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.

Alcibiades wrote:
I remember that when the codex came out there was a lot of talk about how Tomb Blades are the greatest thing ever, possibly even imbalanced, making Immortals obsolete etc.

Since then, has experience confirmed this? What do people think?

My experience has suggested that TBs are fantastic and always worth their points; however I have them kitted out with Gauss, Shieldvanes, and Nebuloscopes, which makes them versatile and resilient though not "powerful". Accordingly, in my usual Decurion builds at various point levels, I rely on them for sniping objectives and Gaussing targets of convenience.

This strikes me as likely the intended functionality, however, it may be disappointing to those expecting a Dark Angels style biker squad.

@ Requizen ---
We teasted a few builds of orkinstar. Yes, using decurion is the norm but we found that the star was so robust that we were making 85% of the saves without a decurion. Otherwise our final test list looked similar to yours.


The ObSec proved its worth in a few games and we eliminated the tax of extra units we did really feel helped us win. The d-lord generally jooined the flayed ones but against some lists he can join warriors or destroyers.

Bear in mind that with a second Crytpek to hold the Veil of Darkness (or solar staff I guess) you would get Decurion level durability even in a CAD.

I'm in the process of re-awakening Tomb World Durrty, my primarily wraithwing force from the last book, and adapting/adding to build for the current book. I'm glad to see that we've got more viable cc options now, and I'm looking at using a Judicator Battalion with two 10-man praetorian units to supplement the obligatory Canoptek Harvest. (Only one of each formation, per ITC restrictions.) My problem is that I really can't see which praetorian weapon option is best.

I typically play at 1,850, so in a force with a Reclamation Legion, Canoptek Harvest, and Judicator Battalion, I'm going to have to pick and choose a few units to invest heavily in and otherwise go light on the rest. If I go ahead and make my cc units my acknowledged point-sinks (wraiths, scarabs, praetorians), then I've gotta get work done with them, so I've got to have them equipped right.

The Rod of Covenant has a lot going for it. There's not a lot of AP2 shooting in my necron army, and adding in a Destroyer Cult for their AP2 shooting is something I'm not really going to have the points for in this build, so having a unit full of can openers really helps in that regard. Plus, they get AP2 at initiative in close combat, which is a really rare treat in this game. Sure, at I2 they're not going before much, but they're going before power fists, and that's not insignificant.

On the other hand, the particle blaster/voidblade option also gets work done. Str6 shooting and entropic/rending on the voidblades at least gives them the possibility of being able to take on vehicles, and since my army mostly has to fish for 6's to glance-down armour, adding more volume-of-attacks always helps. Plus, having the extra attack for two cc weapons is a nice boost.

So, I'm stuck. Both options help in areas where my army is weak. But while the Rod of Covenant has some really good positives, it also has some significant negatives in that it simply can not damage AV12+, while the voidblades give a universal "roll 6 to always damage" option. At this point, I'm thinking that I may just make one unit of each and play games to see what's best, knowing full well that I'll probably never get around to making a third unit.

Have any of you been playing with Praetorians? What do you run them with? What else is in your army? What have you found?

 FL5 wrote:
I'm in the process of re-awakening Tomb World Durrty, my primarily wraithwing force from the last book, and adapting/adding to build for the current book. I'm glad to see that we've got more viable cc options now, and I'm looking at using a Judicator Battalion with two 10-man praetorian units to supplement the obligatory Canoptek Harvest. (Only one of each formation, per ITC restrictions.) My problem is that I really can't see which praetorian weapon option is best.

I typically play at 1,850, so in a force with a Reclamation Legion, Canoptek Harvest, and Judicator Battalion, I'm going to have to pick and choose a few units to invest heavily in and otherwise go light on the rest. If I go ahead and make my cc units my acknowledged point-sinks (wraiths, scarabs, praetorians), then I've gotta get work done with them, so I've got to have them equipped right.

