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.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
"The problem isn't that summoning costs 0 points, it works in other games. It's just you should have to pay something for it."

What?

Points aren't the only resource in a game; summoning for no points can be balanced if it negatively impacts some other thing.

Exactly.

How about having to sacrifice a randomly determined number of models (e.g. Cultists) to fuel the summoning spell?

ClockworkZion's new Facebook Round-up is now in the original post, with the other 6 he has done! Go have a read if you haven't yet (not a lot of new content, but a good read thanks to the GW social media team)

 Rippy wrote:
Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it

It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it

It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).

Good point, though we haven't seen the Death Guards version yet (if they still have it!)

Oh my god, the Squad answer with the Tyranid pic

So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.
I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).

Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?

For the tervigon it appeared to spend 25-30 points on summoning gaunts. This meant that it had to spawn at least 9 gaunts to earn the points back. The average on 3d6 (not 3x3d6) is 10, but the power shut down on any roll of doubles (which is a 50% chance on 3 dice) and if it died it also killed nearby gaunts including ones percussed.

Since those gaunts wanted to be nearby because synapse those gaunts had a decent chance to be destroyed when momma went down.

Seems perfectly fair to me.

 Flood wrote:
So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.
I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).

Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?

If it works like AoS, then an Invul save will be taken after a failed armor save. If not, then maybe you will pick the highest.

Hopefully we won't have any Harbinger of Decay shenanigans with a possible 4 saves in a row at 4+, 5+, 5+. 5+ or what not.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it

It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).

Don't count on it. It says ignore wounds. Not ignore wounds and mortal wounds.

As long as the new summoning has no chance for perils and does not take up a power slot of the psycher I won't care.

I'd prefer they just gave faction chaos drop pods though.

 Flood wrote:
So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.

All of which are things in AoS and thus should not really be a shock to see in 40k. Still, we shouldn't be seeing things as broken as re-rollable 2++ saves.

 Flood wrote:
I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).

Plague Marines are already T5 (T6 on a Bike) and have FnP. Do you really think they should be T6 (T7 on a bike) to make up for losing FnP?

Giving them FnP to shrug off wounds is fine assuming the points costs for the ability are properly balanced.

 Flood wrote:
Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?

From what I understand from what has come out, Invulnerable saves look like they're seperate saves. That said, they are definitely an option if a Rend value takes you past the Invulnerable save's value you can probably roll it instead of the armour. If it was like the old Fantasy Ward save where you rolled armour, then ward it'd be slow and clunky.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
For the tervigon it appeared to spend 25-30 points on summoning gaunts. This meant that it had to spawn at least 9 gaunts to earn the points back. The average on 3d6 (not 3x3d6) is 10, but the power shut down on any roll of doubles (which is a 50% chance on 3 dice) and if it died it also killed nearby gaunts including ones percussed.

Since those gaunts wanted to be nearby because synapse those gaunts had a decent chance to be destroyed when momma went down.

Seems perfectly fair to me.

Exactly. It was fair, balanced bonuses with risks and generally worked well as a concept. You know, unlike Daemon Summoning lists.

 Flood wrote:
So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.
I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).

Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?

AoS has saves and "other saves". Other saves do not get rerolls.

It's still anyone's guess as to whether we'll be doing armor and ward in 8th. I'm doubtful currently since it is distinct and separate unlike AoS.

In the first post it says you can't charge after advancing. Is this correct as far as we know?

Daedalus81 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it

It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).

Don't count on it. It says ignore wounds. Not ignore wounds and mortal wounds.

Hm. We'll need to see the specific rule then since nothing about Mortal Wounds applies to anything outside of a save.

the_trooper wrote:
In the first post it says you can't charge after advancing. Is this correct as far as we know?

Yes. It's basically a renamed Run and moved to the movement phase.

 Bulldogging wrote:
As long as the new summoning has no chance for perils and does not take up a power slot of the psycher I won't care.

I'd prefer they just gave faction chaos drop pods though.

Fluff wise you should have the DREADCLAW, but even that seems to be swept under the rug all the time.

Renegades should definitely be able to purchase Drop Pods and Razorbacks. Maybe Centurions too. You know, to compensate for not having Legion Tactics basically give them Vanilla Marine toys as wargear.

Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...

...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Hm. We'll need to see the specific rule then since nothing about Mortal Wounds applies to anything outside of a save.

Hmm yea that could be true, too if they distinctly say mortal ignores armor and invulnerable then anything outside that is safe from mortal.

I'm thinking too much like AoS.

 Quarterdime wrote:
Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...

...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?

They're not an upgrade, but you leave reserve points for them for when your PHorrors die. Then you can summon them in place. Same for Brimstones. The made note of it in an FAQ i believe.

I haven't seen anyone in my local group take them, and our Main Tzeentch player wishes they were free. (I don't.)

Edit: The Split rule also allows them to be present and when the step above dies they add to the unit. So you can run them either way.

I can't say I am thrilled to see that Blue and Brimstone Horrors have to be purchased separately. I would have rather had Pink Horrors priced appropriately for the ability to split. It kind of is the same thing, but it is more bookkeeping.

My hope for the Tervigon is that you just buy the unit it spits out, sort of like a transport. That way if the Tervigon gets blown up, it bursts into a big blob of gaunts.

I wasn't thrilled to see a unique bespoke rule for feel no pain. It means other units that traditionally have FNP are going to probably have a bespoke rule unique to them as well. I suppose it opens up the design space because those other units could have something happen in addition to the wound being ignored (perhaps gaining an attack in CC or +1 to attack rolls).

I can't wait for my armies to get their faction focus articles. Hopefully they do Space Marines all together, rather than have six separate articles.

 Quarterdime wrote:
Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...

...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?

I'm strongly thinking that the splitting will be factored into the Pink Horrors (and perhaps some kind of weakening Psychic Mastery level mechanic too) because to have to pay to use the mechanic would be a level of stupid I can't imagine them falling into. Well, at least not with playtesters on hand to tell them that Pink Horrors suck if you have to pay for their extra weaker forms.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Hm. We'll need to see the specific rule then since nothing about Mortal Wounds applies to anything outside of a save.

Hmm yea that could be true, too if they distinctly say mortal ignores armor and invulnerable then anything outside that is safe from mortal.

I'm thinking too much like AoS.

We haven't seen a proper rule on that yet, just this:

Mortal Wounds are a new mechanic too – these cannot be saved by any means and punch straight through thick armour and even invulnerable saves!

Which we know can't be 100% true since the Avatar has a means to prevent some Mortal Wounds somehow.

 Rippy wrote:

Spoiler:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it

It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).

Good point, though we haven't seen the Death Guards version yet (if they still have it!)

I'd be willing to bet that Nurglings and Plaguebearer only have M4", so they'll need that "FnP" as they are like to take twice the shooting.
Are we pretty sure the Instant Death is no longer in 40K? Isn't that why weapons now have Damage ratings and Mortal Wounds are a thing?
So no more squished Nurgling bases against Str6 and they probably get that "FnP" too.

-

 Galef wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

Spoiler:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it

It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).

Good point, though we haven't seen the Death Guards version yet (if they still have it!)

I'd be willing to bet that Nurglings and Plaguebearer only have M4", so they'll need that "FnP" as they are like to take twice the shooting.
Are we pretty sure the Instant Death is no longer in 40K. Isn't that why weapons now have Damage ratings and Mortal Wounds are a thing?
So no more squished Nurgling bases against Str6. and they probably get that "FnP" too.

-

Disgustingly Resilient is likely that. In AoS, Plaugebearers have it and it can ignore wounds and Mortal Wounds.

Hmmm. Seems like a virtual port of Chaos Daemons AOS rules. Which is good in my opinion.

GENERAL THOUGHTS:

Sounds like were about to loose our random for the random god rules, good.
Downside we'll probably loose all the wargear options not currently available in the existing model kits.
Which effect Slaanesh and Tzeentch more that the others tow sine they don't usually have melee weapons to proxy in.
So good by ether blades, lash of despair, and other weapon themed gifts and rewards.
Also, free summoning, invulnerable saves stacking to 2++, and flying circuses.

