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.
2017/05/04 14:08:49
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - Morale phase / OOP FW Models
Daedalus81 wrote: And what happened when you lost sweeping advance with that glorious I2? Did you get to keep all those models?
Absolutely nothing, because my remaining 20 orks were Fearless and so didn't have to worry about sweeping advance? Now I stand to lose at least a handful of models?
Edit: and you're assuming the wounds were lost to CC. My example applied equally (if not more so) to being shot. A blob of 30 orks rarely loses CC by 10.
Assuming your character wasn't challenged out and eventually you'll be below 10. It's also pretty costly to make other units of orks like Nobz bigger than 10.
You're not going to be losing handfuls of models to morale unless you have ultra cheap models - like skeleton level.
2017/05/04 14:23:00
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
One of the worst problems I have with 7th is the Mission rules. I hate the randomness of card drawing in Maelstrom but the Eternal War missions are too static until turns 4+. This is where 8th hinges for me. So far I like what I see (especially those rumors fro Faeit).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 14:23:49
2017/05/04 14:24:10
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - Morale phase / OOP FW Models
II so want to take this as gospel as well. There are things they could have extrapolated from AoS, but the way invulnerable saves work and other things that are similar, but changed in a really sensible way.
However, I can't underestimate someone's ability to be creative in their trolling. Maybe if we make a huge stink about it GW will have to release more info.
Spoiler:
zamerion wrote: Nobody post this? (its from faeit yes.. but sounds possible):
- Assault 2d6”, multiple units
- Split fire: any unit can target as many targets as they want
- Normally the unit don’t have to target the nearest unit, but there are lots of abilities that have this restriction
- Invulnerable saves simply ignore armour penetration up to the given value. They are not that common, wave serpents and Canoptek wraiths have one
- Most power fields, etc. are separate saves that are taken in addition to other saves just like FnP of today, they may or may not ignore mortal wounds on a case by case basis
- Dodges, camos, etc are now to hit modifiers
- Characters cannot join units
- Characters can only be targeted if nearest target or within 12”
- Larger models are seldom characters, Gulliman is not for example
- Deepstriking units can be placed anywhere. Every unit with deep strike has a value. Have to beat it to land on target, otherwise opposing player can move unit the rolled distance
- There are no mishaps anymore
- Overwatch shooting against deep striking units within 9” at -1 BS - Summoning is not a psychic ability anymore, normal deep striking with psyker as homing beacon instead
- There are spells that replenish or add wounds to demon squads
- Most vehicles have a single attack with high S, but no AP, some have considerably more like the battle waggon
- Vehicles and units fighting against vehicles usually can fall back without penalty, they cannot move in the charge phase when they have moved or shot in the same turn. Most walkers don’t have this rule
- Terrain enhances armour in assault phase for the defender, or both in consecutive turns, is negated by grenades
- Assaulting units get +1 attack
- Vertical movement does not count against the allowance but a model cannot go higher than the movement value in a given phase. Lots of exceptions for jumping, flying, etc. of course
Ranges are measured on the ground level from base or model to base or model, whichever is nearer
- Units are deployed within 3” of a transport, cannot move, but can charge in the charge phase
- No more firing from a transport, though some vehicles, especially open topped ones have extra firing points weapons if they transport enough (and sometimes eligible) models. But they use their own BS and the kind of weapon is fixed. For example Raiders have 5 fire point splinter rifles, but only if they transport kabalite warriors
- No challenges
- Hidden power fists viable again, wound allocation by owning player, any model in squad, but wounded ones first
- There are some precision weapons that let the firing player choose the wound allocation (always or on a 6)
- Units have always the same T and Save now. There are some models that have T- Sv - and adapt like drones and grots, most of the other combined units have matchings stats now, Black templar neophytes have a 3+ now, for whatever reason
- Command points allow to reroll saves, hits, wounding or charge distance, reroll any single dice throw, negate all terrain in 12” of one of your models, alter the attack sequence, boost psychic block rolls, allow additional reserves and allow units to get another charge phase after wiping out an enemy
- There are some models like Ghazghkull that have their own abilities that are triggered by command points
- perils of the war: snake eyes on the test, d6 on table, d3 mortal wounds and losing a spell are the worst cases
- Player can spend command points to choose who goes first instead of rolling, whoever spends more
- Matched games have a fixed number of turns, 5 or 6 rounds depending on mission, 18” is starting range and turn 1 charges are completely legal
- Reserves are not random, except for rounding: second turn half the units are deployed, third turn half of the remaining, fourth turn rest
- Flyers have an individual to hit modifier, mostly -2 or -3, a 6 is always a hit as usual, depends on the flying mode for flyers that have more than one
- Flyers are affected by heavy weapon malus, but most flyer weapons are assault,
flyer weapons have often a shorter range and a different name, but are otherwise identical to their ground counterparts
- Terrain does not influence movement distance per se. Some citadel terrain pieces half the movement or do other things.
