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.

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".

And you know Duncan wasn't affecting a persona for the camera at the direction of GW how again? I don't get the criticism to be honest, people seemed to like the videos with Duncan in them, now a different person is making essentially the same videos, so why would you think of them any differently?

EDIT: Also she can't be that bad, since watching that vid has convinced me there are bitz in the atrocious Wulfen kit that can be salvaged, which nothing else GW showed managed to do.

Billymac321 wrote:

 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?

SOMEBODY ANSWER this man's question PLEASE. I've been trying to find the answer for the last 3 days!!!!!

GW's not going to rule on it in any way. Historically, tournaments have allowed any detachments not specifically rereleased - the IK Adamantine Lance is still legal despite being for a 6th edition book. I think you'll be good, and I'm pretty sure the Wolves Unleashed detachment will be in this book unchanged anyway.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Billymac321 wrote:

 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?

SOMEBODY ANSWER this man's question PLEASE. I've been trying to find the answer for the last 3 days!!!!!

I would imagine it does not invalidate them. As there is no Formation or Detachment with the same name, it is not overwritten. As this is a rules update/supplement and not a new codex, and the fact that Champions of Fenris is still on the website, I would argue that it is still legal from a RAW and RAI perspective.

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Billymac321 wrote:

 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?

SOMEBODY ANSWER this man's question PLEASE. I've been trying to find the answer for the last 3 days!!!!!

I would imagine it does not invalidate them. As there is no Formation or Detachment with the same name, it is not overwritten. As this is a rules update/supplement and not a new codex, and the fact that Champions of Fenris is still on the website, I would argue that it is still legal from a RAW and RAI perspective.

Ohhh yeaaa looks like Thunderdome just got a little bit more thunderous.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Billymac321 wrote:

 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?

SOMEBODY ANSWER this man's question PLEASE. I've been trying to find the answer for the last 3 days!!!!!

I would imagine it does not invalidate them. As there is no Formation or Detachment with the same name, it is not overwritten. As this is a rules update/supplement and not a new codex, and the fact that Champions of Fenris is still on the website, I would argue that it is still legal from a RAW and RAI perspective.

Ohhh yeaaa looks like Thunderdome just got a little bit more thunderous.

How so? CotGW detachment requires 2 Elites, which you used to just do with Iron Priests. Now that they're HQs, you have to use HQ slots on them and take non-thunderdome stuff in the Elites slot.

In fact, with this change, there doesn't seem to be a way to run a pure TWC detachment at all now.

 Ratius wrote:
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?

They already got a new codex, although it's digital only for now. It's called Codex Space Wolves - Wulfen edition. It has the new stuff in it.

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Billymac321 wrote:

 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?

SOMEBODY ANSWER this man's question PLEASE. I've been trying to find the answer for the last 3 days!!!!!

I would imagine it does not invalidate them. As there is no Formation or Detachment with the same name, it is not overwritten. As this is a rules update/supplement and not a new codex, and the fact that Champions of Fenris is still on the website, I would argue that it is still legal from a RAW and RAI perspective.

Ohhh yeaaa looks like Thunderdome just got a little bit more thunderous.

How so? CotGW detachment requires 2 Elites, which you used to just do with Iron Priests. Now that they're HQs, you have to use HQ slots on them and take non-thunderdome stuff in the Elites slot.

In fact, with this change, there doesn't seem to be a way to run a pure TWC detachment at all now.

Umm servitors are 10pts and count as 1 unit.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Billymac321 wrote:

 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?

SOMEBODY ANSWER this man's question PLEASE. I've been trying to find the answer for the last 3 days!!!!!

I would imagine it does not invalidate them. As there is no Formation or Detachment with the same name, it is not overwritten. As this is a rules update/supplement and not a new codex, and the fact that Champions of Fenris is still on the website, I would argue that it is still legal from a RAW and RAI perspective.

Ohhh yeaaa looks like Thunderdome just got a little bit more thunderous.

How so? CotGW detachment requires 2 Elites, which you used to just do with Iron Priests. Now that they're HQs, you have to use HQ slots on them and take non-thunderdome stuff in the Elites slot.

In fact, with this change, there doesn't seem to be a way to run a pure TWC detachment at all now.

Umm servitors are 10pts and count as 1 unit.

They don't fulfill a FOC slot if you have a IP. Would it still count?

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

Billymac321 wrote:

 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?

SOMEBODY ANSWER this man's question PLEASE. I've been trying to find the answer for the last 3 days!!!!!

I would imagine it does not invalidate them. As there is no Formation or Detachment with the same name, it is not overwritten. As this is a rules update/supplement and not a new codex, and the fact that Champions of Fenris is still on the website, I would argue that it is still legal from a RAW and RAI perspective.

Ohhh yeaaa looks like Thunderdome just got a little bit more thunderous.

How so? CotGW detachment requires 2 Elites, which you used to just do with Iron Priests. Now that they're HQs, you have to use HQ slots on them and take non-thunderdome stuff in the Elites slot.