Removing instant death takes us right back to the 4th edition codex where everything was immune to it.
So all of the Chaos Daemon multi-wound models get a boost but especially our elite units.
The Greater Daemons seem to be getting a significant bump in durability, with 15+ wounds and hopefully they are not still T6.
That could make non flying greater more viable.
Although I'd like Daemon Princes to have more wounds, capping the wounds at 10 would allow non-flying Daemon Princes to be viable again.
Also hope we have some D3 and D6 damage from elites and or something .
So we don't have to rely on Greater Daemons and Damon Princes to crack open vehicles for our infantry.

SLAANESH:

Piercing Claws:



Slaaneshi daemons got to keep rending attacks at AP-4. I was almost certain that they would be just a flat AP-1, and 2-3 attacks.
If we're lucky they might still have base attacks at AP-1. Probably not but I dream, right?
Not as good as 7th Edition rending since you always get a 6+ save and can potentially improve the save.


Graceful Killers:

Nearly a straight port over from AOS, but now effects units of 20+ rather than effecting units of 10+ of 6+ wound roll; and units of 20+ on a 5+ wound roll. So a bit weaker.

Quicksilver Swiftness:

Oh please let this be the same as AOS.
Where its either "run and charge" in the same turn or "run and charge" with a 2D6 run.
The striking first in combat rule could just be "always strike first" unless the enemy unit has the same rule, like it was in fantasy.
Or more likely its a dice roll to steal the charge, kind of like rolling to seize is now.

Keeper of Secrets:

I'm excited for this one, if they follow AOS then she's moving 12" a turn before advancing.
She going to have at least as many wounds as the LOC so 16 at minimum.
Probably only a 5+ invulnerably save and no armor.
But maybe a -1 to hit modifier within a certain radius due to its disturbing beauty.

Masque:

I guess now that all the other characters are also unable to join units...she's better now?
Or at least your no more penalized that taking any other herald.

Chariots:

With increased wounds and a single toughness value for the model these might actually do something in combat for the first time since the 4th edition!
Sadly, since AP-4 rending still exists the 40K version probably wont be causing mortal wounds when its charges.

KHORNE:

So Khornate daemons receive +1 attack and +1 Strength in combat if they charge or are charged.
Probably applies to all Khorne daemons, and possibly is the new mark of Khorne as well.

Bloodthirster:

I'm calling it now the BT will be hitting and wounding on a 2+, and doing D3, D6 or a flat 6 depending on the weapon.
If a Lord of Change the least durable of the Greater Daemons has 16 wounds, the BT will have 18+, and a 2-3+ armor save.

TZEENTCH:

Tzeentchian Daemons: +1 to their invulnerable saves.
Possilbly also the new mark of Tzeentch as well, given Rubics were revealed to have a 5+ invulnerable save.

Lord of Change:

4+ invulnerable save and 16 wounds.
So two more wounds than the new Tzeentch Battle-tome version.

Horrors:

They're still Psykers.
They also are able to deal with some of the tougher enemy units.

Blue Horrors and Brimstone Horrors:

Require that you save some Reinforcement Points to split out of their parent unit.
So no more free models.
Seems fair but I rarely used summoning anyway.


NURGLE:


If they port over the -2 to hit in the shooting phase, and the -1 to hit in the combat phase for 20+ model units Plague bearers will be quite scary.
Especially if they port over some of the mortal wound causing disease abilities.
Or at least cause D3 or D6 damage.

Great Unclean One:

Since Glottkin in AOS has 18 wounds, and they say in the article the LOC has 16.
The GUO could easily 20+ wounds and T8.

Disgustingly Resilient:

Nurgle Daemons ignore wounds on a roll of 5+.
Another straight port over from AOS and essentially FNP.
Yeah, so there your new mark of Nurgle

Mischief Makers:

Allows Nurglings to deploy near enemy models and engage them quickly.
Sounds like a scout move.

the_trooper wrote:
In the first post it says you can't charge after advancing. Is this correct as far as we know?

Yes that is true, the old "run or charge" is still in


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

Spoiler:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it

It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).

Good point, though we haven't seen the Death Guards version yet (if they still have it!)

I'd be willing to bet that Nurglings and Plaguebearer only have M4", so they'll need that "FnP" as they are like to take twice the shooting.
Are we pretty sure the Instant Death is no longer in 40K? Isn't that why weapons now have Damage ratings and Mortal Wounds are a thing?
So no more squished Nurgling bases against Str6 and they probably get that "FnP" too.