- There are no warzone rules in the core rules
- True line of sight is used to establish line of sight to a model, but otherwise models count in or out of cover depending if they are in a piece of terrain or if they are touching it and the firing - line goes through the terrain
- In matched play, models have a fixed base size specified in the General’s Handbook. In the two other game types, they can use any base they want
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 14:25:40
2017/05/04 14:30:35
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - Morale phase / OOP FW Models
Daedalus81 wrote: II so want to take this as gospel as well. There are things they could have extrapolated from AoS, but the way invulnerable saves work and other things that are similar, but changed in a really sensible way.
However, I can't underestimate someone's ability to be creative in their trolling. Maybe if we make a huge stink about it GW will have to release more info.
Spoiler:
zamerion wrote: Nobody post this? (its from faeit yes.. but sounds possible):
- Assault 2d6”, multiple units
- Split fire: any unit can target as many targets as they want
- Normally the unit don’t have to target the nearest unit, but there are lots of abilities that have this restriction
- Invulnerable saves simply ignore armour penetration up to the given value. They are not that common, wave serpents and Canoptek wraiths have one
- Most power fields, etc. are separate saves that are taken in addition to other saves just like FnP of today, they may or may not ignore mortal wounds on a case by case basis
- Dodges, camos, etc are now to hit modifiers
- Characters cannot join units
- Characters can only be targeted if nearest target or within 12”
- Larger models are seldom characters, Gulliman is not for example
- Deepstriking units can be placed anywhere. Every unit with deep strike has a value. Have to beat it to land on target, otherwise opposing player can move unit the rolled distance
- There are no mishaps anymore
- Overwatch shooting against deep striking units within 9” at -1 BS - Summoning is not a psychic ability anymore, normal deep striking with psyker as homing beacon instead
- There are spells that replenish or add wounds to demon squads
- Most vehicles have a single attack with high S, but no AP, some have considerably more like the battle waggon
- Vehicles and units fighting against vehicles usually can fall back without penalty, they cannot move in the charge phase when they have moved or shot in the same turn. Most walkers don’t have this rule
- Terrain enhances armour in assault phase for the defender, or both in consecutive turns, is negated by grenades
- Assaulting units get +1 attack
- Vertical movement does not count against the allowance but a model cannot go higher than the movement value in a given phase. Lots of exceptions for jumping, flying, etc. of course
Ranges are measured on the ground level from base or model to base or model, whichever is nearer
- Units are deployed within 3” of a transport, cannot move, but can charge in the charge phase
- No more firing from a transport, though some vehicles, especially open topped ones have extra firing points weapons if they transport enough (and sometimes eligible) models. But they use their own BS and the kind of weapon is fixed. For example Raiders have 5 fire point splinter rifles, but only if they transport kabalite warriors
- No challenges
- Hidden power fists viable again, wound allocation by owning player, any model in squad, but wounded ones first
- There are some precision weapons that let the firing player choose the wound allocation (always or on a 6)
- Units have always the same T and Save now. There are some models that have T- Sv - and adapt like drones and grots, most of the other combined units have matchings stats now, Black templar neophytes have a 3+ now, for whatever reason
- Command points allow to reroll saves, hits, wounding or charge distance, reroll any single dice throw, negate all terrain in 12” of one of your models, alter the attack sequence, boost psychic block rolls, allow additional reserves and allow units to get another charge phase after wiping out an enemy
- There are some models like Ghazghkull that have their own abilities that are triggered by command points