The Rod of Covenant has a lot going for it. There's not a lot of AP2 shooting in my necron army, and adding in a Destroyer Cult for their AP2 shooting is something I'm not really going to have the points for in this build, so having a unit full of can openers really helps in that regard. Plus, they get AP2 at initiative in close combat, which is a really rare treat in this game. Sure, at I2 they're not going before much, but they're going before power fists, and that's not insignificant.

On the other hand, the particle blaster/voidblade option also gets work done. Str6 shooting and entropic/rending on the voidblades at least gives them the possibility of being able to take on vehicles, and since my army mostly has to fish for 6's to glance-down armour, adding more volume-of-attacks always helps. Plus, having the extra attack for two cc weapons is a nice boost.

So, I'm stuck. Both options help in areas where my army is weak. But while the Rod of Covenant has some really good positives, it also has some significant negatives in that it simply can not damage AV12+, while the voidblades give a universal "roll 6 to always damage" option. At this point, I'm thinking that I may just make one unit of each and play games to see what's best, knowing full well that I'll probably never get around to making a third unit.

Have any of you been playing with Praetorians? What do you run them with? What else is in your army? What have you found?

Well if this is an ITC thing you need to be aware of a rule in the book,I'm not sure if ITC have houseruled it, but as it stands, If you fire the rod, it isn't AP2 for that player turn in CC. This drastically reduces their effectiveness, and makes the Voidblades the better choice IMO.

Aside from thism I don't think AV12 will be a problem. AV 14 isn't common, and wraiths can handle anything AV13. Most rear armor is 11/10 anyway so unless it's a walker, RoC praets will still work.

 FL5 wrote:
I'm in the process of re-awakening Tomb World Durrty, my primarily wraithwing force from the last book, and adapting/adding to build for the current book. I'm glad to see that we've got more viable cc options now, and I'm looking at using a Judicator Battalion with two 10-man praetorian units to supplement the obligatory Canoptek Harvest. (Only one of each formation, per ITC restrictions.) My problem is that I really can't see which praetorian weapon option is best.

I typically play at 1,850, so in a force with a Reclamation Legion, Canoptek Harvest, and Judicator Battalion, I'm going to have to pick and choose a few units to invest heavily in and otherwise go light on the rest. If I go ahead and make my cc units my acknowledged point-sinks (wraiths, scarabs, praetorians), then I've gotta get work done with them, so I've got to have them equipped right.

The Rod of Covenant has a lot going for it. There's not a lot of AP2 shooting in my necron army, and adding in a Destroyer Cult for their AP2 shooting is something I'm not really going to have the points for in this build, so having a unit full of can openers really helps in that regard. Plus, they get AP2 at initiative in close combat, which is a really rare treat in this game. Sure, at I2 they're not going before much, but they're going before power fists, and that's not insignificant.

On the other hand, the particle blaster/voidblade option also gets work done. Str6 shooting and entropic/rending on the voidblades at least gives them the possibility of being able to take on vehicles, and since my army mostly has to fish for 6's to glance-down armour, adding more volume-of-attacks always helps. Plus, having the extra attack for two cc weapons is a nice boost.

So, I'm stuck. Both options help in areas where my army is weak. But while the Rod of Covenant has some really good positives, it also has some significant negatives in that it simply can not damage AV12+, while the voidblades give a universal "roll 6 to always damage" option. At this point, I'm thinking that I may just make one unit of each and play games to see what's best, knowing full well that I'll probably never get around to making a third unit.

Have any of you been playing with Praetorians? What do you run them with? What else is in your army? What have you found?

Against most of the high-midrange targets you will see on the battle field, Rod of the Covenant is stone cold nuts. However, against certain targets, it is literally unable to do anything (e.g., anything AV12 or higher).

In contrast, the Particle Caster / Voidblade combination has a technical capacity to do something against any target, but does not have any particular target of choice.

i have found the AP2 was more useful nearly all of the time.