-

I agree though I think it will be movement 5 for plague eaters, if rubrics are anything to go off. Remember in the fluff, Nurgle Daemons are always noted for moving much faster than they look like they should be able to.

I love my Tervigons, but am not put-off by them no longer spawning free models (if that's even what happens). It was basically about ~50 pts worth of free models anyway, which is not a big deal. Tervigons will get their own cool buffs for 8th Ed, which I am excited to see what they do. It's also cool if you can use them to "summon" gaunts from a pool of points you set aside. That is way better than simple acting as a transport.

 rollawaythestone wrote:
I love my Tervigons, but am not put-off by them no longer spawning free models (if that's even what happens). It was basically about ~50 pts worth of free models anyway, which is not a big deal. Tervigons will get their own cool buffs for 8th Ed, which I am excited to see what they do. It's also cool if you can use them to "summon" gaunts from a pool of points you set aside. That is way better than simple acting as a transport.

Especially if they can charge after being spawned

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Quarterdime wrote:
Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...

...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?

I'm strongly thinking that the splitting will be factored into the Pink Horrors (and perhaps some kind of weakening Psychic Mastery level mechanic too) because to have to pay to use the mechanic would be a level of stupid I can't imagine them falling into. Well, at least not with playtesters on hand to tell them that Pink Horrors suck if you have to pay for their extra weaker forms.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Hm. We'll need to see the specific rule then since nothing about Mortal Wounds applies to anything outside of a save.

Hmm yea that could be true, too if they distinctly say mortal ignores armor and invulnerable then anything outside that is safe from mortal.

I'm thinking too much like AoS.

We haven't seen a proper rule on that yet, just this:

Mortal Wounds are a new mechanic too – these cannot be saved by any means and punch straight through thick armour and even invulnerable saves!

Which we know can't be 100% true since the Avatar has a means to prevent some Mortal Wounds somehow.

2X the total cost of 10 pinks+20blues+20brimstones for pinks that split for free so 400ish points for a unit of 10.

Having 10 pinks that split is, imho twice as good as just having 3 big units turn 1

 pizzaguardian wrote:
Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.

As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"

The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)


Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.

They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .

You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.

Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Really though, why is anyone even here then? Why not just shut down the whole N&R forum and replace it with a link to Atia and BOLS?

It's a discussion forum, for discussion, where we discuss things. The disclaimer that we're discussing incomplete information and so our discussions are by their very nature provisional is inherent to the place, it doesn't need to be stated constantly, and people don't need to be constantly reminded of it. This is by no means only directed at you, there's half a dozen posters on here who seem to come and contribute almost nothing bar accusations of negativity and demands that people stop engaging in the entire purpose of the forum; speculative discourse based on rumours as we understand them at any given time.

The reverse is also true, there's a good handful of posters whose sole argument is "this is change, and I don't like it" dressed up in any number of ad hoc justifications.

You know what, I typed out a big long reply to this, but I reached the end and decided to just take my own closing bit of advice to make greater use of the ignore feature.

Messiah wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:

The Fourth Sphere Expansion fleet set off almost immediately once the fires in the Gulf had subsided, but with the Great Rift was still raging through that region of space, all contact with them was soon lost. Were they all killed by some unknown attacker(s)? Did they just lose contact due to interference? Perhaps they entered the Warp – intentionally or not – becoming lost (or worse) in the violent empyrean tides? Maybe they will yet be found, or emerge somewhere unexpected in the galaxy, a lost portion of this optimistic new empire ever intent on conquest…

Chaos Tau confirmed.

I'll collect them lol. Would be neat to see crazed Mon'tau. Also the 4th wave didn't get destroyed, but a huge expeditionary force that size being used by chaos is going to put some hurt on things. Whatever happened to them I'm sure it will be plot significant if it's the first new thing worth learning about them.

I'd rather guess that they were swallowed and then spit out in several different places, ready to fight in other warzones against other enemies, justifying fluff-wise how they can be on the table against anyone.

Yup, that and they'll hold a chunk of them in their back pocket for when a summer campaign generates a result they don't like or they accidentally write themselves into a corner, so a nice hefty Tau fleet can pop out of nowhere aligned with whichever side was losing, to maintain the status quo.