- perils of the war: snake eyes on the test, d6 on table, d3 mortal wounds and losing a spell are the worst cases
- Player can spend command points to choose who goes first instead of rolling, whoever spends more
- Matched games have a fixed number of turns, 5 or 6 rounds depending on mission, 18” is starting range and turn 1 charges are completely legal
- Reserves are not random, except for rounding: second turn half the units are deployed, third turn half of the remaining, fourth turn rest
- Flyers have an individual to hit modifier, mostly -2 or -3, a 6 is always a hit as usual, depends on the flying mode for flyers that have more than one
- Flyers are affected by heavy weapon malus, but most flyer weapons are assault,
flyer weapons have often a shorter range and a different name, but are otherwise identical to their ground counterparts
- Terrain does not influence movement distance per se. Some citadel terrain pieces half the movement or do other things.
- There are no warzone rules in the core rules
- True line of sight is used to establish line of sight to a model, but otherwise models count in or out of cover depending if they are in a piece of terrain or if they are touching it and the firing - line goes through the terrain
- In matched play, models have a fixed base size specified in the General’s Handbook. In the two other game types, they can use any base they want
- Reserves are not random, except for rounding: second turn half the units are deployed, third turn half of the remaining, fourth turn rest
Faeit just updated the article with this disclaimer/rebuttal:
Please note that a valued source has confirmed that these are wildly off. Here is from a source we can trust about the rumors below
Some items are kinda correct due to the poster grabbing gw shares and sigmar rules, and basically throwing spaghetti at the wall. But most is either incomplete, somewhat off, or wildly off.
Charax wrote: Faeit just updated the article with this disclaimer/rebuttal:
Please note that a valued source has confirmed that these are wildly off. Here is from a source we can trust about the rumors below
Some items are kinda correct due to the poster grabbing gw shares and sigmar rules, and basically throwing spaghetti at the wall. But most is either incomplete, somewhat off, or wildly off.
So don't get your hopes up
Sometimes you just feel like not liking people.
2017/05/04 14:48:53
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
privateer4hire wrote: "...You forgot that the MSU has also another 5 guys so both sides have same number left. Difference comes when you would lose more than 3 guys to battleshock...Say extra casualty from shooting so big unit would now be 3 left vs MSU 5 left.
OBVIOUSLY you don't compare 10 vs 5. You compare 10 vs 5 and 5."
So comparing 10 vs 5 and 5, let's just say that each unit suffers only 1 casualty each including the 10 man unit.
It appears one strategy is to spread attacks across the MSUs if you are attacked.
Maybe you shoot up one unit and assault like crazy with the other at each 5 man unit.
Or if it's not your turn, if they're both dogpiling your unit, you split your cc attacks across them.
Because each one that loses a unit is (unless they have a special rule in force) now has to take a battleshock test.
So either you too msu or he has 4 Small units vs your 2 big.
And causing 1 casualty to each unit to cause test lsbtw worse than combining fire against same target so if you do msu player is even happier.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2017/05/04 14:58:04
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - Morale phase / OOP FW Models
I find your complaints on assault as it potentially stands very tough to follow. You don't think assault will be kind to hordes without special rules... and then are ticked that AoS is really helpful to hordes with those factions having rules that let them be good at the style of play they're oft associated with.
Yes. Again, if special rules are required to allow certain armies to function as intended, then there's something seriously wrong with the core rules.
Special rules should be there to add special stuff to armies... not to plug the holes created by core rules that don't take them into account.
. Are you truthfully saying that the only thing you want to seperate an IG blob and Orks is the stat line?
