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.

I'm not seeing the issue with allied detachments for us since we always have an Archdemagogue as a warlord.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
I'm not seeing the issue with allied detachments for us since we always have an Archdemagogue as a warlord.

No, If we field an Archdemagogue that isn't the warlord we lose a CP, therefore forcing you to pick the Archdemagogue as warlord.

If you ally in a R&H detachment and don't field an archdemagogue as warlord you lose 1 cp .



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Btw: this here is the new version:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mcc4vkayr2s9h2y/Renegades%20and%20Heretics%20IA13%20Update..pdf?dl=0

Yeah, but why would you not choose an Archdemagogue to e your warlord? That's where most of the strength in the army comes from, or at least a great deal of it

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Yeah, but why would you not choose an Archdemagogue to e your warlord? That's where most of the strength in the army comes from, or at least a great deal of it

Because some just want to exploit the 3ppm troops?

think about it, 30 militia members cost now 90 pts. 2 commanders 60 pts. that is 150 pts and therefore 20 pts cheaper then it is now, with charachters that still now do something.

I saw this when i first wrote up the pts and consequently concluded that now commanders would be worth it and militia, it would basically let people abuse MSU again.

Then I for one have no issue with the rule. It allows to take allied detachments (which is hard for us to abuse) and discourages other people from trying to abuse R&H as Cannon fodder

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Then I for one have no issue with the rule. It allows to take allied detachments (which is hard for us to abuse) and discourages other people from trying to abuse R&H as Cannon fodder

A CSM player still can abuse or use the R&H as cannonfodder, but he is then incentiviced to bring the bigger detachments and not just the 5pts Veterans /Disciples and consorts.

But I was wondering, how is it going to work with our warlord in incorporating outside units into our detachments? Seeing as our armies could have any between 1 and 4 possible Chaos gods as a faction keyword, what would we determine as being able to incorporate?

For example:
My army has both Nurgle and Khorne faction units in it. Would I be able to bring in units with either Khorne or Nurgle into my detachments? Or should we limit these units to whatever our Archdemagogue has as his faction keyword?

Give me an exemple please.

Like say my warlord has the Nurgle keyword but I have some Khorne keyword units in my army as well. Would I be able to have Khorne Daemons and Nurgle Daemons mixed in with my detachments?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You know what, I misunderstood. I thought that they would gain the faction keywords of their god, but it's just keywords. My whole question is moot.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Like say my warlord has the Nurgle keyword but I have some Khorne keyword units in my army as well. Would I be able to have Khorne Daemons and Nurgle Daemons mixed in with my detachments?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You know what, I misunderstood. I thought that they would gain the faction keywords of their god, but it's just keywords. My whole question is moot.

Thought so that is why i asked again, but you confused me good


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Basically, you gain nurgle and khorne but you can't let non r&H units in, except the allowed ones

A shame, really wanted to run some Gellerpox units along side

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
A shame, really wanted to run some Gellerpox units along side

Why not pick another detachment for the gellerpox?

Looking over the Ogryn brutes, should they not have the option of a covenant?

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Looking over the Ogryn brutes, should they not have the option of a covenant?

Good question.
In IA13 you aligned them with a god.

In the index they got covenants.

I could imagine it as an option for the champion.

What would the optimal point cost be for a unit to buy it?

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
What would the optimal point cost be for a unit to buy it?

So far i went with 10pts flat for it, like it was in IA13 for all units.
I think it also scales fine that way since you pay more for it thanks to the smaller squad.

Just finished reading it.

I think even in its current WIP state it’s obviously better than what we have now, so kudos for taking the time. It’s exciting to potentially have a more interesting and varied army.

I will say this, though. Philosophically, I just don’t really like some of what I’m seeing. Mind you, this is a matter of taste and preference more than anything else.

Forge World’s designers seemingly intentionally wanted an army that doesn’t perform all that well and is full of handicaps. Certain combos notwithstanding, I think if that was their aim then they accomplished it. What is disappointing to me is that so many other players are happy to embrace this, even when writing a homebrew version of the army list.

Is the goal to keep things the same and only invent new rules when there is no equivalent, or what? Many things are copied and pasted from the current FW index in terms of rules and points. 30 point marauder brutes, for example. And yet, Baleful Eye was deemed too powerful, so it was changed to a less powerful version. This change alone would have me prefer the current lackluster index, which is a sad statement.

Having a broken army would certainly not be the right direction, for sure. But at the same time, why is there this tendency to handicap yourself? This is not an insult, again, just a matter of preference, but it seems totally out of line with the rest of the army lists in the game (written by GW).

