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 guys, just bringing this issue from the Codex: Craftworlds thread.

Shriftshroud relic allows you to go on reserve and appear by deepstrike in your first movement phase.
This was clearly designed without the FAQ nerf to 1st turn deepstrike and it's now not only almost useless (as you can't decide to deepstrike properly on turn 2) but also contrary to the spirit of the original rules.

Do you think we should ask GW for this (and other similar rules) to be errata'ed?

 techsoldaten wrote:

I'm fine with Inquisitors in a Vanguard detachment, for now. It's not like Acolytes are a bad thing.

That's a good point. I've mostly been running a supreme command mix of HQs that are now a lot harder to fit (adding MORE Grey Knights doesn't sound like a great plan....). I should definitely look into making some acolytes. They're certainly nice, but the lack of models meant I didn't really bother.

re: Shriftshroud, no.

I think the rules on deepstrike are pretty clear. They want you on your side of the board. And when you arrive, they don't want you moving.

There is value in deploying outside your enemy's deployment zone board turn 1, and for waiting until turn 2. The reason it seems this is useless is that some players have gotten used to a playstyle centered around turn 1 charges, which isn't happening anymore.

As more players adapt, the value will become clear. But saying its useless just means you haven't played many games post-FAQ yet.

Edit: was the correct thread after all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

I'm fine with Inquisitors in a Vanguard detachment, for now. It's not like Acolytes are a bad thing.

That's a good point. I've mostly been running a supreme command mix of HQs that are now a lot harder to fit (adding MORE Grey Knights doesn't sound like a great plan....). I should definitely look into making some acolytes. They're certainly nice, but the lack of models meant I didn't really bother.

That's weird. Until a couple months ago, I could still find all the old henchman models on GW's site by searching for them by name. Now all I see is Warriors and Acolytes.

 DanielFM wrote:
Hi guys, just bringing this issue from the Codex: Craftworlds thread.

Shriftshroud relic allows you to go on reserve and appear by deepstrike in your first movement phase.
This was clearly designed without the FAQ nerf to 1st turn deepstrike and it's now not only almost useless (as you can't decide to deepstrike properly on turn 2) but also contrary to the spirit of the original rules.

Do you think we should ask GW for this (and other similar rules) to be errata'ed?

Its clear what can deepstrike and where, and what cant. Yup, it made it worthless, but oh well. Adapt and change up the strat

 DanielFM wrote:
Hi guys, just bringing this issue from the Codex: Craftworlds thread.

Shriftshroud relic allows you to go on reserve and appear by deepstrike in your first movement phase.
This was clearly designed without the FAQ nerf to 1st turn deepstrike and it's now not only almost useless (as you can't decide to deepstrike properly on turn 2) but also contrary to the spirit of the original rules.

Do you think we should ask GW for this (and other similar rules) to be errata'ed?

Does it actually say "Go into Reserves"? If it doesn't than it would work like Wings of Fire and Gates of Infinity, and you are allowed to redeploy on the first turn if the unit starts on the table.

How about this idea: In the first turn, DS 12" away from enemies but no such limitation in own deployment zone

 techsoldaten wrote:
Incorrect.

All the units in each Detachment must share at least one faction keyword, and it cannot be Chaos, Imperium, Eldar, etc.

That affects units in DETACHMENTS. That does not affect Detachments in ARMIES.

So you're saying that a Death Guard army that includes Plague Bearers, or Beasts of Nurgle, or Nurglings - all things from their own Codex, not Chaos Daemons - wouldn't suffer because of this new rule, even if they're in the same detachment?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
Incorrect.

All the units in each Detachment must share at least one faction keyword, and it cannot be Chaos, Imperium, Eldar, etc.

That affects units in DETACHMENTS. That does not affect Detachments in ARMIES.

So you're saying that a Death Guard army that includes Plague Bearers, or Beasts of Nurgle, or Nurglings - all things from their own Codex, not Chaos Daemons - wouldn't suffer because of this new rule, even if they're in the same detachment?

No. They share the Nurgle Keyword and they are fine. They wouldn't get the Battle-Forged-Death-Guard-specific-bonuses, just as they didn't get those before the FAQ, but Nurgle (just like Tzeentch, Khorne, Slaanesh) is a valid Keyword to tie a Detachment together.

You could even throw in Epidemius or a Nurgle Soulgrinder or something like that into that Detachment without a problem.

So do the Death Guard Marines lose their special rules if they take Plague Bearers in the same detachment?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So do the Death Guard Marines lose their special rules if they take Plague Bearers in the same detachment?

You don't lose any special abilities printed on the datasheet.

