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.

Did we get a proper plague marine kit yet, or are they literally saving that for last? It's weird the unit in the CSM book comes st the tail end of the DG release.

SilverAlien wrote:
Did we get a proper plague marine kit yet, or are they literally saving that for last? It's weird the unit in the CSM book comes st the tail end of the DG release.

It is not weird, that is marketing. You are forced to return every week to GW, too see if they are available yet. Maybe you order in the mean time some of their other products (Plague Brethren!). As they are the core unit of DG, everybody going for DG will look out for them, so it makes sense for GW to publish them last. If not people would buy them and won´t recognize the following publications, like now.
Still a d#ck move.

I also wait for them and will order if all I want is available. I expect the hauler will have the same price tag as the drone, so I pass on them. I already downgraded my initial purchase list to 1 box PM, Typhus, Tallyman, Surgeon, Putrifier and maybe a drone and the Bligthspawn, maybe not. With DI, First Strike and additional 50 walkers, thats enough for me to create a small fluffy army.
As most here, I have an already playable 40k force, so I don´t need to get the full DG treatment.

As for the missing sorcerers and lords, get ready for some tasty supplements in the future. It would fit the bill.

Has anyone heard anything about an errata? The other Codexes received their Errata quite quickly. I wonder if they are waiting because not all the models are released?

Qlanth wrote:
Has anyone heard anything about an errata? The other Codexes received their Errata quite quickly. I wonder if they are waiting because not all the models are released?

Yeah, bit perturbed by the fact that a week's passed without so much as a peep. The Daemon Prince with Wings issue and possibly even power fists being errata'd in would be nice. Plus some order clarifications of the myriad auras etc....

SilverAlien wrote:
Did we get a proper plague marine kit yet, or are they literally saving that for last? It's weird the unit in the CSM book comes st the tail end of the DG release.

Oct 14th. And not sure yet if the box is 10 models or 7 models.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 GuitaRasmus wrote:
I just want to point out that, being a Death Guard player for many years, and a chaos fanatic, this whole release has me squeing with joy. Who cares if the models are expensive? It's always been an expensive hobby. The look great, and cool rules to boot.

The only thing I'm not satisfied with is, that they're taking so long to release them - I have money to burn dammit! Give me plastic crack!

You talk like a TV advertisement.

That's because I haven't been this excited for a 40k release, in like... Forever. For the first time, the DG gets a proper codex, with fluffy units and rules, that actually fits the background, instead of using Nurgle bikers (T6), Nurgle Havocs (T5) and Nurgle Obliterators (T5) - not because people thought it would be cool and fluffy, but because it was by far the best mark in the game. I'm glad to see Nurgle bikes and Nurgle havocs are gone - I can't recall a single piece of artwork or fluff ever depicting nurgle bikers. To me, they've always just been about using the best possible mark to gain an advantage. People have been wanting the Chaos legions to be unique and have their own unique rules for a long time - to me, it makes good sense that some units are not available to certain legions.

Just like lumbering Plague Marines are unlikely to use bikes (don't think they ever have, not during the heresy either), Rubric Marines wouldn't have jump troops either, etc. etc.

zerosignal wrote:

 GuitaRasmus wrote:
I just want to point out that, being a Death Guard player for many years, and a chaos fanatic, this whole release has me squeing with joy. Who cares if the models are expensive? It's always been an expensive hobby. The look great, and cool rules to boot.

The only thing I'm not satisfied with is, that they're taking so long to release them - I have money to burn dammit! Give me plastic crack!

I care the models are expensive, because I dropped a few hundred quid on a Vectorium when Traitor Legions was released, and three-quarters of my army is now destined for the shelf.

I'm done with GW for a while. I have a ton of stuff to build and paint, and will get the codices for my remaining factions, but they're not getting any of my cash for some time.

That sucks - however, I don't understand why anyone would blow so much money on an army, when we've known that 8th was just around the corner for a long time? Besides, they're not destined for the shelf - you can very much still use them, you just won't get the DG tactics. Just use them in a separate detachment. I can understand why you're pissed about losing the T6 advantage, but that's the way it's always been with new releases - rules get changed, points are adjusted, etc - your units are absolutely usable - they're just not the way they used to be.