Of course, it would take way more time and effort to overhaul each and every unit, so I guess it isn’t fair to expect that from an early WIP, so I’m not saying I expect that here after such a short time.

I guess I’m just really on a totally different page than a lot of the other players of this faction. For me, far too many units left out of the army list, and far too many self handicaps whose beneficial trade offs aren’t really much compared to the other armies in the game.

Another point I want to bring up, how much should Covenant upgrades be for units like Hellhounds or Valkyries?

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Another point I want to bring up, how much should Covenant upgrades be for units like Hellhounds or Valkyries?

Why should vehicles get Covenants. I would rather adapt the warplans for them instead to be fully functional traits.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

I think even in its current WIP state it’s obviously better than what we have now, so kudos for taking the time. It’s exciting to potentially have a more interesting and varied army.

I will say this, though. Philosophically, I just don’t really like some of what I’m seeing. Mind you, this is a matter of taste and preference more than anything else.

Understandable, this was basically just a updated version of IA13.

Forge World’s designers seemingly intentionally wanted an army that doesn’t perform all that well and is full of handicaps. Certain combos notwithstanding, I think if that was their aim then they accomplished it. What is disappointing to me is that so many other players are happy to embrace this, even when writing a homebrew version of the army list.

If you look into the waning days of 7th R&H was a topcontender for the most broken gak ever. Artillery Tyrant + Purge formation with plague zomie tarpits.
The Glorious Recycling on 3+ gain cover for all units behind your infantry that was 3+ including baneblades and picking a baneblade to gain zealot and fearless with covr for it.

Infact R&H were without formations upper midtier, ccoming close to beeing hightier, and with formation were just chedar.

Is the goal to keep things the same and only invent new rules when there is no equivalent, or what? Many things are copied and pasted from the current FW index in terms of rules and points. 30 point marauder brutes, for example. And yet, Baleful Eye was deemed too powerful, so it was changed to a less powerful version. This change alone would have me prefer the current lackluster index, which is a sad statement.

Having a broken army would certainly not be the right direction, for sure. But at the same time, why is there this tendency to handicap yourself? This is not an insult, again, just a matter of preference, but it seems totally out of line with the rest of the army lists in the game (written by GW).

Have you played against either, prenerf Commisar conscript blobs, Or against Failbaddon cultists blobs, that also recently again got into the toptables?
If you did, was it a interesting game? Because the ones i played against these were not interesting or fun.

I did it 4 times for tournament practice against some people, morale immune blobs are easily one of the worst things in this game atm. (mind i^you i played the training dummy with a high durability list to see if the DMG output is there).
Now imagine all of these problems hold over and this time the unit is JUST 3 pts instead of 4 or even 5? Don't you agree this would be very much unhealthy for the game?

Added to that, the new morale rule actually just stopps D3 dead if you pass a morale check, that made the enforcer more reliable, the enforcer also dropped 1/6th in pts. The enfocer now also has access to a piece of equipment to just flat out double the A valua on most models.


As for the Marauder Brutes and why i took over Index pts.
Marauder Brutes are an odd one, because most of the people here and that will play R&H , will make shooty Marauders.
Those that do want to go into melee, will potentially be taking Brutes. I can't however lower the price for Brutes down to , say 15 pts. which would be realistically worth it for melee marauders, because then people will start to pick them as ablative wounds for their shooty marauders.
Infact i am still toying around with the points there but these are a unit that needs some playtesting.

On the otherhand alot of the index stuff was taken over because it was simply better priced, or would you want to pay 60pts for an ogryn berserker alone again?

Of course, it would take way more time and effort to overhaul each and every unit, so I guess it isn’t fair to expect that from an early WIP, so I’m not saying I expect that here after such a short time.

I guess I’m just really on a totally different page than a lot of the other players of this faction. For me, far too many units left out of the army list, and far too many self handicaps whose beneficial trade offs aren’t really much compared to the other armies in the game.

Why left out? What did i forget?
You now have full access to the upgradable units again? Alone the troop count doubled.

Also let's go and see this:
Militia and mutants dropped 25%
The Commander got 1/5th more expensive but gained an AURA for 5 pts (30 pts) that is arguably better then their IG counterparts.
Veterans are back as TROOP and for 5 pts.
Disciples dropped 1/6.
Command Disciples have the best bodyguard rule there is in the game atm and cost 6ppm.
Rogue Psykers are now a threat and can be picked for cheap.
Enforcers dropped 5 pts and gained access to great equipment.
Covenants now do gak. and compared to IA13 dropped a 1/3 (5pts)
Vehicles are 1:1 AM
Chaos Spawn now is the cheaper CSM version, whcih CA actually didn't give us, because wtf.....