You do not get the bonuses you explicitly get for a Detachment that only includes units with the Death Guard Keyword (again, unchanged from pre-FAQ). Those would be:
- Inexorable Advance
- Plague Host (i.e. ObSec)
- Unlocking Death Guard Stratagems (at least via this Detachment)

Right, so, just to clarify/confirm, Deathguard armies are punished for taking units from their own Codex?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Right, so, just to clarify/confirm, Deathguard armies are punished for taking units from their own Codex?

Well Cadians are punished by taking Mordians. Both same codex.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Right, so, just to clarify/confirm, Deathguard armies are punished for taking units from their own Codex?

As they were before the FAQ no? (Not entirely sure, just know it screwed my CSM if I took the Daemons in book in a detachment Strategem/relics wise eyc)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So do the Death Guard Marines lose their special rules if they take Plague Bearers in the same detachment?

Yes, since every unit in a detachment must be <DEATH GUARD> in order to unlock Legion traits.

Myytti666 wrote:
Yes, since every unit in a detachment must be <DEATH GUARD> in order to unlock Legion traits.

Right.

That's slowed.

tneva82 wrote:
Well Cadians are punished by taking Mordians. Both same codex.

Not even slightly the same thing.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Right, so, just to clarify/confirm, Deathguard armies are punished for taking units from their own Codex?

Just like all armies. An Ultramarine detachment including an Imperial Fist gets "punished" just the same. And it's no different than an all-Jetbike Eldar army being "punished" with less command points for not bringing Guardians.

It's not punishing to offer some extra-incentives for limiting yourself with unit selection and/or to off-set more unit flexibility with reduced access to some special rules.

That's been a staple of 40K since forever. Arguably, it's much, much, much more toned down in 8th than it was in the formation days of 7th.

You're missing the point. Ultramarines and Imperial Fists are different armies. There's no such thing as an Ultramarine Imperial Fist army.

Technically there's no such thing as an 'Ultramarine' army either. Ultramarines are a special rule applied to a Space Marine army.

Death Guard is an army though, they have special rules, special rules that go away when they take a unit from their own Codex. The equivalent would be Space Marines infantry squads losing their rules if you took any vehicles, of Blood Angels losing their special rules if they took Scouts, or Grey Knights losing their rules if they brought Razorbacks.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
You're missing the point. Ultramarines and Imperial Fists are different armies. There's no such thing as an Ultramarine Imperial Fist army.

Technically there's no such thing as an 'Ultramarine' army either. Ultramarines are a special rule applied to a Space Marine army.

Death Guard is an army though, they have special rules, special rules that go away when they take a unit from their own Codex. The equivalent would be Space Marines infantry squads losing their rules if you took any vehicles, of Blood Angels losing their special rules if they took Scouts, or Grey Knights losing their rules if they brought Razorbacks.

Daemons are a different army than Death Guard Space Marines. Just because they re-printed the rules for reference for abilities such as summoning or some stratagems, so people don't have to buy the Daemons Codex as well, doesn't mean they're part of it. And you can easily do a Daemon-heavy Detachment with maybe a Malign Plague Caster and a Sorcerer and lots of Daemons, that loses nothing from having the (utterly unfluffy) not-Battle-Focus-run-and-shoot rule.

If you claim they "must be the same army" just because they are in the same book, than Imperial Fists and Ultramarines are also the same army by the same logic.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Daemons are a different army than Death Guard Space Marines. Just because they re-printed the rules for reference for abilities such as summoning or some stratagems, so people don't have to buy the Daemons Codex as well, doesn't mean they're part of it.

No... they're in the Codex. They're part of that army. They're part of that book. They're not reprinted for 'reference'. They're part of the Death Guard Codex. The fact that the units overlap with another army is utterly irrelevant and an arbitrary, nay, an imaginary distinction. You have invented a divide that simply does not exist. Plaguebearers are part of the Death Guard Codex. Why would you Death Guard army lose its rules because you took something from your own book.

The very notion that an army can be punished by taking units from your own book is ludicrous. How can it not be seen that way? This is dumber than 8th's ed's idiotic LOS rules.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
If you claim they "must be the same army" just because they are in the same book, than Imperial Fists and Ultramarines are also the same army by the same logic.

But there's no such thing as an Ultramarine or an Imperial Fist army. Those are special rules applied to a Space Marine army, taken from the Space Marine Codex.

Again, the comparison isn't "Ultramarines" and "Imperial Fists". The comparison is units.

If your Space Marine army chose the Ultramarine Special rule, but lost those rules upon taking Devastator Squads, that would be the equivalent.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
You're missing the point. Ultramarines and Imperial Fists are different armies. There's no such thing as an Ultramarine Imperial Fist army.

Technically there's no such thing as an 'Ultramarine' army either. Ultramarines are a special rule applied to a Space Marine army.

Death Guard is an army though, they have special rules, special rules that go away when they take a unit from their own Codex. The equivalent would be Space Marines infantry squads losing their rules if you took any vehicles, of Blood Angels losing their special rules if they took Scouts, or Grey Knights losing their rules if they brought Razorbacks.