 GuitaRasmus wrote:
To me, they've always just been about using the best possible mark to gain an advantage.

It's as if that the 6th edition codex was garbage excluded a demon-pigeon that got nerfed later and people tried everything that was at least viable. But I could be wrong.
And then in another "patch" book of such edition, (the 4th or something) the designers actually encouraged such behaviour writing down a full legion list with the aforementioned viable units.

Now, is true that if the DG gets a codex it should play and feel different and perhaps a turning point in design always has its victims. Probably the issue is the Mark of Nurgle. If it was the usual +1 T people would just be happy to put in the army a second detachment with Warptime sorcerer and Havocs and call it a day. As is, just does not "feel" right.
You call "Nurgle" the units but theyt are not "Nurgle-y".

Also, is nice "appeal to art", but you can find in the second 3rd edition codex a plague "havoc" with an heavy bolter (albeit illegal even in 3rd).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 GuitaRasmus wrote:

That sucks - however, I don't understand why anyone would blow so much money on an army, when we've known that 8th was just around the corner for a long time?

So... we should ignore GW products when a new edition is around the corner?
6th edition CSM codex was valid in 7th.
That was actually the main problem CSM had in 7th, some part of the book were set in stone and crippled the army no matter what.
I don't want to make accusations but this kind of answer seems disingenuous, at best.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

So... we should ignore GW products when a new edition is around the corner?

Well, to be honest, thats a wise thing to do. I don't want to be pedantic, etc... but is like buying a World of Warcraft Expansion when that expansion has to all practical levels ended and you are 3-5 months apart from the new expansion. Thats the reason why I never buy any model that I don't like. Never had I buy a model because "I need this for my army". No! Thats the recipe fo disaster. Buy only models that you like even if you are only gonna put them painted into a cavinet.

 Galas wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

So... we should ignore GW products when a new edition is around the corner?

Well, to be honest, thats a wise thing to do. I don't want to be pedantic, etc... but is like buying a World of Warcraft Expansion when that expansion has to all practical levels ended and you are 3-5 months apart from the new expansion. Thats the reason why I never buy any model that I don't like. Never had I buy a model because "I need this for my army". No! Thats the recipe fo disaster. Buy only models that you like even if you are only gonna put them painted into a cavinet.

yeah but where do we put the limit at this?
What if next Guard codex removes leman russes?
What if next space marine codex removes (reductio ad absurdum) removes all the space marines?

I am sorry this is not a good way to write rules if you see your customers as affectionate hobbyists and not as suckers to exploit.

Oh yeah I totally agree with that. It sucks that they are doing this kind of thing and is a legitimate critizism agains't them.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

So... we should ignore GW products when a new edition is around the corner?

Well, to be honest, thats a wise thing to do. I don't want to be pedantic, etc... but is like buying a World of Warcraft Expansion when that expansion has to all practical levels ended and you are 3-5 months apart from the new expansion. Thats the reason why I never buy any model that I don't like. Never had I buy a model because "I need this for my army". No! Thats the recipe fo disaster. Buy only models that you like even if you are only gonna put them painted into a cavinet.

yeah but where do we put the limit at this?
What if next Guard codex removes leman russes?
What if next space marine codex removes (reductio ad absurdum) removes all the space marines?

I am sorry this is not a good way to write rules if you see your customers as affectionate hobbyists and not as suckers to exploit.

Wait what did they remove?

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

So... we should ignore GW products when a new edition is around the corner?

Well, to be honest, thats a wise thing to do. I don't want to be pedantic, etc... but is like buying a World of Warcraft Expansion when that expansion has to all practical levels ended and you are 3-5 months apart from the new expansion. Thats the reason why I never buy any model that I don't like. Never had I buy a model because "I need this for my army". No! Thats the recipe fo disaster. Buy only models that you like even if you are only gonna put them painted into a cavinet.

yeah but where do we put the limit at this?
What if next Guard codex removes leman russes?
What if next space marine codex removes (reductio ad absurdum) removes all the space marines?