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also still missing are the following units and rules, which were from the vraks supplement :

Apostate priest, these we basically have, thanks to deathkorps work but a slight rework still needed.

Artillery tyrant i have a idea that i will Post later.

Great points all.

Sorry I was unclear, when I'm talking about units left out I'm talking about Astra Militarum units that Renegades & Heretics don't have access to.

As mentioned elsewhere, e.g., baneblade variants and valkyrie variants. "We" (R&H) have no way of buffing units like these the way loyalists do, and their inclusion in our army list would certainly not be overpowered in my mind. Our demagoguery, covenants, etc. do nothing for them. And that's totally fine! In my mind, that's what makes it fair enough to include them.

You aren't wrong about how lame it could be to face hordes and hordes of morale-immune troops. I just don't see why we would take it upon ourselves to remove a powerful ability when others are included in the game. I see this issue more as one of personal choice by a player not to be a TFG rather than nerfing ourselves. One unit of morale-immune mutants is over the top, or 3+ are? Even so, how much damage is the rest of the army doing that morale-immune troops with a specific elites choice that is a 1-per-slot are totally broken?

Again I refer back to the spirit of sportsmanship (or whatever you want to call it) and not being TFG. In a tournament, though, I see no problem with even 10 units of morale-immune mutants. One broken list versus another broken list is no skin off my nose. There will always be some broken combination that people use to win tournaments that they pay to enter and have prize support. I don't begrudge them that. If a casual player or pickup game uses a list like that, I just wouldn't bother playing them since it's a foregone conclusion and I don't like to waste my time.

I realize my comments didn't take the totality of your changes into account, and many of them are great. Again it wasn't you doing bad work, just me having a different vision and philosophy.

As mentioned elsewhere, e.g., baneblade variants and valkyrie variants. "We" (R&H) have no way of buffing units like these the way loyalists do, and their inclusion in our army list would certainly not be overpowered in my mind. Our demagoguery, covenants, etc. do nothing for them. And that's totally fine! In my mind, that's what makes it fair enough to include them.

This is excactly why i didn't implement the limit i toyed around with earlier for Valkyries f.e.

You aren't wrong about how lame it could be to face hordes and hordes of morale-immune troops. I just don't see why we would take it upon ourselves to remove a powerful ability when others are included in the game. I see this issue more as one of personal choice by a player not to be a TFG rather than nerfing ourselves. One unit of morale-immune mutants is over the top, or 3+ are? Even so, how much damage is the rest of the army doing that morale-immune troops with a specific elites choice that is a 1-per-slot are totally broken?

Considering that R&H overall will get alot cheaper potentially alot. I basically work with the premise, look what is broken, try not to step in it, if it is to weak look at it again and adapt it .
Basically the hope i have is, that if i give out a Codex that is on the weaker side, it is easier for people to accept it, therefore easier for people to actually test it, therefore supplying myself with more data, therefore making it easier argued if i buff nerf something in the fututre, it's just another approach.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
So i was busy, and had some time in the train today and decided, why not start that obstacle now: First these:

Artillery Tyrant: (profile is the same as the Commander Instead of the aura however he gains the following:
Friendly units that are either: Basilisk, Earthshakers carriage/emplacement, Medusas of any flavour, minotaur artillery tank, wyvern, Griffon, heavy mortars, quad launchers, that are within 6" of the artilery Tyrant add D3 shots on top of their regular shots ammount.
Further: The Artillery Tyrant is 0-1 per detachment.

Masterenforcer: (basically again a commander profilewise, this time however restricted to only be able to be picked when your demagogue is a Arch-Heretic-Revolutionary) He gains the Index Rule that enforcers had there, and is a HQ that never can be the warlord.

Apostate Priest, see Deathkorps post.

Archheretic: Basically A HQ that is there for support, base idea is the pact with the gods/ god and this grants him access to specific Powers (basically like a psyker but one that buys them instead of getting them for free) Inspired by the Black Tontine. Toying around with him beeing capable summoning an Assessor.
_______________________________________
Stratagems:

General:
Lives before Ammo: 1CP:
Any Militia/ Mutant Squad makes you roll a D3, add that many Mutants/ Militia to the Squad, the squad can expand over their starting number.



Archdemagogic Stratagems:

Master of the Horde:
Trial by Fire: 2 CP, chose a militia Squad that has suffered loss/es. The Squad changes it's profile from militia to Renegade Veterans.

A wave of bodies: 3CP At the start of your turn. All enemy models suffer a -1 to hit penalty if they shoot at Militia units this turn.

