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.

 Mymearan wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Another tutorial from Emma

Spoiler:

.

So a "how not to paint Wulfen" video? lol

That girl tries too hard to be like Duncan

What's wrong with that paint scheme? Looks perfectly fine imo. Also filling Duncan's shoes isn't easy, I think she's doing a good job of it and she'll find her own style eventually. I heard some people say she was doing painting streams before working at GW, and apparently doing a good job at it?

Well it's obviously just personal opinion, I don't particularly like the flesh tone and I dislike the way the "fur" is sculpted in clumps with large smooth bald areas, so painting the "fur" grey just exaggerates that derpy sculpting.

As for Emma in general, maybe she'll find her own personality eventually, at the moment she's just copying Duncan in intonation, mannerisms and general style. Maybe that's just what she's like, in which case those two should get married or something Or maybe she's acting, in which case they must have told her "act like a female version of Duncan".

From GW's blog

Errata in book confirmed, but unfortunately no changes to the Dreadnought. Also, no elites and HQ Iron Priests at the same time.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Errata in book confirmed, but unfortunately no changes to the Dreadnought. Also, no elites and HQ Iron Priests at the same time.

So either go with IP elites or IP HQ in one Army list, not both. Is Wolves Unleash Detachment of the old codex still valid?

Ip is HQ


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Collected CotW rules

http://imgur.com/a/2hhva


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Iron Priest datasheet gets replaced (see GW blog post above)

New sheet

But The Wolves Unleashed can have up to 6 HQ's right?

 Matthew wrote:
But The Wolves Unleashed can have up to 6 HQ's right?

That is a good question. Does anybody know if the Wolves unleashed or the Company of the great wolf detachments are still legal?

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Also, no elites and HQ Iron Priests at the same time.

Where is that confirmed? Wulfson seemed quite adamant on the previous page.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Also, no elites and HQ Iron Priests at the same time.

Where is that confirmed? Wulfson seemed quite adamant on the previous page.

If you look at the fine print on the picture up the page with the squadron rules for the tanks, etc. on it, it mentions that the datasheet for the Iron Priest replaces the old entry (last paragraph on the left). Sounds pretty clear that you can’t take both options if one replaces the other.

Warhams-77 wrote:

New sheet

Spoiler:

So a techmarine that can't take servitors to boost the battlesmith ability, but can take some cyber-pooches.

Special rule 'fetch'?

What does it mean in each of your shooting phases?

 OneManNoodles wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:

New sheet

Spoiler:

So a techmarine that can't take servitors to boost the battlesmith ability, but can take some cyber-pooches.

Special rule 'fetch'?

Servitors are a separate unit choice now, not an upgrade to the Techmarines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Billymac321 wrote:
What does it mean in each of your shooting phases?

Each time you have a shooting phase; y'know, the point in your turn where you shoot weapons?

Ok so let me clarify a few things regarding the Iron Priest issue:

- In the WD, p27 is the Iron Priest profile, p26 is a red box telling you how to use it and it states that it can be used "either as a replacement or in addition to the one in the Codex".

- I'm not saying here that the campaign supplement will say the same, it's just what people who have access to the WD will see.

- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.
Don't encourage this sort of thing.

But is it a new codex?

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

Without the supplement a player don't have access to any of the new rules like formations or vehicle squadrons, so same can be said for the Iron Priest rules that aren't in the WD.

Lot of people won't own that supplement or even know the rules inside unless they play in a store or with a gaming group. The profile in the WD is for these people since it will be released at the same time as CotW and would be redundant for those who own the new book.

White Dwarf Weekly is full of 'Wait, what?' like the Gorkanauts in the Looted Tank WD datasheet

People will find a solution when they have the books in hand.

Source for the image above: http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/What's-New-Today-from-the-White-Dwarf-Team/2016/02/09/Curse-of-the-Wulfen-the-book

 Wulfson_40K wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

Without the supplement a player don't have access to any of the new rules like formations or vehicle squadrons, so same can be said for the Iron Priest rules that aren't in the WD.