I am sorry this is not a good way to write rules if you see your customers as affectionate hobbyists and not as suckers to exploit.

NOTHING has been removed. Nothing. You can play with all your miniatures, just like you used to. They just won't have the rules you would like. I can see why you are frustrated about this, but this has been the case with every new codex or rulebook since 2ed took over from Rogue Trader. (Yep, I'm that old).

 Desubot wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

So... we should ignore GW products when a new edition is around the corner?

Well, to be honest, thats a wise thing to do. I don't want to be pedantic, etc... but is like buying a World of Warcraft Expansion when that expansion has to all practical levels ended and you are 3-5 months apart from the new expansion. Thats the reason why I never buy any model that I don't like. Never had I buy a model because "I need this for my army". No! Thats the recipe fo disaster. Buy only models that you like even if you are only gonna put them painted into a cavinet.

yeah but where do we put the limit at this?
What if next Guard codex removes leman russes?
What if next space marine codex removes (reductio ad absurdum) removes all the space marines?

I am sorry this is not a good way to write rules if you see your customers as affectionate hobbyists and not as suckers to exploit.

Wait what did they remove?

If your question is in regard of the Guard or the Space marines, those were hypothetical, extreme scenarios made up to prove a point.
In regard of the death guard, is the shift from what is official "Death Guard" in Traitor Legions (7th) and the current codex.
This with the caveat that it could be for the greater good (long term "investment" in an army that feels really different).

There are only two problems:
- The design and point costs still has problems, albeit some concept is interesting
- The people that spent money and time on a 7th edition DG still have usable models, but these do not feel Death guard at all because the current Mark of Nurgle has no direct mechanical advantages, at least in comparison with 3rd-7th.

The second point is the most contested one, I think.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 GuitaRasmus wrote:


NOTHING has been removed. Nothing. You can play with all your miniatures, just like you used to. They just won't have the rules you would like. I can see why you are frustrated about this, but this has been the case with every new codex or rulebook since 2ed took over from Rogue Trader. (Yep, I'm that old).

See my example above. Where do we set the limit then? Where is still acceptable?

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 GuitaRasmus wrote:
To me, they've always just been about using the best possible mark to gain an advantage.

It's as if that the 6th edition codex was garbage excluded a demon-pigeon that got nerfed later and people tried everything that was at least viable. But I could be wrong.
And then in another "patch" book of such edition, (the 4th or something) the designers actually encouraged such behaviour writing down a full legion list with the aforementioned viable units.

Now, is true that if the DG gets a codex it should play and feel different and perhaps a turning point in design always has its victims. Probably the issue is the Mark of Nurgle. If it was the usual +1 T people would just be happy to put in the army a second detachment with Warptime sorcerer and Havocs and call it a day. As is, just does not "feel" right.
You call "Nurgle" the units but theyt are not "Nurgle-y".

Also, is nice "appeal to art", but you can find in the second 3rd edition codex a plague "havoc" with an heavy bolter (albeit illegal even in 3rd).

That's one single example - admittedly I was out of the game for 3rd and 4th ed, I discovered girls were a thing. I still challenge you to find artwork or fluff about nurgle bikers.

The 6th ed. codex wasn't garbage at all - the other codexes were subject to horrible power creep. I've won lots of games, using my old fluffy DG army with 6.th ed codex in my local gaming club, but we're not power gamers - we play thematic lists, and use an army selection system to avoid meeting 5 knights or Eldar Jetbike spam. If thats your local meta, I'm afraid you'll still struggle with our new codex. To be honest, I'm bored to death of the few chaos armies I've seen being heldrakes, juggerlord with spawns, and Nurgle obliterator/havoc spam. I honestly think it's nice to see something being done about that.

Death Guard has never been about heavy weapons or fast attack - they're a slow, lumbering, unstoppable horde of Plague Marines, with special weapons, supported by terminators and walkers. Every piece of fluff supports this. Now they have rules that actually supports this, without having to resort to transports, etc, and I think that's great. They seem like a viable, well balanced army. If you want to use bikes, raptors, forge fiends, etc, that's cool - just take them in a separate detachment.