 FL5 wrote:
I'm in the process of re-awakening Tomb World Durrty, my primarily wraithwing force from the last book, and adapting/adding to build for the current book. I'm glad to see that we've got more viable cc options now, and I'm looking at using a Judicator Battalion with two 10-man praetorian units to supplement the obligatory Canoptek Harvest. (Only one of each formation, per ITC restrictions.) My problem is that I really can't see which praetorian weapon option is best.

I typically play at 1,850, so in a force with a Reclamation Legion, Canoptek Harvest, and Judicator Battalion, I'm going to have to pick and choose a few units to invest heavily in and otherwise go light on the rest. If I go ahead and make my cc units my acknowledged point-sinks (wraiths, scarabs, praetorians), then I've gotta get work done with them, so I've got to have them equipped right.

The Rod of Covenant has a lot going for it. There's not a lot of AP2 shooting in my necron army, and adding in a Destroyer Cult for their AP2 shooting is something I'm not really going to have the points for in this build, so having a unit full of can openers really helps in that regard. Plus, they get AP2 at initiative in close combat, which is a really rare treat in this game. Sure, at I2 they're not going before much, but they're going before power fists, and that's not insignificant.

On the other hand, the particle blaster/voidblade option also gets work done. Str6 shooting and entropic/rending on the voidblades at least gives them the possibility of being able to take on vehicles, and since my army mostly has to fish for 6's to glance-down armour, adding more volume-of-attacks always helps. Plus, having the extra attack for two cc weapons is a nice boost.

So, I'm stuck. Both options help in areas where my army is weak. But while the Rod of Covenant has some really good positives, it also has some significant negatives in that it simply can not damage AV12+, while the voidblades give a universal "roll 6 to always damage" option. At this point, I'm thinking that I may just make one unit of each and play games to see what's best, knowing full well that I'll probably never get around to making a third unit.

Have any of you been playing with Praetorians? What do you run them with? What else is in your army? What have you found?

You want one of each.

harkequin wrote:
Well if this is an ITC thing you need to be aware of a rule in the book,I'm not sure if ITC have houseruled it, but as it stands, If you fire the rod, it isn't AP2 for that player turn in CC. This drastically reduces their effectiveness

Wasn't there some sort of counter argument that invalidated that claim? (something along the lines of "Well if that interpretation was really the case, then [unit from other army] wouldn't be able to [do a thing they do] because it would restrict them to A or B but not A and B. But obviously no one has a problem with anyone playing them A and B, so why can't Praetorians do the same?")

 skoffs wrote:

harkequin wrote:
Well if this is an ITC thing you need to be aware of a rule in the book,I'm not sure if ITC have houseruled it, but as it stands, If you fire the rod, it isn't AP2 for that player turn in CC. This drastically reduces their effectiveness

Wasn't there some sort of counter argument that invalidated that claim? (something along the lines of "Well if that interpretation was really the case, then [unit from other army] wouldn't be able to [do a thing they do] because it would restrict them to A or B but not A and B. But obviously no one has a problem with anyone playing them A and B, so why can't Praetorians do the same?")

No not afaik. In the dakka thread that it came up in, people pointed out that it affects a lot of units, but the rule is still there. Shining spears(i think) Are affected, they can't fire the weapon, and use it in CC that turn. A particularly hilarious one is Arjak's hammer. Just because other people were playing it wrong doesn't mean we can, just means that others are playing it wrong :(

Anyway, It's a silly rule, but it has significance for tournaments where it's rock solid in the book. Hopefully it'll be errata'd (The old Necron FAQ went down a few days ago, so fingers crossed) because RoC praets are one of if not the best answers to dreadknights we have and If they could fire out 10 S5 AP2 shots, followed by 18 S5 AP 2 Melee attacks (assuming 4 get gutted by the DK) It would be awesome.

If this really is a rule then why did they specify in the orks codex that if you shoot a burna in the shooting phase then you can't use it as a power weapon in CC? There would be no need to specify if the rulebook already covers it.