In fact, with this change, there doesn't seem to be a way to run a pure TWC detachment at all now.

Umm servitors are 10pts and count as 1 unit.

Well yeah you can do that, I was just saying that you can no longer do "every model in my army is an IC and/or on a Thunderwolf mount!" type lists. 20 points is still an acceptable tax.


Actually, I'm not sure about that. The rule "Thralls" says "If Servitors are included in a Detachment that includes at least one Iron Priest, the Servitors do not use up a Force Organisation slot". Can they be compulsory Elites if they don't take up a slot? I would imagine you can decide they can, but it says "do not use" rather than "can choose not to use".

Iron Priests count as both, so you take a HQ IP and two Elite IP.

They still count towards the 2 elite requirement to run the detachment but no they don't use up a elite slot as in I can max out the elite lots with other stuff if I choose to

 pretre wrote:
Iron Priests count as both, so you take a HQ IP and two Elite IP.

The new IP replaces the old one:

Warhams-77 wrote:
From GW's blog

They also had this beauty to say "Also included are updated Datasheets for Predator, Vindicator, Land Speeder and Whirlwind vehicle squadrons, giving them the same special rules and options as those found in Codex: Space Marines. No more are the Sons of Russ left languishing behind their superhuman kin on the battlefield!" Well, if they don't update the dreads, I would guess we are still languishing behind (we wont even discuss Blood Claws or our Scouts).

SW Scouts are fine. They have Veteran statistics. Perhaps BCs are less disciplined that the other initiate brethren due to being fitted with a black carapace very early. I am still upset about the Dreadnoughts. Melee Dreads have fewer attacks than schizo dreads. That is wrong.

SW Scouts are horrible. They cost as much as a GH (SM scouts are cheaper and have the same stats now) are an elite unit as opposed to troop and have limited weapon options. SM scouts on the other hand are now as skilled, are troop, have a transport option in the storm (which is a decent ride) and an upgrade character (all for less). Now, previously SW scouts had OBEL which made them useful, combined with the fact that they could charge when entering play so they had a role that their SM counterparts didn't so they were worthwhile. Now, stripped of their special abilities, they are paper weights. Combine that with the fluff where SW scouts are elite fighters, whereas SM scouts are trainees, and none of it makes any sort of sense.

sturguard wrote:
SW Scouts are horrible. They cost as much as a GH (SM scouts are cheaper and have the same stats now) are an elite unit as opposed to troop and have limited weapon options. SM scouts on the other hand are now as skilled, are troop, have a transport option in the storm (which is a decent ride) and an upgrade character (all for less). Now, previously SW scouts had OBEL which made them useful, combined with the fact that they could charge when entering play so they had a role that their SM counterparts didn't so they were worthwhile. Now, stripped of their special abilities, they are paper weights. Combine that with the fluff where SW scouts are elite fighters, whereas SM scouts are trainees, and none of it makes any sort of sense.

Agreed. If they are vets, then why the hell don't they have 2 attacks?! Bring back assault from reserves. That would do wonders for the game in terms of tactics and make wolf scouts and Genestealers relevant again. Just have a clause in the deep strike rules saying no assault from deep strike and your sweet. There's nothing op about assaulting when you move on from a table edge. If your opponent is too stupid to stay away from the table edge when he knows what's in reserves that's his problem.

Meh, SW got shafted as a whole. The only two competitive greatpacks are Ironwolves and Blackmane. And even then, Blackmane is way overshadowed by the Skyhammer force. While the Ironwolves is a joke of a SW force in razorback/land-speeder spam. The Firehowlers overwatch denial could have been so cool! It was so fething close. But it's useless since ATSKNF and fearless are immune. Wtf? Serously? . Why didn't Deathwolves get charge from outflank? If they didn't want ally shenanigans, they could have just worded the rule to be "only Deathwolves models" can charge from outflank. gak man, I would have been happy with "only Deathwolf swiftclaw models", rofl... Champions of Fenris is unplayable in 80% of all games. We get Howl of Wolves if we run 2 greatpacks or 2 of the same legendary greatpack... What was the point of this? We have trouble fleshing out 1 greatpack in 1850pt with all the tax, you can forget about 2.

And if all that wasn't enough, they didn't bring our scouts and dreads into line. Why?... I can't even...

Bah, sorry people, I'm just so disappointed. My hopes were so high...

Requizen 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

...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.

It's a rules update in the form of an expensive supplement.

I don't even know where it's written "you must use the newest version of a rule". To me it's always been "If it's in a current publication, you can use it", and the SW codex as far as I can see is still a current publication.

Unless GW update the physical codex that's sitting on the shelf, then the SW codex is current rules. Even if they do update the physical codex I think you'd have to have a stick up your bum to not let someone just use the 2014 codex because with all the new formations it's more of a nerf than a boost, but that's just my personal opinion. As long as the SW codex is current I think it's fine to use it.