That's a bit of a simplification, but in general yes, that's pretty much what I want. That is, after all, the whole point of the statline. Everybody and his dog having special rules is fine in a small-scale skirmish game. In a game the size of 40K, it just makes things too complicated. Special rules should either apply to entire armies, or should apply to actual special things. Special rules on individual basic troop units should be avoided as much as humanly possible.
My actual complaint here though isn't about the existence of special rules. It's about the purpose of those special rules. Having a special rule applied to Ork armies that gives them a bonus against the standard morale rules is fine. That's part of adding character to the army. Having a special rule on Orks because without it they are unduly hampered by the standard morale rules? That's poor game design.
OK what? That is one of the silliest hurdles I have ever seen a person put up. Chess is a VERY basic core rule design and EVERY piece has it's special rules that let it function uniquely so it isn't just a pawn. What your doing here is making up a bullcrap standard to hold GW to. I have never heard anyone ever state that just because rules that let units interact properly in a simple coreset be located on the units card for ease of use, that somehow it's poor design. In fact, it's the total opposite and it's becoming cringe worthy just how par detached you are from playing this game. Can you name a table top miniature game with even one quarter of the models in 40k? Have you counted the number of units in the last decade? Making a core rules set that covers every u8nit and allows them to function uniquely and equally in a game so big would require a tomb of books thicker then the mess we have now. Even playing a 500pt skirmish as you say can take a dogs age because of all those massive books of core rules.
With the design of 8th, the rules scale appropriately with the game size. A 500 point game will have 1-3 scrolls, while a 2500 pt game could have 12. It's actually a very ellegant design that MANY other smaller games have been doing for years without this double standard you have constructed.
Did you ever think that maybe they gave Orks a poor Ld value was so they could have a fluffy rule like Mob Rule give the army character?
Yes? That's exactly what mob rule was for.
Low LD isn't the problem. Cascading wounds as a result of that low Ld is the problem.
This doesn't make sense, how is losing 25 more ork boyz to a sweeping advance without mob rule because 5 died cascading wounds? See how your tailoring the argument as you go? Yea I would say your argument is poor design.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 15:01:47
I feel horde armies are not effective in AoS but don't feel this is down to battleshock.
Skaven Verminpack, Flesh Eater Court Ghoul Patrol, are two of the top, top armies in AoS right now. In fact, in scenarios a lack of bodies/elite armies is proving to be what makes many strong lists non-winners at tournaments.
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted)
2017/05/04 15:29:13
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
So I've begun work on building my Scouring era Black Templars to run in this new edition and shot GW a message on Facebook about wargear options which they were kind enough to ping back on this morning: all wargear options that are legal now will still be legal. Fingers crossed this means MSU Sisters and Templars can still run a special and a heavy at 5 models and that I won't need to take 10 Initiates just to field a heavy weapon in my units as I'm starting my build focused around a Initiate/Neophyte mix.
On a different note: Indepent characters not being able to join units makes sense to me on a rules level, and doesn't prevent your IC from hiding in a crowd of other bodies to gain a cover bonus, but I can see the frustration on how them being alone would ruin everyone's day. I have a couple expectations for the rules if this is the case, but these are just my expectations not any solid information of how it will actually work:
+ IC rules will become keyword bubbles instead of shared strictly with a single unit (like a Hatred Bubble for units with the Astartes keyword in, say, 6" of a Chaplain)
+ ICs being able to hitch rides in friendly transports as long as enough room is available in them (AoS has one that lets you do this, so it's not an unreasonable direction)
+ Retinues will come back properly and will be a way for the IC to gain a proper unit of bodies that can protect them from sniping (mass speculation here but as many armies have retinue options for their ICs I'd be more surprised if this wasn't the case)
+ lone ICs will have the ability to pawn wounds off to nearby units Look Out Sir style to help reduce sniping.
+ ICs in general will have a lot of wounds and likely be immune to Instant Death based mechanics.
On a different note I haven't looked at AoS in a while but I'm willing to bet chariots are likely going to be single statline models now and likely blend the toughness of the chariot with the killyness of the rider.