Daemons are a different army than Death Guard Space Marines. Just because they re-printed the rules for reference for abilities such as summoning or some stratagems, so people don't have to buy the Daemons Codex as well, doesn't mean they're part of it. And you can easily do a Daemon-heavy Detachment with maybe a Malign Plague Caster and a Sorcerer and lots of Daemons, that loses nothing from having the (utterly unfluffy) not-Battle-Focus-run-and-shoot rule.

If you claim they "must be the same army" just because they are in the same book, than Imperial Fists and Ultramarines are also the same army by the same logic.

You must not know 40k very well to think anything you said is true. It's not the *same* logic at all as Imperial Fists and Ultramarines, as stated, are totally different forces. Have you ever seen an Ultramarine librarian summon Imperial fists in the same way a chaos sorceror summons demons? Space marines, Imperial guard, eldar, etc all fight in their different factions using totally different tactics, command and control, logistics, etc however Demons have always been simply another unit in a chaos space marine force. It's pretty stupid that Deathguard would LOSE special rules by fighting alongside a unit that they are trained to fight with. It's okay to understand that the rule-as-written is dumb.

Nurgle daemons are not part of a Death Guard army, they are not part of that legion, they are allies of that legion, which is a different thing.

It's not like the Death Guard codex is the only one that works that way, Thousand Sons are also designed like that.

Since you have models that can summon, and bringing a whole codex with you just to have the stats for those daemons would be cumbersome, they have added some reference data sheets in your codex.

If you want those units in your detachment and still have the bonuses of a pure DG detachment, you can reserve the points and summon those daemons.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Why would you Death Guard army lose its rules because you took something from your own book.

Because Plaguebearers are not Death Guard in the background. They aren't descended from Mortarion and/or the Emperor. They aren't gene-engineered super soldiers who have fallen to Chaos and/or warmachines build by the (Dark) Mechanicum for them.

They are units from a different army that happens to be in the same book.

The very notion that an army can be punished by taking units from your own book is ludicrous. How can it not be seen that way? This is dumber than 8th's ed's idiotic LOS rules.


Again, the comparison isn't "Ultramarines" and "Imperial Fists". The comparison is units.

If your Space Marine army chose the Ultramarine Special rule, but lost those rules upon taking Devastator Squads, that would be the equivalent.

Than it's Ultramarines taking a Crusader Squad. Or Lysander. Point remains. Simply being in the same book doesn't mean they are automatically or intended to be the same army all the time no matter what. Or Khorne Daemons taking Daemonettes. Or now a Kabal-Detachment taking a unit of Wyches.

8th Ed. Codexes (just like those from previous Editions) don't work on the basis or claim that everything in a book is always of the very same army background-wise and can always be combined willy-nilly without any loss of some special rules included only to promote more fluffy armies to begin with.

You CAN combine them if you want. But the designers also added a few carrots to reward people who stick closer to the background. To me, that seems like the perfect middle-ground between making things impossible and not giving a gak about background at all.

Spoletta wrote:
Nurgle daemons are not part of a Death Guard army, they are not part of that legion, they are allies of that legion, which is a different thing.

You're arguing fluff. I'm arguing mechanics.

Mechanically each army has a book. In that book are that army's rules.

The Deathguard have their book. It's called Codex Deathguard. In Codex Deathguard you have units. This book creates a situation where the player is penalised for taking units from their own book.

"Daemons are from another book!" No, they're from the Deathguard book. Printed in black and white (and green, I suppose).

There is no Ultramarine Codex. There is no Imperial First Codex. What there is is Codex Space Marines. If there was a rule that caused you to lose whatever special rules you have applied to your army by taking a unit from that same Codex, it wouldn't be right.

"You cannot use the White Scar special rules that you have applied to your Space Marine army because you took a Vindicator". That would be stupid.

This is the same thing. This isn't about fluff. This is about mechanics. These mechanics are in dire need of a Tech-Priest!!!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


Mechanically each army has a book. In that book are that army's rules.


There is no Ultramarine Codex. There is no Imperial First Codex. What there is is Codex Space Marines. If there was a rule that caused you to lose whatever special rules you have applied to your army by taking a unit from that same Codex, it wouldn't be right.

You're proving your own point. If each army has a book "mechanically" (quote please!), than there is no "Ultramarines army" or "Imperial Fist" army in 40K, there'd only be a Space Marine army because that's the book.

So nobody should lose rules for throwing in Tigurius, Shrike and a Crusader Squad. But they do ...

You know why?

Because Codex books for 40K 8th Edition can and do include units from and for multiple armies!!!


Your entire rant hinges on a weird, fabricated one-book-one-army rule that is nowhere to be found and has never ever been a thing in 40K.

Hell, if every book were by default one army ... Indexes would be pretty good again!!