 Chosen Praetorian wrote:
If this really is a rule then why did they specify in the orks codex that if you shoot a burna in the shooting phase then you can't use it as a power weapon in CC? There would be no need to specify if the rulebook already covers it.

That's the main point. There are LOTS of weapons affected by that interpretation specifically, and the Ork codex has to make specific note. Ergo, the way we were already playing it was correct.

 Chosen Praetorian wrote:
If this really is a rule then why did they specify in the orks codex that if you shoot a burna in the shooting phase then you can't use it as a power weapon in CC? There would be no need to specify if the rulebook already covers it.

Because GW probably forgot the rule even existed in the first place, It's stupid and obscure, but it's there. I only brought it up because he was wondering specifically for a tourney, where anyone can point to the following quote from the BRB to ruin his day.

"Some weapons can be used in different ways, representing different power settings or types of ammo. Some weapons can be used in combat as well as shooting. Where this is the case, there will be a separate line in the weapon’s profile for each, and you can choose which to use each turn. "

Emphasis mine.

harkequin wrote:

 Chosen Praetorian wrote:
If this really is a rule then why did they specify in the orks codex that if you shoot a burna in the shooting phase then you can't use it as a power weapon in CC? There would be no need to specify if the rulebook already covers it.

Because GW probably forgot the rule even existed in the first place, It's stupid and obscure, but it's there. I only brought it up because he was wondering specifically for a tourney, where anyone can point to the following quote from the BRB to ruin his day.

"Some weapons can be used in different ways, representing different power settings or types of ammo. Some weapons can be used in combat as well as shooting. Where this is the case, there will be a separate line in the weapon’s profile for each, and you can choose which to use each turn. "

Emphasis mine.

They did cover it. In the Ork codex.

It's always been a rule in the ork codex, since 5th ed. It just seems weird to give a special weapon (burnas) a rule that is already covered in the main rulebook. It would be like giving lascannons a special rule that says "roll a d6 and add the result to the strength of the weapon when rolling to penetrate a vehicles armor." The rule is already covered in the main rule book so no need, especially seeing as the ork codex is a 7th ed dex and the 7th ed BrB "says" we can't use them in both phases. It was honestly probably over looked by GW while they were trying to decide by what % to raise prices.

In all honesty, being able to fire at AP2, then assault at AP2 is pretty dang crazy.

I'm looking to round out my 1500pt list. Right now I am trying to decide between 2 units of 5 deathmarks, or 1 unit of 14 flayed ones. My army has very little CC in it, but I hear great things about flayed ones abilities. Though I wouldn't mind having deathmarks to lay the hurt on any potential big baddies, at least a little bit of hurt that is.

Also trying out a little bit of MSU necrons. Right now I have:
Decurion
Olord+scythe
5 immortals
10 warriors
20 warriors (Dlord+Olord in here)
3 tomb blades
3 tomb blades
3 tomb blades
Destroyer lord +scythe/phase shifter
2+1 destroyer+Hdestroyer
2+1 destroyer+Hdestroyer
2+1 destroyer+Hdestroyer

Leaves me with something like 182pt to play with. I ran a unit of 19 warriors with the Dlord in it, it was pretty sweet to give that big blob PE. Also, choosing Dlord as warlord gives me a better shot at a useful trait.

I have also thought about bringing a night scythe, I have no decent AA, and it wouldn't hurt to have something. I could bring the scythe and bump the immortals to 8 .Double min deathmarks seems like it could be good, just to have more bodies to make the enemy deal with, plus I actually own deathmarks, where I don't own any flayed ones.

MSU Deathmarks were good back when they could wound on 2+ for every turn against the mark.
Now I tend to max out my Deathmarks and attach a Destroyer Lord to make absolutely certain whatever they shoot at dies in that first volley when they come in.
(if they counter deep strike in your opponent's turn your D.Lord charge in yours, just in case 20 rapid fire sniper shots that wound on 2+ and reroll 1s isn't enough and you need to finish something off)

I second Skoffs point. 10 Dmarks with a D-lord.
Give him the gauntlet of the conflagrator for the interception. And a warscythe to charge the next turn.

