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.

Ever use them? When would they be considered good?

A friend of mine uses a nightbringer just because he likes to. In one game during a local game store tournament he one shotted on of my wraithknights on the top or turn 1... He rolled the D power then proceeded to roll a 6 to hit followed by a 6 on the D-table. He still lost as my 2nd wraithknight blew it off the table with a D shot and then nhe couldnt get through the 3 wraithknights I still had on the field in a relic game. Thanks to 7th a wraithknight can carry the relic

CTans are actually bad right now because of how their shooting rules work.

You decide the target you are shooting at, then roll on a table to see which gun they get, sadly the guns range from swarm control to D weapon and everything in between. So if you choose to shoot at a land raider, then roll anything but the high damage weapons, your shots are wasted.

Our group decided to house rule the CTans to make them roll at the very start of the shooting phase to see which weapon they are using before any run moves or shots are fired and it actually makes them pretty good.

Their shooting isn't gakky once you realize most of the powers focus on MSU.

They're not durable for the cost, though, and it is really only worth running the Nightbringer in a Conclave to teleport around and Shriek stuff and...stuff.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Their shooting isn't gakky once you realize most of the powers focus on MSU.

They're not durable for the cost, though, and it is really only worth running the Nightbringer in a Conclave to teleport around and Shriek stuff and...stuff.

Yeah that nightbringer LD ability can really make IG and Tau troops disappear pretty damn quick.

 Konrax wrote:
CTans are actually bad right now because of how their shooting rules work.

You decide the target you are shooting at, then roll on a table to see which gun they get, sadly the guns range from swarm control to D weapon and everything in between. So if you choose to shoot at a land raider, then roll anything but the high damage weapons, your shots are wasted.

Our group decided to house rule the CTans to make them roll at the very start of the shooting phase to see which weapon they are using before any run moves or shots are fired and it actually makes them pretty good.

Which is so dumb. Seriously, what is with GWs obsession with random tables?
It can't be laziness, as its actually does require a bit of time and work to come up with different permutations.
Its as if they are trying desperately to make the game as convoluted and as difficult to get into as possible.

I liked the game better with less random tables. Like back when you paid for your psyker powers instead of randomly rolling for them...

 Xerics wrote:
I liked the game better with less random tables. Like back when you paid for your psyker powers instead of randomly rolling for them...

Yeah, it was way better back then. They didn't have to copy Warhammer Fantasy, the psi system was already adequate.
The only change to the psychic system I liked was how you can defend yourself from psy now.

What is this nightbringer in conclave thing?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
I liked the game better with less random tables. Like back when you paid for your psyker powers instead of randomly rolling for them...

Yeah, it was way better back then. They didn't have to copy Warhammer Fantasy, the psi system was already adequate.
The only change to the psychic system I liked was how you can defend yourself from psy now.

I wish i could go back to the days of just taking farseers with fortune and guide only, and having to only pass a leadership test to manifest a power

marcman wrote:
What is this nightbringer in conclave thing?

It's a supplementary formation called the conclave of the burning one. I don't remember which book it is from (it's in the one with the mephrit dynasty). Basically it consists of a C'tan and two crypteks who form a single unit. The C'tan gains fnp 5+ when both crypteks are alive, and fnp 6+ when one cryptek is alive. Both crypteks get to use the c'tan's toughness. The formation is considered the only viable way to run C'tan since you get acces to mephrit relics (which are exclusive to mephrit formations) and regular relics. This allows you to get relics that allow you to teleport, get pseudo-invisibility, and the essential God shackle relic, which gives the C'tan +1 strength and toughness. You can also get relics to create a tank cryptek with a re-rollable 2+ save. You can also look out sir wounds around to spread them out, and regenerate them if you are running the nightbringer (which is the only way to run the conclave). Basically, the conclave raises C'tan from "bad" to "somewhat decent" but it is still far from competetive since it is very expensive and slow.

Anrakyr-the-Traveller wrote:

marcman wrote:
What is this nightbringer in conclave thing?

It's a supplementary formation called the conclave of the burning one. I don't remember which book it is from (it's in the one with the mephrit dynasty). Basically it consists of a C'tan and two crypteks who form a single unit. The C'tan gains fnp 5+ when both crypteks are alive, and fnp 6+ when one cryptek is alive. Both crypteks get to use the c'tan's toughness. The formation is considered the only viable way to run C'tan since you get acces to mephrit relics (which are exclusive to mephrit formations) and regular relics. This allows you to get relics that allow you to teleport, get pseudo-invisibility, and the essential God shackle relic, which gives the C'tan +1 strength and toughness. You can also get relics to create a tank cryptek with a re-rollable 2+ save. You can also look out sir wounds around to spread them out, and regenerate them if you are running the nightbringer (which is the only way to run the conclave). Basically, the conclave raises C'tan from "bad" to "somewhat decent" but it is still far from competetive since it is very expensive and slow.

