curious about is to see how the Crowe formation turns out, as I have always been intrigued by the Purifier list, however I am also curious to see what GW will do to make the Strike Squads a more appealing choice. Will be nice to see how it turns out so that we can see more variety other then the traditional Terminator or Draigo-Wing lists.

The book is already leaked online. Crowe is worse and had a price increase and Draigo is better and had a price decrease. The same happened with strikes squads and terminators. Draigowing with 3 dreadknights is the only power list int the book at first glance.

Agtthot wrote:

 Rommel44 wrote:
I am very intrigued to see how the new Grey Knights turn out, as I currently only have 7x Grey Knight Models (Strike Marines, 6x SB, Nemesis Sword, 1x SB, Daemon Hammer), and I look forward to the new book. Biggest thing I am really curious about is to see how the Crowe formation turns out, as I have always been intrigued by the Purifier list, however I am also curious to see what GW will do to make the Strike Squads a more appealing choice. Will be nice to see how it turns out so that we can see more variety other then the traditional Terminator or Draigo-Wing lists.

The book is already leaked online. Crowe is worse and had a price increase and Draigo is better and had a price decrease. The same happened with strikes squads and terminators. Draigowing with 3 dreadknights is the only power list int the book at first glance.

I heard about the leak but I haven't seen the new book yet. Sad to hear that Crowe is a lot weaker and worse off now so I guess I can forget the Purifier formation then. What about the Grey Knight Strike Squads? Can you run an effective list utilizing them or as you said, the Draigowing and Dreadknights. However, according to there force organization, we can only run 2x heavies, so only 2x Dreadknights, not 3x.

 Sir Arun wrote:
About the psycannon:

Take the profile of an assault cannon for example.

It says: Heavy 4, Rending.

Not Heavy 4 Rending

Thus, if the Psycannon were to always be rending, GW would have to write it longhand: Assault 2, Rending or Heavy 4, Rending.

That is not how English is written or properly translated. Things contained within commas are a set, things after the comma are another set,

So "Assault 2 or Heavy 4, Rending" is the same thing as saying "Assault 2 and Rending or Heavy 4 and Rending"

The comma is there to separate it because it is an additional weapon quality. You can have, for example, a Heavy 4 weapon that doesn't have Rending. The comma separates the either/or statement (Assault 2 or Heavy 4) from the additional property of the weapon.

They would not write it out as you've described, that's simply not how English is written, in either casual or technical formats.

Thinking about the new formation and an all deepstriking force, do we need to deploy anything on the table in turn 1 ?

I think I remember back when necrons had just come out people were leaving a lord and bikes on the table turn 1 so they wouldn't be considered tabled before thei rreserves arrived. Does 7th edition share this stipulation, or can I leave my opponent nothing to shoot at turn 1 ?

 adamsouza wrote:
Thinking about the new formation and an all deepstriking force, do we need to deploy anything on the table in turn 1 ?

I think I remember back when necrons had just come out people were leaving a lord and bikes on the table turn 1 so they wouldn't be considered tabled before thei rreserves arrived. Does 7th edition share this stipulation, or can I leave my opponent nothing to shoot at turn 1 ?

You only lose if at the end of game turn, not player turn, if you have no units on the table. You can indeed deploy nothing on the table and then pray that you hit at least a single 3+ reserve roll.

My real question now is this: Even though Paladin Apothecaries are muuuuuch cheaper, is it even worth taking paladins now that normal terminators are so much cheaper? Before, the 15pt bump to add +1 WS and +1W was definitely worth it. Now, it is +22 pts for that upgrade and is looking a lot less attractive since I could just spend an additional 11 pts and get another body that can't be 1 shotted.

Roll badly, since it's a 3+ for each unit, and you'll lose turn1.

Killermonkey wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
Thinking about the new formation and an all deepstriking force, do we need to deploy anything on the table in turn 1 ?

I think I remember back when necrons had just come out people were leaving a lord and bikes on the table turn 1 so they wouldn't be considered tabled before thei rreserves arrived. Does 7th edition share this stipulation, or can I leave my opponent nothing to shoot at turn 1 ?

You only lose if at the end of game turn, not player turn, if you have no units on the table. You can indeed deploy nothing on the table and then pray that you hit at least a single 3+ reserve roll.

My real question now is this: Even though Paladin Apothecaries are muuuuuch cheaper, is it even worth taking paladins now that normal terminators are so much cheaper? Before, the 15pt bump to add +1 WS and +1W was definitely worth it. Now, it is +22 pts for that upgrade and is looking a lot less attractive since I could just spend an additional 11 pts and get another body that can't be 1 shotted.

Well smaller unit sizes and double the wounds i feel are worth it. Though dont be silly and DS next to a bunch of meltas or a overcharging riptide