Lot of people won't own that supplement or even know the rules inside unless they play in a store or with a gaming group. The profile in the WD is for these people since it will be released at the same time as CotW and would be redundant for those who own the new book.

What? So in this scenario, we have a Space Wolf player who has the White Dwarf telling them about the Supplement and the new rules found inside, but they won't own it and will only play regular Space Wolves with ONLY the Iron Priest HQ choice that doesn't invalidate their Iron Priest Elite choice and none of the other options afforded by the Supplement?

Just because someone doesn't own the rules doesn't mean they get to ignore them. No one lets me play my 5e Necron codex with 100 point Night Scythes and 5 man Warrior Squads if I don't buy the 7e book. That's not how the game works, nor has ever worked.

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

Except it's not a new codex, it's a supplement.... a very expensive supplement at that. They're updating the ebook codex (which is also not exactly cheap) but so far haven't mentioned anything about updating the physical codex.

I think in this case it's one of those times where you should be able to choose not to use the latest rules if you don't want to spend money on the supplement. Though you also won't be able to use the shiny new formations.

So the new supplement is either "pay2play" or "pay2win" depending on how you look at it

I'll just add that in my PoV no rules issue will arise if you add the supplement to the mix. The way I see things in that case:

- WD tells you can use both new or Codex profile
- CotW change the Codex profile to the new one
- You still can use both profile but they now happen to be exactly the same, namely the HQ version, making the WD redundant.

I can't believe they didn't update Dreads when they updated everything else. Hopefully it's just stealth updated in the digital rerelease.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

Except it's not a new codex, it's a supplement.... a very expensive supplement at that. They're updating the ebook codex (which is also not exactly cheap) but so far haven't mentioned anything about updating the physical codex.

I think in this case it's one of those times where you should be able to choose not to use the latest rules if you don't want to spend money on the supplement. Though you also won't be able to use the shiny new formations.

So the new supplement is either "pay2play" or "pay2win" depending on how you look at it

...It's a rules update. It doesn't matter if you don't want to pay for it or not. The most recent rules for a model are the legal ones, anything else is a houserule. And that's fine if you want to houserule things, but don't go around telling people that ignoring rules is the normal/correct way to play the game.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Another tutorial from Emma

Spoiler:

.

So a "how not to paint Wulfen" video? lol

That girl tries too hard to be like Duncan

What's wrong with that paint scheme? Looks perfectly fine imo. Also filling Duncan's shoes isn't easy, I think she's doing a good job of it and she'll find her own style eventually. I heard some people say she was doing painting streams before working at GW, and apparently doing a good job at it?

Well it's obviously just personal opinion, I don't particularly like the flesh tone and I dislike the way the "fur" is sculpted in clumps with large smooth bald areas, so painting the "fur" grey just exaggerates that derpy sculpting.

As for Emma in general, maybe she'll find her own personality eventually, at the moment she's just copying Duncan in intonation, mannerisms and general style. Maybe that's just what she's like, in which case those two should get married or something Or maybe she's acting, in which case they must have told her "act like a female version of Duncan".

Wow could you be more of a jerk here AllSeeingSkink?
In her earlier videos, yes she does try and mimic Duncan. Though that's probably nerves. I think she's just trying to do her job, personally. She's certainly not lacking enthusiasm which I think, is helpful to those who might be a little twitchy about painting.

On a side note...The thing I hate most about Space Wolves is their armour colour. I much prefer the Heresy era grey to the 40K era blue-grey. Oh and the cheesy wolf wolfy wolf son frostymurderfang.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
I can't believe they didn't update Dreads when they updated everything else. Hopefully it's just stealth updated in the digital rerelease.

I do, as they didn't even bother to change some messed up rules in the Tau Codex (Vehicle weapons upgrades cost for example) so I wouldn't be surprised if a few models like the Dreads suffer the same fate in CotW.