The problem is the formation (from Shield of Baal: Exterminatus) requires a Ctan Shard, which is no longer an option in the Necron Codex, and would have to be house-ruled to be usable.

Thanks! Anyone know where I can find the page that tells be about the relics

 Happyjew wrote:

Anrakyr-the-Traveller wrote:

marcman wrote:
What is this nightbringer in conclave thing?

It's a supplementary formation called the conclave of the burning one. I don't remember which book it is from (it's in the one with the mephrit dynasty). Basically it consists of a C'tan and two crypteks who form a single unit. The C'tan gains fnp 5+ when both crypteks are alive, and fnp 6+ when one cryptek is alive. Both crypteks get to use the c'tan's toughness. The formation is considered the only viable way to run C'tan since you get acces to mephrit relics (which are exclusive to mephrit formations) and regular relics. This allows you to get relics that allow you to teleport, get pseudo-invisibility, and the essential God shackle relic, which gives the C'tan +1 strength and toughness. You can also get relics to create a tank cryptek with a re-rollable 2+ save. You can also look out sir wounds around to spread them out, and regenerate them if you are running the nightbringer (which is the only way to run the conclave). Basically, the conclave raises C'tan from "bad" to "somewhat decent" but it is still far from competetive since it is very expensive and slow.

The problem is the formation (from Shield of Baal: Exterminatus) requires a Ctan Shard, which is no longer an option in the Necron Codex, and would have to be house-ruled to be usable.

Unless they updated the Necron codex in the last 2 months im pretty sure the new Nightbringer and Deciever are shards. It even says in their entry "Shard of the Nightbringer"

The Conclave of the Burning One calls for "1 C'tan Shard", not "1 C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer" or "1 C'tan Shard of the Deceiver". Each is a proper name for a specific unit.

...and those would be Shards.

Technically going with raw ghaz and happyjew are correct. But really, only the biggest (and most foolish) rules lawyer would take advantage of banning the formation. There are so many better options that a Necron player could take (you could take a destroyer cult, judicator battalion or two canoptek harvests for the same price as a fully upgraded conclave). Taking the conclave isnt a tactical advantage and is still quite fluffy, so there really isn't a good reason to ban it.

Is it "C'Tan Shard" in quotation marks?

If not I'm going to question the difference of the two.

I likr the LoW one
No random powers, just choose 2 at the start of the game
Plus he is T9 and a GC meaning he is stupidly tough (especially is you use The God Shackle, making him T10!)
He can also get a power where every model he moves over automatically takes a D hit

commander dante wrote:
I likr the LoW one
No random powers, just choose 2 at the start of the game
Plus he is T9 and a GC meaning he is stupidly tough (especially is you use The God Shackle, making him T10!)
He can also get a power where every model he moves over automatically takes a D hit

He's be replaced by the codex entry

 CrownAxe wrote:

commander dante wrote:
I likr the LoW one
No random powers, just choose 2 at the start of the game
Plus he is T9 and a GC meaning he is stupidly tough (especially is you use The God Shackle, making him T10!)
He can also get a power where every model he moves over automatically takes a D hit

He's be replaced by the codex entry

Not necessarily, Got a thread going on YMDC debating weather or not he can still be used
The Escalation FaQ states that the Escalation rules are counted as being in the codex that they would come from, and the BRB states that units that have multiple army list entries, the player may choose what one to use and the 'Lords of War in Warhammer 40,000' states that a LoW may be chosen from the same codex as the primary detachment (of which the Escalation FaQ corrects the entries to say that they are part of that codex/faction)

...and the BRB states that units that have multiple army list entries, the player may choose what one to use...

The BRB doesn't state this, its why there is a debate over it.

The general consensus for rules is you use the most recent version of a unit's rules. The Transcendent C'tan's most recent rules are the ones in the codex. pretty simple.

Also the YMDC thread only respone is "ask your opponent/TO" and I've yet to find anyone willing to let you use the escalation rule (on account of them being hideously overpowered)

 CrownAxe wrote:

...and the BRB states that units that have multiple army list entries, the player may choose what one to use...

The BRB doesn't state this, its why there is a debate over it.

The general consensus for rules is you use the most recent version of a unit's rules. The Transcendent C'tan's most recent rules are the ones in the codex. pretty simple.

Also the YMDC thread only respone is "ask your opponent/TO" and I've yet to find anyone willing to let you use the escalation rule (on account of them being hideously overpowered)

BRB wrote:ARMY LIST ENTRIES IN DIFFERENT PUBLICATIONS
There are a few units whose Army List Entries are presented in more than one Games Workshop publication. Daemon Princes, for example, are presented in both Codex: Chaos Daemons and Codex: Chaos Space Marines. In these instances, the unit’s Faction is determined by whichever codex it was chosen from. Be sure to keep track of which is which if you decide to take one from more than one source.

commander dante wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

...and the BRB states that units that have multiple army list entries, the player may choose what one to use...