Again, you are inventing a distinction that does not exist. "Multiple armies?" What does that mean.

What "armies" come out of Codex Space Marines? I'll tell you. Just one: Space Marine armies.

Then special rules are applied to that army, depending on what you want. A Special Character limiting the use of said special rules doesn't strike me as particularly repugnant because, well, this is where fluff and mechanics cross over.

Tigurious is an Ultramarine character, so naturally you should have him in a Space Marine army that uses the Ultramarine special rules, and if you weren't, you wouldn't gain said benefits.

But if you want to go at this from a fluff perspective, fine:

Do you think it is good that the Deathguard forget who they are when they summon Daemons?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

But if you want to go at this from a fluff perspective, fine:

Do you think it is good that the Deathguard forget who they are when they summon Daemons?

They don't. If you summon them, you get to keep all your precious special rules. It's almost, almost as if ... as if that's what the designers want to encourage!!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Again, you are inventing a distinction that does not exist. "Multiple armies?" What does that mean.

What "armies" come out of Codex Space Marines? I'll tell you. Just one: Space Marine armies.

Then special rules are applied to that army, depending on what you want. A Special Character limiting the use of said special rules doesn't strike me as particularly repugnant because, well, this is where fluff and mechanics cross over.

Tigurious is an Ultramarine character, so naturally you should have him in a Space Marine army that uses the Ultramarine special rules, and if you weren't, you wouldn't gain said benefits.

But if you want to go at this from a fluff perspective, fine:

Do you think it is good that the Deathguard forget who they are when they summon Daemons?

Ok, let's try a different comparison then. Do you know how the loci work for Chaos Daemon? That's exactly whats going on here. Your Deathguard Detachment gets a bonus for specialising/limiting themselfes to only Death Guard units, just like for example a Khorne Chaos Daemon Detachment get's a bonus for not having any Nurglings, but only Khorne Daemons.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Did you really buy 9 Lictors though? If so....why? There gets to a stage where they're just more expensive, less flexible Tyranid Warriors that gobble up already hotly contested Elite Slots.

They are my favorite model in the game. Also I really liked the hit and run playstyle. I did it in WHFB with Wood Elves, I did it in 40k with Lictors. While it lasted, that is.

Also, I have been telling GW many things multiple times. for example the fact that Rubric marines currently have two different datasheets (with the same name but different rules), both of them 100% valid at the same time. And two FAQs later, this has not been addressed.

Did it ever dawn on you that your situation might be rather rare?
Do you seriously belive that GW can ever make EVERYONE, including those that bought nine lictors, happy?

The current rules changes.

text removed.
Reds8n

/ Best regards, Fredrik

Crazy_swede wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Did you really buy 9 Lictors though? If so....why? There gets to a stage where they're just more expensive, less flexible Tyranid Warriors that gobble up already hotly contested Elite Slots.

They are my favorite model in the game. Also I really liked the hit and run playstyle. I did it in WHFB with Wood Elves, I did it in 40k with Lictors. While it lasted, that is.

Also, I have been telling GW many things multiple times. for example the fact that Rubric marines currently have two different datasheets (with the same name but different rules), both of them 100% valid at the same time. And two FAQs later, this has not been addressed.

Did it ever dawn on you that your situation might be rather rare?
Do you seriously belive that GW can ever make EVERYONE, including those that bought nine lictors, happy?

The current rules changes.

text removed.
Reds8n

/ Best regards, Fredrik

It's not about making people happy, it's about the same company that sold you physical copies of models is now forbidding you to use them in their official ruling. Not a tournament comp, not a third party or FLGS house ruling, the actual company that makes the game.

MtG does the same by rotating out cards from past years I suppose, so that makes a precedent. And sure, they give you alternative formats to use your old cards, just as you are allowed to play 9 lictors in narrative play. However, warhammer and MtG are not the same. In MtG you get 15 cards for 3 bucks and that's the end of it (of course you should always draft your packs otherwise you are an uncivilized brute). In warhammer you spend 30 bucks for one model and then an extra 10-15 bucks on paints and 5-10 hours to prepare, paint and base it. It's a HUGE slap to the face if you are not allowed to bring your nicely painted models in a tournament by orders of the same company that encourages you to buy more models.

They could have any other kind of restriction to limit spam. Points penalties, diminishing returns, you name it. But banning physical models is insane. This is not a video game, it's not like we can cancel our models and instantly get our money back.

I think a better example for the chaos+daemons thing is if servitors didn’t have the chapter trait or if ratlings and ogryn didn’t have the regiment trait. Chaos space marines have always had the option of splashing a few daemons in. I don’t understand why the basic daemons didn’t have the same rule fallen get in CSM. Now they have difficult summoning rules AND remove you legion traits? I think GW just wants you to spend more money and start a daemon army.