Someone deep strikes a melta squad / some GK termis right into your lines, show up with and AP2 flamer and 20 2+ sniper rounds.

If there is no threat, then put the D-lord with the blob.

Ill take your guys advice and give it a shot!
3pt over 1500 if I drop the phase shifter for a gauntlet. Though if I drop 1 warrior and 1 deathmark, I can have both.

After putting together an 1850 list with a Reclamation Legion, Destroyer Cult, and Canoptek Harvest, I had 60 points left over. I decided to put a Veil of Darkness, a Phylactery, and a Warscythe on the Destroyer Lord. The idea is that the Destroyer Lord joins Zahndrekh and 20 Warriors backed up by a Ghost Ark. That way, the Destroyer Lord gives the unit a one-shot at extreme maneuverability, a tank for wounds, and some extra combat power all in addition to preferred enemy.

Does anyone have any better ideas for what to do with the last 60 points? I have a practice game vs Tau this Thursday to prepare for some 1850 tournaments coming up.

Here's the list for reference:

Don't know about terrain in your area, but I do know that deep striking 20 warriors, big Z and a D lord is going to be tricky positioning. Could be nice, but that is a big gamble. Plus, afterwards you will be just about the biggest blast target possible.

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Don't know about terrain in your area, but I do know that deep striking 20 warriors, big Z and a D lord is going to be tricky positioning. Could be nice, but that is a big gamble. Plus, afterwards you will be just about the biggest blast target possible.

Difficult terrain is not a real thing to worry about, but staying a fairly safe 12" away from all impassable terrain and board edges is definitely not a given. In the later rounds as units move about, gaps are typically left open enough to drop in.

Good point about the blasts. A Solar Staff would be a good fix for that, but I also don't mind taking a few blasts on the chin with that unit. My last game I intentionally clumped the unit together as bait for a Mawloc (because mission). The Mawloc struck 3 times hitting 12-17 Warriors every time. After he conceded at the bottom of 4, the unit still had 14 Warriors with a healthy Ghost Ark feeding it.

So blasts are definitely a big factor when deciding on when to use the Veil because it will naturally lower its durability by separating it from the Ghost Ark, but blast weapons are not a hard counter.

Back when the codex was released people were talking about reclamation legion having a "tomb blade tax", but now that I've had 20-ish games with various decurion lists, I'd actually make the claim that tomb blades are the best unit in the codex, at least in a decurion list where they have 4+ RP and move through cover. It's just so damn awesome having something that can move 36" in a turn to grab those maelstrom objectives.

 Chosen Praetorian wrote:
It's always been a rule in the ork codex, since 5th ed. It just seems weird to give a special weapon (burnas) a rule that is already covered in the main rulebook. It would be like giving lascannons a special rule that says "roll a d6 and add the result to the strength of the weapon when rolling to penetrate a vehicles armor." The rule is already covered in the main rule book so no need, especially seeing as the ork codex is a 7th ed dex and the 7th ed BrB "says" we can't use them in both phases. It was honestly probably over looked by GW while they were trying to decide by what % to raise prices.

This is one of the main reasons no one in my area plays it this "correct" way. We play it how it seems to make sense, since this is the house-rule edition of 40k anyway. There are a ton of things that are stupid, and I doesn't make sense that an assault unit that has a short range assault shooting attack, can't use it while trying to do the one thing they're designed for, assaulting.

People who argue that GW "forgot" to take it out of the Ork codex, or simply are incompetent, have no reason to claim they know the exact ruling for an unclear rule. I was willing to retract my statement if they FAQed the Burna statement out of the codex, but alas, they did not. And that is enough for me and my gaming group to continue to play how we've been playing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 gwarsh41 wrote:
In all honesty, being able to fire at AP2, then assault at AP2 is pretty dang crazy.

Why's that crazy? It's good, but not crazy. 28 ppm, I2, WS4 on an elite CC unit, with AP2 in CC, and a short range AP2 shooting attack, in an army more-or-less devoid of AP2 shooting. Nowhere near crazy.

