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.

Hi everyone,

I know its a few days yet until everyone can get their new 40k rulebooks and indexes. But, there are a lot of store copies floating around (to say nothing of leaks) so I was wondering if I could confirm that I understand the new Force Org/Detachment system.

Say I'm taking a patrol detachment, to start small. I take a Blood Angel Tech marine as the HQ, and two Blood Angel tactical squads as Troops. I buy both tactical squads Rhinos as dedicated transports.

Then, lets say I have an Imperial Guard Basilisk laying around I've never used, and I decide I want to toss it into the patrol detachment as a Heavy Support.

My understanding is that the Factions must match to be in a detachment together - so, I'm matching them by the "Imperium" faction, not the Adeptus Astartes or Blood Angel faction.

Is this correct, can I do this?

I think I can, with the provision that the Tech marine can only repair the Rhinos, and cannot touch the Basilisk.

Which leads to question two:

If I can do this, lets say I'm making a fluffy list representing Imperial and Ork forces being forced to fight together to fend off demons on Armageddon. Could I then just take a second detachment, fill it up with Orks, and play it side-by-side with my Imperium detachment in the same game?

Oggthrok wrote:


My understanding is that the Factions must match to be in a detachment together - so, I'm matching them by the "Imperium" faction, not the Adeptus Astartes or Blood Angel faction.

Is this correct, can I do this?

I think I can, with the provision that the Tech marine can only repair the Rhinos, and cannot touch the Basilisk.

Which leads to question two:

If I can do this, lets say I'm making a fluffy list representing Imperial and Ork forces being forced to fight together to fend off demons on Armageddon. Could I then just take a second detachment, fill it up with Orks, and play it side-by-side with my Imperium detachment in the same game?

Yes to the first part as they share Imperium as a keyword.

No to the second part as in matched play all units must have a common keyword across the whole army.

Oggthrok wrote:


Is this correct, can I do this?

I think I can, with the provision that the Tech marine can only repair the Rhinos, and cannot touch the Basilisk.

Correct.

Which leads to question two:

If I can do this, lets say I'm making a fluffy list representing Imperial and Ork forces being forced to fight together to fend off demons on Armageddon. Could I then just take a second detachment, fill it up with Orks, and play it side-by-side with my Imperium detachment in the same game?

Yep!

Though if you're using the optional Matched Play mission rules, there's a stipulation that all your units have to share at least one faction keyword in common. For a narrative mission like you described, it's perfectly fine.

Oggthrok wrote:

If I can do this, lets say I'm making a fluffy list representing Imperial and Ork forces being forced to fight together to fend off demons on Armageddon. Could I then just take a second detachment, fill it up with Orks, and play it side-by-side with my Imperium detachment in the same game?

Sure, just not in official matched play.

As has been said, in matched play you must share a single keyword among all units (except "unaligned") in the army. So no detachment of Orks + detachment of Nids, shenanigans.

Currently, the only exception is that Genestealer cult can take a detachment of Imperial Guard.

I gotta say, I really like this method of army construction way better than 7E.
I won several local tournies using Eldar + Necrons (Scatterbikes + WK with 2 Canoptek Harvests).
I did this to prove that 'Come the Apoc' allies should not be a thing. Neither for balance nor theme.

I'm fairly pleased that Matched Play (the version Tournies will likely use) prevents this kind of army.

 docdoom77 wrote:
As has been said, in matched play you must share a single keyword among all units (except "unaligned") in the army. So no detachment of Orks + detachment of Nids, shenanigans.

Currently, the only exception is that Genestealer cult can take a detachment of Imperial Guard.

This.

Presumably, once we get full Codexes again, you'll get better strategems, warlord traits, etc... the "narrower" your army keyword is. So Adeptus Astartes will get stronger bonuses than Imperium, and Iron Hands will be stronger still.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Presumably, once we get full Codexes again, you'll get better strategems, warlord traits, etc... the "narrower" your army keyword is. So Adeptus Astartes will get stronger bonuses than Imperium, and Iron Hands will be stronger still.

Presumably. I notice that plenty of the "aura" abilities already encourage you to focus by only affecting units that fully match. For example a SM Captain of a given Chapter only buffs units of that Chapter etc.

Just wait until you see my Eldar from Craftworld "Blood Angels"! :p

 Karhedron wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Presumably, once we get full Codexes again, you'll get better strategems, warlord traits, etc... the "narrower" your army keyword is. So Adeptus Astartes will get stronger bonuses than Imperium, and Iron Hands will be stronger still.

Presumably. I notice that plenty of the "aura" abilities already encourage you to focus by only affecting units that fully match. For example a SM Captain of a given Chapter only buffs units of that Chapter etc.

Just wait until you see my Eldar from Craftworld "Blood Angels"! :p

That is true where the aura abilities are any good. For DE when using Kabal units the ability to use the Archons leadership (usually +1 effectively) isn't worth it, I'd rather have a farseer that can cast doom. The Succubus, on the other hand, has a reroll 1s in close combat aura, which is amazing for an army that has army wide 2+ to hit from turn 3 on (3+ before). The Haemonculus' aura is also great. +1 Toughness makes Wracks, Grotesques, Talos and Vehicles much better. It's a shame the Kabal units don't get something that boosts shooting really as that is what they focus on.

Thank you for your replies everyone!

I'm really liking this new system then; I can have my fluffy Imperial allies (A Guard platoon alongside Marines in drop pods, say, to simulate a rescue mission/weak point reinforcement by the marines) and not have to buy the HQ or be limited to one troop as allies were.

On the other hand, they've kept it well enough restricted that I'm not tempted to do anything too dumb, like load marines up in a Chimera, or have Techmarines wasting time on Leman Russ tanks. They keyword system is pretty spiffy.

Thanks again!