Nurgle marked marines are NOT DG - they are nurgle marked marines. DG is chosen by Nurgle, tainted by the destroyer virus, and should be more than some random renegade who decides that snot and pus is awesome.

 GuitaRasmus wrote:


Death Guard has never been about heavy weapons or fast attack - they're a slow, lumbering, unstoppable horde of Plague Marines, with special weapons, supported by terminators and walkers. Every piece of fluff supports this. Now they have rules that actually supports this, without having to resort to transports, etc, and I think that's great. They seem like a viable, well balanced army. If you want to use bikes, raptors, forge fiends, etc, that's cool - just take them in a separate detachment.

I agree. I stated above that this is the DG I came to know in 3rd.
But then why write the 7th edition codex that expanded and fueled the DG of 6th edition?
Above you accuse me to be upset because "I don't like the rules" but you are arbitrarily supporting this decision for the same reasons. What about the gamers that started in 6th, had no idea about the slow death guard and build armies using the 6th and 7th edition books in good faith?
You are essentially saying that you don't give a crap because of fluff you arbitrarily decided is the best. Fluff I like, mind it.
But this is not the fluff those people found, at least not in emphasis, in the 6th-7th edition books.
The time and money of these people deserve respect.

 GuitaRasmus wrote:

The 6th ed. codex wasn't garbage at all - the other codexes were subject to horrible power creep.

I struggle to believe this is an honest statement.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
I agree. I stated above that this is the DG I came to know in 3rd.
But then why write the 7th edition codex that expanded and fueled the DG of 6th edition?
Above you accuse me to be upset because "I don't like the rules" but you are arbitrarily supporting this decision for the same reasons. What about the gamers that started in 6th, had no idea about the slow death guard and build armies using the 6th and 7th edition books in good faith?

You mean age of turn and burn kirby?

 Kaiyanwang wrote:


See my example above. Where do we set the limit then? Where is still acceptable?

That's just it - WE don't set the limit. GW does. They write rules they hope will appeal to as many as possible, and therefore sell shiny new toys. They don't intentionally want to piss off customers like you and me, but if some get's pissed off, so be it. We can either choose to buy the codex/models, or don't. That's the only power we have. If you want to have high performance, you'll have to have high maintenance - it's always been that way in collectible games, be it Warhammer, Magic, WM/H, or whatever - the meta changes now and then, and you either have to acquire new stuff or accept that someone else has hotter new toys. I can remember Chaos 2. ed being crazy good - then came the Space Wolves who smashed them to bits - and then came the eldar codex, where every Eldar player spammed completely, utterly broken Warp Spiders and Swooping Hawks. Trust me, 40k is pretty balanced these days, compared to 2.nd.

Seriously - lighten up. It's a game with little plastic men, something to do with our spare time. It's not worth it to get all worked up about. If GW really grinds your gears that much, pick up some other game (although I wouldn't recommend Magic or WM/H - they have a habit of completely changing the meta every 6 months or so).

 GuitaRasmus wrote:


Seriously - lighten up. It's a game with little plastic men, something to do with our spare time. It's not worth it to get all worked up about. If GW really grinds your gears that much, pick up some other game (although I wouldn't recommend Magic or WM/H - they have a habit of completely changing the meta every 6 months or so).

I struggle to understand why, when all the arguments are used up, one has to resort to this one.
So why discuss in a forum dedicated to this hobby? is stupid (premium price) little plastic men, right? I mean, who gives?

Better doing something else entirely then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:


You mean age of turn and burn kirby?

I start to think the changes are more cosmetic than anything. I had hopes for 8th, still many good thing but something is creeping in.
All the stratagems have a formation vibe. We will see, let's be optimistic.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:


I agree. I stated above that this is the DG I came to know in 3rd.
But then why write the 7th edition codex that expanded and fueled the DG of 6th edition?
Above you accuse me to be upset because "I don't like the rules" but you are arbitrarily supporting this decision for the same reasons. What about the gamers that started in 6th, had no idea about the slow death guard and build armies using the 6th and 7th edition books in good faith?
You are essentially saying that you don't give a crap because of fluff you arbitrarily decided is the best. Fluff I like, mind it.
But this is not the fluff those people found, at least not in emphasis, in the 6th-7th edition books.
The time and money of these people deserve respect.