The BRB doesn't state this, its why there is a debate over it.

The general consensus for rules is you use the most recent version of a unit's rules. The Transcendent C'tan's most recent rules are the ones in the codex. pretty simple.

Also the YMDC thread only respone is "ask your opponent/TO" and I've yet to find anyone willing to let you use the escalation rule (on account of them being hideously overpowered)

BRB wrote:ARMY LIST ENTRIES IN DIFFERENT PUBLICATIONS
There are a few units whose Army List Entries are presented in more than one Games Workshop publication. Daemon Princes, for example, are presented in both Codex: Chaos Daemons and Codex: Chaos Space Marines. In these instances, the unit’s Faction is determined by whichever codex it was chosen from. Be sure to keep track of which is which if you decide to take one from more than one source.

Thats not permission to choose between two different units entries. Its telling you that a unit is the faction of the codex it came from.

 CrownAxe wrote:

commander dante wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

...and the BRB states that units that have multiple army list entries, the player may choose what one to use...

The BRB doesn't state this, its why there is a debate over it.

The general consensus for rules is you use the most recent version of a unit's rules. The Transcendent C'tan's most recent rules are the ones in the codex. pretty simple.

Also the YMDC thread only respone is "ask your opponent/TO" and I've yet to find anyone willing to let you use the escalation rule (on account of them being hideously overpowered)

BRB wrote:ARMY LIST ENTRIES IN DIFFERENT PUBLICATIONS
There are a few units whose Army List Entries are presented in more than one Games Workshop publication. Daemon Princes, for example, are presented in both Codex: Chaos Daemons and Codex: Chaos Space Marines. In these instances, the unit’s Faction is determined by whichever codex it was chosen from. Be sure to keep track of which is which if you decide to take one from more than one source.

Thats not permission to choose between two different units entries. Its telling you that a unit is the faction of the codex it came from.

and that is Codex:Necrons, as stated in the Escalation FaQ

Nobody will let you use the Tran C'Tan from the supplement when there is one in the main codex. If they were both codex's you could argue that point but one is a supplement and so it loses out to the codex.

commander dante wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

commander dante wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

...and the BRB states that units that have multiple army list entries, the player may choose what one to use...

The BRB doesn't state this, its why there is a debate over it.

The general consensus for rules is you use the most recent version of a unit's rules. The Transcendent C'tan's most recent rules are the ones in the codex. pretty simple.

Also the YMDC thread only respone is "ask your opponent/TO" and I've yet to find anyone willing to let you use the escalation rule (on account of them being hideously overpowered)

BRB wrote:ARMY LIST ENTRIES IN DIFFERENT PUBLICATIONS
There are a few units whose Army List Entries are presented in more than one Games Workshop publication. Daemon Princes, for example, are presented in both Codex: Chaos Daemons and Codex: Chaos Space Marines. In these instances, the unit’s Faction is determined by whichever codex it was chosen from. Be sure to keep track of which is which if you decide to take one from more than one source.

Thats not permission to choose between two different units entries. Its telling you that a unit is the faction of the codex it came from.

and that is Codex:Necrons, as stated in the Escalation FaQ

It's still not permission to pick between the two

 CrownAxe wrote:

commander dante wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

commander dante wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

...and the BRB states that units that have multiple army list entries, the player may choose what one to use...

The BRB doesn't state this, its why there is a debate over it.

The general consensus for rules is you use the most recent version of a unit's rules. The Transcendent C'tan's most recent rules are the ones in the codex. pretty simple.

Also the YMDC thread only respone is "ask your opponent/TO" and I've yet to find anyone willing to let you use the escalation rule (on account of them being hideously overpowered)

BRB wrote:ARMY LIST ENTRIES IN DIFFERENT PUBLICATIONS
There are a few units whose Army List Entries are presented in more than one Games Workshop publication. Daemon Princes, for example, are presented in both Codex: Chaos Daemons and Codex: Chaos Space Marines. In these instances, the unit’s Faction is determined by whichever codex it was chosen from. Be sure to keep track of which is which if you decide to take one from more than one source.

Thats not permission to choose between two different units entries. Its telling you that a unit is the faction of the codex it came from.

and that is Codex:Necrons, as stated in the Escalation FaQ

It's still not permission to pick between the two

Then what restricts me from choosing then?

If they were both codex's you could argue that point but one is a supplement and so it loses out to the codex.

commander dante wrote:

Then what restricts me from choosing then?

Nothing. Just like nothing stops you from using the 4ed Cron codex in your games, or from making up your own rules and using them in games.

But pretty much no one well let you play with it. Its just a common convention to use the most recent rules for a unit and the escalation rules are not that.