Requizen wrote:
What? So in this scenario, we have a Space Wolf player who has the White Dwarf telling them about the Supplement and the new rules found inside, but they won't own it and will only play regular Space Wolves with ONLY the Iron Priest HQ choice that doesn't invalidate their Iron Priest Elite choice and none of the other options afforded by the Supplement?

Yup, and I believe that GW giving them that choice in a WD that is released exactly at the same time as the supplement hints at it being what they intended.

Requizen wrote:
Just because someone doesn't own the rules doesn't mean they get to ignore them. No one lets me play my 5e Necron codex with 100 point Night Scythes and 5 man Warrior Squads if I don't buy the 7e book. That's not how the game works, nor has ever worked.

In that case I don't think your example is adequate, as the SW Codex hasn't been replaced, it is still sold and is 100% playable as bought. If someone buy a book that is still relevant and still present on the shelves then it's playable "out of the box". Nowhere are there any rules that say that the book we sell are incomplete and require additional books to work. You want to play SW? You buy Codex SW, you can play SW! That's all there is to it.

If you cant because your gaming group ask for the most recently updated rules wherever they come from, then it's your environment that require it, be it a club, a store or a tournament, or self imposed like my own gaming group was. It's not the norm, it's a choice.

There are things to say about the way I see people handling rules update thought but we would go fully HS here and since I'm such a slow typer this would become a total pain for everyone anyway.

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

What sort of thing? Doing what you want with your own hobby? HOW DARE THEY

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

What sort of thing? Doing what you want with your own hobby? HOW DARE THEY

You can hobby any way you want. But any group that actually gives a gak about the rules won't play that way, and pretending otherwise is just silly.

So are SWs getting a new codex release after this or not?

I.e. is this release purely a supplement (albeit with some rule tweaks) or will a full redo of the codex follow?

And by full, I dont expect a massive redo, more like a Cron release (same fluff but some units changed and formations etc).

Anyone?

You can have your Iron Priests as Elites if I can have my Shuriken Catapults with Following Fire.

Agreed?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

Except it's not a new codex, it's a supplement.... a very expensive supplement at that. They're updating the ebook codex (which is also not exactly cheap) but so far haven't mentioned anything about updating the physical codex.

I think in this case it's one of those times where you should be able to choose not to use the latest rules if you don't want to spend money on the supplement. Though you also won't be able to use the shiny new formations.

So the new supplement is either "pay2play" or "pay2win" depending on how you look at it

I think it's silly that psybolt ammo was removed and psycannons became salvo. I'm just going to use those unit entries from the old GK codex, but use the updated rules for Draigo and Dreadknights. I mean, each individual unit is just a dataslate, and who cares about using the most up to date rules. New codex is overpriced anyways.

 DarkLink wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Wulfson_40K wrote:
- In a casual, non-tournament game, if someone is using only the Codex and the WD (and any older supplement that isn't CotW) then nothing stops them from having both kind of Iron Priests at the same time.

Except, you know, the rules. That's like saying a new codex doesn't invalidate the old one and a player can take models from a 7e book and a 6e book at the same time.

Don't encourage this sort of thing.

Except it's not a new codex, it's a supplement.... a very expensive supplement at that. They're updating the ebook codex (which is also not exactly cheap) but so far haven't mentioned anything about updating the physical codex.

I think in this case it's one of those times where you should be able to choose not to use the latest rules if you don't want to spend money on the supplement. Though you also won't be able to use the shiny new formations.

So the new supplement is either "pay2play" or "pay2win" depending on how you look at it

I think it's silly that psybolt ammo was removed and psycannons became salvo. I'm just going to use those unit entries from the old GK codex, but use the updated rules for Draigo and Dreadknights. I mean, each individual unit is just a dataslate, and who cares about using the most up to date rules. New codex is overpriced
anyways.

This is getting silly. We are talking two different dataslates of which white dwarf states are both valid not two different codexes form different editions of the game. Thats apples to oranges.