DarkLink wrote: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.

You're not comparing similar things. The SW codex is still the current codex. I'm not talking about using an old codex alongside a new codex, or using an old codex in spite of a newer codex existing.... I'm talking.... very specifically.... about.... ignoring a supplement.

Stop trying to equate it to things that aren't similar.

angelofvengeance wrote:Wow could you be more of a jerk here AllSeeingSkink?

Name calling, cute. "Takes one to know one". "If you're calling someone on the internet a jerk, you might just be a jerk". Anyway, moving on from the childishness.

I think she's just trying to do her job, personally.

I acknowledged that she might have just been told to act that way, in which case she's a decent actor

I find it a bit like when an actor gets replaced in a TV show and the new actor tries to play the same character in the same way as the old actor. It's distracting and IMO they're better off just finding their own way of playing the character. Except this isn't a TV show and Emma and Duncan aren't characters, so there's no reason for them to be acting the same

I know for most people it's an insignificant gripe, and maybe I'm just being OCD (or as a "jerk" as you like to throw around) but I find it distracting.

They made iron priests HQs? Good.

Now we just need another BA supplement to give them squadron bonuses and a mediocre decurion, and we'll be all good, right? :p

I thought SW Scouts did have two attacks. My mistake.

Let's see when this will get wiped by the GW Inquisition but the tumblr blog of the author of CotW's 2nd novel is very specific that Curse of the Wulfen (the 40k campaign, see link) is "the first installment" of this campaign.

http://a-40k-author.tumblr.com/post/138788698036/war-zone-fenris-unleashed


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is also lots of fluff info regarding part one (Spoiler)

http://a-40k-author.tumblr.com/post/139046155261/war-zone-fenris-the-situation-so-far-for-those

I wonder if all the options for Land Speeders implies a new kit? They do seem to be pimping them pretty hard as an option, and IIRC they’ve never been a huge part of SW lore/tactics.

/wishlisting

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It's a rules update in the form of an expensive supplement.

I don't even know where it's written "you must use the newest version of a rule". To me it's always been "If it's in a current publication, you can use it", and the SW codex as far as I can see is still a current publication.

Unless GW update the physical codex that's sitting on the shelf, then the SW codex is current rules. Even if they do update the physical codex I think you'd have to have a stick up your bum to not let someone just use the 2014 codex because with all the new formations it's more of a nerf than a boost, but that's just my personal opinion. As long as the SW codex is current I think it's fine to use it.

And you can go ahead and play like that, no one can tell you how to play with your buddies on a week night. Just don't expect other people to interpret it the same way if you play someone who cares about the rules or you go to an event. Anything you do that is out of the ordinary is a houserule, full stop. Not that there's anything wrong with houserules, we do them all the time (discard cards you can't achieve when playing Maelstrom, ignore Allies matrix when playing pickup 2v2s, etc), but it doesn't make them the actual rules.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Iron Priests count as both, so you take a HQ IP and two Elite IP.

The new IP replaces the old one:

Thanks, someone had said the opposite based on the WD. Appreciate it!

They already got a new codex, although it's digital only for now. It's called Codex Space Wolves - Wulfen edition. It has the new stuff in it.

Yes but its Codex Space Wolves - Wulfen
Will there be another codex, simply called Codex - Space Wolves, that might update things like their Dreads, character rules, sub units etc.
Or is Codex Space Wolves - Wulfen it? Period?

 pretre wrote:
Thanks, someone had said the opposite based on the WD. Appreciate it!

That's me, there is indeed an IP profile in the WD and a box telling people they can use it either as a replacement or in addition to the one in the codex, unlike the supplement that apparently states it's a pure replacement.

There was a small argument a few posts back about the meaning of two sources giving slightly different rules to the same model, but drama scale was stuck in the lower digits so the lack of blood splatter and people screaming in pain didn't make it a particularly noticeable discussion.

So WD says that the new rules are optional and if people want to use the old ones they can still use them because the new ebook does not replace the old codex.

"use whatever rules you want", how nice.....

 kodos wrote:
So WD says that the new rules are optional and if people want to use the old ones they can still use them because the new ebook does not replace the old codex.

"use whatever rules you want", how nice.....

Not sure why they would post conflicting things like that, but then again this is GW...

Maybe Iron Priests taken in the new book's formations require them to be HQs, and the older detachments can take them as either? Correct me if I'm wrong, but playing with the new book's rules and toys isn't required since C:SW is still the actual ruleset.

Svenghali wrote:


A formation does not require a slot, so it doesn't matter if the IP is HQ or Elite
and we know if the Codex SW stay the actual ruleset, when the new ebook is downloadable.

But yeah, this is GW, just remember the confusion the WD set with the text "imperial knights can ally with every force in 40k" and after the release we get "with ever imperial force, we thought that is clear".

So I expect that GW keep telling us that the actual Codex is still valid until there is a big "suprise" in 2 weeks which give us a complete new Codex SW