2017/05/04 15:53:51
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
2017/05/04 16:01:24
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
That being said, you can most definitely "use" your models, but might not be able to use them as they were once intended.
"Current & sell today" are the keywords.
At any given moment they could stop selling something and say "Currently out of stock" or "Currently discontinued." I'd imagine OOP models are usable as models go, but you'd have to use them with new stats if they are no longer a valid unit. "Counts as" basically.
"Sell today" is ambiguous too, because at any given moment if they stop selling a model, it still stands true to their word.
Interesting - so given the whole time marches on spiel - are we going into the 42nd Millennium?
Doubtful. It sounds like there using "the Warp did it" to explain any changes they wish to make. With some parts of the Galaxy in virtual stasis and others jumping ahead centuries, relative to Terra I imagine. Essentially anything can now be justified. Such as huge leaps in Tau interstellar capability, or Nids having wiped whole sectors of life. Or former Imperial world having suffered centuries of daemonic infestation or Xeno domination. All while still remaining at the close of the 41st millennium. It's a clever in universe cheat.
"Fear the cute ones."
2017/05/04 16:06:51
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
"- In matched play, models have a fixed base size specified in the General’s Handbook. In the two other game types, they can use any base they want"
If that ended up being true, that would be a giant FU to anyone who modeled their stuff with a different base because of their previous "use whatever base you want" policy. Hopefully that's one of the wildly inaccurate ones.
2017/05/04 16:29:18
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
I can see the base thing being a rule to prevent conversions being used to gain a larger foot print for consolidation abuse and the like. Strict base size isn't a bad thing for competition, but it does cause some problems with GW's whole "you can use old base sizes for the old models" thing.
This is one of those "damned if they do, damned if they don't" sort of situations it seems.
2017/05/04 16:38:20
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
Crablezworth wrote: A bunch of 140$ leath bound paperweights are actually a pretty big reminder to never take the wallet out again. Especially if we never get answers for inferno.
They already are. The red books have changed/updated a lot of the units in the original black books, including point costs. The black books are for the story, legion histories, and campaign rules/games.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 16:38:59
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
2017/05/04 16:38:25
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
ClockworkZion wrote: I can see the base thing being a rule to prevent conversions being used to gain a larger foot print for consolidation abuse and the like. Strict base size isn't a bad thing for competition, but it does cause some problems with GW's whole "you can use old base sizes for the old models" thing.
This is one of those "damned if they do, damned if they don't" sort of situations it seems.
Woops..... i put a bunch of my cooler character models and wobbly human sized things on the 30s
Crablezworth wrote: A bunch of 140$ leath bound paperweights are actually a pretty big reminder to never take the wallet out again. Especially if we never get answers for inferno.
They already are. The red books have changed/updated a lot of the units in the original black books, including point costs. The black books are for the story, legion histories, and campaign rules/games.
they basically invalided previous stuff at least 8 or less times from editions to edition.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 16:41:21
ClockworkZion wrote: I can see the base thing being a rule to prevent conversions being used to gain a larger foot print for consolidation abuse and the like. Strict base size isn't a bad thing for competition, but it does cause some problems with GW's whole "you can use old base sizes for the old models" thing.
This is one of those "damned if they do, damned if they don't" sort of situations it seems.
Big issue with that is that some people would literally be forced to buy new models or even armies just to play with...
Come to think I don't think I would have legal marine army anymore for matched play! So basically about 300 models or so invalidated from matched play...
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2017/05/04 16:40:49
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
"Please note that a valued source has confirmed that these are wildly off. Here is from a source we can trust about the rumors below
Some items are kinda correct due to the poster grabbing gw shares and sigmar rules, and basically throwing spaghetti at the wall. But most is either incomplete, somewhat off, or wildly off. "
2017/05/04 16:42:06
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
Interesting - so given the whole time marches on spiel - are we going into the 42nd Millennium?