 MLKTH wrote:
Back when the codex was released people were talking about reclamation legion having a "tomb blade tax", but now that I've had 20-ish games with various decurion lists, I'd actually make the claim that tomb blades are the best unit in the codex, at least in a decurion list where they have 4+ RP and move through cover. It's just so damn awesome having something that can move 36" in a turn to grab those maelstrom objectives.

It still is, in some ways, a "tax". It's just a tax in the same way most formations have taxes. Tomb Blades are fantastic, but sometimes you would rather have the points to go elsewhere. Same with the Immortals/Warriors in the Reclamation Legion.

If you're trying to make a "horde" style army with the Decurion, trying to get 4+ RP and lots of cheap Warriors/Flayed Ones, then you might view the more expensive Immortals or more specialized Tomb Blades as a tax. If you're trying to make a fast list with Tomb Blades, then you might begrudge the fact that you have Immortals and Warriors that need to purchase vehicles to keep up with the rest of the army.

To give another example, our Troops are pretty good, but if I'm making a CAD and want to run as many Assault units as possible, I still need to run 2 min units of Immortals to fill out my Troop slots. That's 170 points I can't spend on what I want my army to be about, hence they're a "tax", despite the fact that Immortals are amazing, one of the best Troops in the game by my reckoning.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Chosen Praetorian wrote:
If this really is a rule then why did they specify in the orks codex that if you shoot a burna in the shooting phase then you can't use it as a power weapon in CC? There would be no need to specify if the rulebook already covers it.

That's the main point. There are LOTS of weapons affected by that interpretation specifically, and the Ork codex has to make specific note. Ergo, the way we were already playing it was correct.

it was also a change from the last edition for orks where the unit had to fire the burnas as one or use them in melee, the new rule in the ork codex allows you to pick models to fire the burna, and the ones that do not fire it can use it in melee- as the rule states.

Need a bit of input here. Planning for an 800 point game, using this list:

Orkikan
16 Warriors
5 Immortals
3 Tomb Blades
3 Tomb Blades
6 Wraiths

(No formations allowed, so CAD all the way.)

Now, for the Wraiths, do I split them up, or keep them together? By splitting them up I'm able to engage more units, possible cause overkill when getting shot at, and take more objectives (maelstrom). On the other hand, if kept together I can start them off with Orikan for the first turn or two, for the re-roll, increasing their damage resistance from 66% to 88%.

(It may be worth noting that while the list isn't set in stone, I don't have any more Tomb Blades or Wraiths. I might consider replacing the Warriors and 1 Tomb Blade with 5 more Immortals and 5 Praetorians.)

Never mind, I don't have 4 fast attack choices!

Wraiths are fast, meant to catch, engage, and hold key targets (not as killy, though).
With Orikan attached, that'll slow them right down. Yes, they're more survivable, but what good is that when their targets can just run away from them?

Also, it's not quite clear whether or not his Master Chronomancer rule even works on Wraiths.

Requizen wrote:
Also, it's not quite clear whether or not his Master Chronomancer rule even works on Wraiths.

If the Wraiths aren't in the Harvest formation, they can't get RP so they can't benefit from Orikan's special rule. Wraiths do have a 3+ armor save if that's in question.

Orikan in a Warrior blob is fun though.

Marshal_Gus wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Also, it's not quite clear whether or not his Master Chronomancer rule even works on Wraiths.

If the Wraiths aren't in the Harvest formation, they can't get RP so they can't benefit from Orikan's special rule. Wraiths do have a 3+ armor save if that's in question.

Orikan in a Warrior blob is fun though.

Well the discussion was whether or not they can reroll 1s to save, since the rule states: "Orikan and all models with the Reanimation Protocols special rule receive a +1 bonus to RP and can re-roll all saving throws of 1". It seems to indicate that a model can't benefit from the re-roll if they don't have Reanimation Protocols.