Bloody Handed Reaver:
Unexpected Thrust: 2 CP / Grenadiersquad with Chimera: You can keep up to 3 Grenadier Squads with Chimeras in reserve per 2 CP:
They enter the Battlefield from a flank and can go up to 5" to an enemy model. The Grenadier Squad immediatly disembarks and suffers a -1 to hit for their shooting this turn the Squad enters.The Squad never can charge the same turn it entered from the flank that way.

Mutant overlord:
The end of order 2 CP, once per Turn. All units that have the Curse of Mutation rule improve their WS and M by 1.

Heretek Magos:
Powered by Hellfire 2 CP, chose a vehicle in the same Detachment as the Heretek Magos, All weapons add +1 shot to their profile, this will get doubled by Grinding advance, and improve their AP by 1. Every to hit roll of 1 genereates a hit against the vehicle using the power.

Master of machines 2 CP: Whenever your Heretek Magos repairs a vehicle, instead of D3 W the Vehicle gains 3W +D3 back.

Arch-Heretic-Revolutionary:
Guerrilas : 1 CP per Squad: before the start of the game you may chose to spend 1 CP per Renegade Veteran or Disciple Squad. All untis that shoot at these unit outside of 12" gain -1 to hit to their shooting attacks.

Gonna be trying out RnH with your list soon, have you considered using google drive or something so you don't have to keep reposting?

These Archdemagouge stratagems gave me an idea: wouldn't the Devotions better off as Specialist Detachments? The buff to the Archdemagouge would come from the Specialist Warlord Trait and the bonus to the unit from the Specialist Stratagem. This would make the army composition leaner and less confusing because you can throw all the tidbits into the Specialist Detachments rather than have 5 pages of Arch-Demagogue options and descriptions, and make the Devotions work in Power Level games too.

Also, I feel like the army list is getting a little murky there and there. The War Plans are rather complicated for Army Traits, for example. Other special abilities also have an unnecessarily high amount of components I think. Some rules come out a little strangely in the 8th edition environment, like what happens with Covenants in Power Level games.

 AtoMaki wrote:
These Archdemagouge stratagems gave me an idea: wouldn't the Devotions better off as Specialist Detachments? The buff to the Archdemagouge would come from the Specialist Warlord Trait and the bonus to the unit from the Specialist Stratagem. This would make the army composition leaner and less confusing because you can throw all the tidbits into the Specialist Detachments rather than have 5 pages of Arch-Demagogue options and descriptions, and make the Devotions work in Power Level games too.

Also, I feel like the army list is getting a little murky there and there. The War Plans are rather complicated for Army Traits, for example. Other special abilities also have an unnecessarily high amount of components I think. Some rules come out a little strangely in the 8th edition environment, like what happens with Covenants in Power Level games.

I allready explained why i don't want to go into PL, mainly how do i value a squad with or without Militia training.

How do i value Master of the horde militia compared to regular militia in PL? Covenants are also treated as a equipment for the champion, i can not however justify that a Squad with a covenant / militia training costs the same, PL's inward balance is allready fragile, with such an army that is that customizable i doubt it would be a good idea.

As for the War plans, considering they are atm standins and i only really like one ATM i can understand why you would feel that way. However, i will not go the way of specialicst detachments/ unlocks.

One of my many reasons to rewrite the whole IA13 book was the lack of customizability, if i have to sacrifice PL then i will do so. I will however look again at certain demagogue devotions, especially the horde ones, he seems to have too much restrictions atm, probably cut away the no Squadron rule and militia training will also be available, but cost more.
(I realized that i probably still have PTSD from 7th edition unending host shenanigans.)

HOWEVER: IF i find the time and IF i have a good grasp on what is needed ATM for the codex and it is in a good enough balanced point, then i might, take the time and look for a PL conversion.

Was the option for the heavy weapon squad to have a covenant left out on accident or intentionally?

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Was the option for the heavy weapon squad to have a covenant left out on accident or intentionally?

Accident, altough i thought that i fixed that.

Very fun stuff, re: the stratagems and such.

Another point, should it just be the Ogryn Packmaster that is affected by a covenant? Or should his hounds be affected to since I think they are meant to be demonic...

 Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:
Very fun stuff, re: the stratagems and such.

I basically just thought what would be the Modus operandi for these leaders.

They wrote themselves in other words.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Another point, should it just be the Ogryn Packmaster that is affected by a covenant? Or should his hounds be affected to since I think they are meant to be demonic...

The packmaster itself is like the champion of other squads so yes he influences the dogs, or should, have i missed that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I also didn't want another " shoot two times " thingy.

I only asked because it didn't mention anything about covenants in his entry, so I was just curious what your thoughts on it were.