Doubtful. It sounds like there using "the Warp did it" to explain any changes they wish to make. With some parts of the Galaxy in virtual stasis and others jumping ahead centuries, relative to Terra I imagine. Essentially anything can now be justified. Such as huge leaps in Tau interstellar capability, or Nids having wiped whole sectors of life. Or former Imperial world having suffered centuries of daemonic infestation or Xeno domination. All while still remaining at the close of the 41st millennium. It's a clever in universe cheat.
They might use this to bring back more "dead" primarchs from the past.
2017/05/04 16:46:16
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
JimOnMars wrote: They might use this to bring back more "dead" primarchs from the past.
They don't need "warp did it" for THAT many. Ready to come back without that much issues(apart from issue of primarch coming back in the first place): Lion, Russ, Khan, Vulkan, all chaos primarches except Horus, Alpharius/Omegon, Curze.
Really only ones that requires hefty "warp did it" would be Horus, Sanguinius, Ferrus and to a degree Dorn(though he COULD be explained without warp though would still be raising eyebrows) plus above 3 chaos ones.
Plus obviously the 2 missing ones would require some VERY HEAVY "warp did it" handwavium
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 16:47:39
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2017/05/04 16:50:29
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
So I shot GW a message on FB about some potential changes to wargear loadouts and got a reply. So first, my message:
So with this new editon and the look of pistols no longer serving to be close combat weapons does this mean we'll be seeing the issuance of knives and chainswords to our loyalist models standard?
I only ask because everyone seems to always have a knife, chainsword or bayonet in the lore (and the Infantryman's Uplifting Primer states it to be a part of a Guardsman's required kit) but on the table top that's never seen outside of specific army builds.
If you can't answer now a little article about it as a teaser this month would be good too! I'm sure a lot of us just want a better idea how war is going to be waged going into the new edition and would appreciate the insight.
And their reply:
Hey [REDACTED] - that's a great question! It does indeed sound like an article. Watch this space!
So it looks like there IS a change (potentially in the "everyone gets something to stab people with" direction (I hope), but the details will become an article in the future instead of a FB message.
2017/05/04 16:50:56
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
JimOnMars wrote: They might use this to bring back more "dead" primarchs from the past.
They don't need "warp did it" for THAT many. Ready to come back without that much issues(apart from issue of primarch coming back in the first place): Lion, Russ, Khan, Vulkan, all chaos primarches except Horus, Alpharius/Omegon, Curze.
Really only ones that requires hefty "warp did it" would be Horus, Sanguinius, Ferrus and to a degree Dorn(though he COULD be explained without warp though would still be raising eyebrows) plus above 3 chaos ones.
Plus obviously the 2 missing ones would require some VERY HEAVY "warp did it" handwavium
I dunno about Curze, he seems pretty dead. And his story sort of came full-circle in that his death was a meaningful vindication for him.
2017/05/04 16:51:23
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
Hope the base thing isn't a rule in 40k. The reason I say that is because my PAGK are on 32mm bases. All of my marines are on 25mm bases because that was the bases they were sold on in 1989. My eldar are also all on 25mm because well, I last played them in 2nd edition.
2017/05/04 16:59:45
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 3rd May 17 - OOP FW Models / Natfka rumour
skarsol wrote: "- In matched play, models have a fixed base size specified in the General’s Handbook. In the two other game types, they can use any base they want"
If that ended up being true, that would be a giant FU to anyone who modeled their stuff with a different base because of their previous "use whatever base you want" policy. Hopefully that's one of the wildly inaccurate ones.
I have a 2nd/3rd ed 7,000pt marine army on which all terminators (15 + characters) are still on their original 25mm bases. If no one objects, I use them on those. For players who think I'm trying to score an advantage (usually younger players who never saw them officially sold/used), I have some wood 40mm primed black bases that I bring with just in case and put them on top. That said, it's alot easier when your talking about a small subsection of the army (terminators) instead of the majority. I wouldn't relish having to do that with the 50-60 normal marines still on 25mm bases instead of the current 30mm included ones (or are they 32mm?).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 17:01:02
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted) 