I started playing in Rogue Trader days, and really got going in 2.nd. Back then, I had a 20.000 pts Night Lords army, (points where much higher back then - about 2.5 as much pr. model as today) with a scratchbuilt thunderhawk gunship with the rules from Citadel Journal - and Night Lords were pretty much Khorne Worshippers back then, meaning that I could happily and thematically field lots of berserkers - I think I had about 40. They changed that - thankfully so, because the present fluff is much cooler - but I can't see the point of getting my pants in a bunch over it.

Lots of armies gets changed with new rules - The guys who bought models for Khorne Daemonkin are probably a bit bummed about it too, or the guys that spent hundreds of dollars on grey knights in 6th, because it was the new black. In may I spent 10-20 hours converting a Forgefiend for my new DG army - then, when the index came out, I realised that I wouldn't be able to use it in a pure DG army. Oh well, ces't la vie.

 GuitaRasmus wrote:


Lots of armies gets changed with new rules - The guys who bought models for Khorne Daemonkin are probably a bit bummed about it too, or the guys that spent hundreds of dollars on grey knights in 6th, because it was the new black. In may I spent 10-20 hours converting a Forgefiend for my new DG army - then, when the index came out, I realised that I wouldn't be able to use it in a pure DG army. Oh well, ces't la vie.

I can only conclude that you are the GW target customer, not me and my ebay-hunting out of spite.
Since all the involved parts seem happy, this looks like being the best possible scenario.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 GuitaRasmus wrote:


Seriously - lighten up. It's a game with little plastic men, something to do with our spare time. It's not worth it to get all worked up about. If GW really grinds your gears that much, pick up some other game (although I wouldn't recommend Magic or WM/H - they have a habit of completely changing the meta every 6 months or so).

I struggle to understand why, when all the arguments are used up, one has to resort to this one.
So why discuss in a forum dedicated to this hobby? is stupid (premium price) little plastic men, right? I mean, who gives?

Better doing something else entirely then.

I've given lots of arguments - nothing is new, your models are still usable, just not using the rules you would like - and the army is more fluffy than ever before. You just seem to be raging about rules changes, something that's been going on since 2.ed.

Anyway, I'm out.

I really hope the Blight hauler comes out in the 5th week/ Oct. 7th for preorder. I WANTS one (or 3)!

Have you all seen these 'alt' drones that Hi-Tech is making?



They look cool too!

 GuitaRasmus wrote:


I've given lots of arguments

I am afraid that refute to recognize the point (models previously sold as DG are no longer DG) as something relevant does not count as "giving lots of arguments".

 skullking wrote:
I really hope the Blight hauler comes out in the 5th week/ Oct. 7th for preorder. I WANTS one (or 3)!

Have you all seen these 'alt' drones that Hi-Tech is making?



They look cool too!

Not seen it but I like it, or rather I like the central section, but i'd pair it with the real bloat drone rotors

Has there been any word of a start collecting box?

Rather subdued for Hi-Tech's usual levels of extravagance.

CmdRazak wrote:
Has there been any word of a start collecting box?

It’ll come a lot later, if there is one.

I'm returning to 40k after a 5ed break and trying to figure
Out best way too get a death guard army up a d running.
Was hoping like other armies they would get one. I really
Would like to advoid wasting money. Im getting alot of wife
Aggro ATM lol

CmdRazak wrote:
Has there been any word of a start collecting box?

The AUS site has a Patrol detachment up for preorder, not an "official" start collecting box though (also on second look, price wise, exact same as buying separately so no savings - your typical "one click" bundle)

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-AU/Harbingers-of-Decay-Petrol-Detachment-2017

CmdRazak wrote:
I'm returning to 40k after a 5ed break and trying to figure
Out best way too get a death guard army up a d running.
Was hoping like other armies they would get one. I really
Would like to advoid wasting money. Im getting alot of wife
Aggro ATM lol

Get your Plague Marines, Poxwalkers and Foetid Blight Drones by buying the DG armies out of the starter sets on eBay.