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.

Mchagen wrote:
It's only a requirement to choose a first founding chapter if those extra supplement choices are used. But competitively speaking, there's no reason not to. A player would lose out on an entire supplement of extra options.
.

Not just options, but flat out bonuses. The improved doctrines are close to a third chapter tactic in power. (Or third clause, in the case of first founding tactics). That you can mix and match more combos as well is just an extra helping of much more better.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I confused to what the ironhail prefix is supposed to denote.
At first I thought it meant better AP, as apparently ironhail stubbers have -1 AP instead of nothing, but ironhail autocannons are an extra shot over normal autocannons, with no additional change to the autocannon statline, whilst the ironhail stubbers stay at 3 shots.

Make up your mind GW, does ironhail give an extra shot or more AP?

It’s just an M&S style extra adjective to sound cool and dangerous. “This is not just a stubber; it’s a Cawl-crafted, belt-fed Ironhail Heavy Stubber...” <gentle wah was guitar music>

I understand that about it, its just that from a game design standpoint its a terrible convention to have. I can imagine people making mistakes about the weapon profile, as they'll either give the Iron Hail stubber 4 shots or the Ironhail Autocannon Ap -2, on the basis that as they have the same "prefix", they must have the same special "modifier"

GW has moved away from universal rules and quarantees of uniformity. You literally need to check every weapon as there\s no quarantee similar things work same way.

People wanted bespoke rules rather than universal rules. Enjoy now that you got them

I agree. There is no reason what so ever to not have a custom chapter using the UM or WS rules right now, competitively (unless you want to use the UM or WS special characters).

That said, an event i am going to on the last weekend of this month has already come out and said that the new books will be valid for play BUT the successor chapter tactics will not be in use. Hopefully this is due to the individual tournament and not something that will be repeated across the wider scene as i think it'll make play with, and against, marines different the majority of the time.

tneva82 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I confused to what the ironhail prefix is supposed to denote.
At first I thought it meant better AP, as apparently ironhail stubbers have -1 AP instead of nothing, but ironhail autocannons are an extra shot over normal autocannons, with no additional change to the autocannon statline, whilst the ironhail stubbers stay at 3 shots.

Make up your mind GW, does ironhail give an extra shot or more AP?

It’s just an M&S style extra adjective to sound cool and dangerous. “This is not just a stubber; it’s a Cawl-crafted, belt-fed Ironhail Heavy Stubber...” <gentle wah was guitar music>

I understand that about it, its just that from a game design standpoint its a terrible convention to have. I can imagine people making mistakes about the weapon profile, as they'll either give the Iron Hail stubber 4 shots or the Ironhail Autocannon Ap -2, on the basis that as they have the same "prefix", they must have the same special "modifier"

GW has moved away from universal rules and quarantees of uniformity. You literally need to check every weapon as there\s no quarantee similar things work same way.

People wanted bespoke rules rather than universal rules. Enjoy now that you got them

That's still no excuse for inconsistency
I would like a return of USR though. It was easier to keep track of them.
Bring back the old codex format as well, because this thing where you have to flip to the back of the book to see points values of weapons, then flip back to see points, and the lack of reference sheet for units, is pretty crap.

So is there any way for successor chapters to use Chapter Relics? Some of them look pretty good.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
So is there any way for successor chapters to use Chapter Relics? Some of them look pretty good.

You can get one by paying an extra CP of successor tax.

 Crimson wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
So is there any way for successor chapters to use Chapter Relics? Some of them look pretty good.

You can get one by paying an extra CP of successor tax.

Dang, that might be kinda steep.

or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.

BrianDavion wrote:
or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.

It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.

 Crimson wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.

It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.

p[retty sure you can't get the stuff from the vafrious codex supplements then anyway, but I might be wrong.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.

It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.

p[retty sure you can't get the stuff from the vafrious codex supplements then anyway, but I might be wrong.

You are. You can.

.. that explains it then, being able to pair relics (and the doctrine ability?) with design your own CTs is ABSURDLY powerful. and some of the relics in the core book are good eneugh that you can just snag a coire book relic and then buy a UM relic.

I was very excited for news of this book. Finally a way to give Relictors some rules!!
It I’m sad that a chapter master cannot be a primaris and that honor guard are exclusively a UM thing.. which is weird because every chapter has a tradition of having their own version.
I’m not wanting to deal with normal marines anymore, the time line currently couldn’t support standard marines still living or being in production. I just wish they did a solid job of integrating things better

actuaslly sounds like CMs can be primaris

BrianDavion wrote:
actuaslly sounds like CMs can be primaris

Nothing has ever stopped them from being so. The Chapter Master Stratagem is the same as it was before (other than costing 2CP instead of 3CP).

I long for a 30k-style honour guard unit.

 Crimson wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
or just declare you're just the ultramarines with a differant paint job. the sucessor tax would only be relevant if you where running a forgeworld character.

It is relevant if you want to use a custom chapter tactic.

p[retty sure you can't get the stuff from the vafrious codex supplements then anyway, but I might be wrong.

You are. You can.

It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.

In terms of FAQ-fodder, I have the sinking suspicion that GW will release Shock Assault saying all Adeptus Astartes and Heretic Astartes, then have to FAQ it to include Fallen. Bolter Discipline forgot the Fallen during its first iteration, odds are that GW won't learn from that (admittedly corner-case) mistake.

oh i didn't realize the supplements opened up relics by the nature of you just saying 'my chapter is a successor of X'.

awesome way to ensure everyone buys every supplement, bravo GW bravo

Dudeface wrote:

It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.

No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.

 Crimson wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.

No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.

Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.

 NivlacSupreme wrote:
I long for a 30k-style honour guard unit.

I'm not familiar with the 30k units; what makes them special? Besides all the extra tassles, ribbons, bathrobes and such of course.

 Kirasu wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.

No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.

Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.

Found the excerpt and yeah it's in there, seems a bit gakky though to be honest and genuinely pushes the supplements back into "why bother" territory.

Dudeface wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.

No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.

Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.

Found the excerpt and yeah it's in there, seems a bit gakky though to be honest and genuinely pushes the supplements back into "why bother" territory.

Because players want to play with the best rules they can for their army (Except for a very very very small amount of players that just love to be contrarian). Supplements give you extra free abilities for no downside, plus GW can sell you a full codex for 70$ instead of just 40$!

 Kirasu wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

It screams week 2 FAQ though, I wouldn't plan for it long run.

No, it is perfectly intended. The whole custom chapter trait thing would be utterly pointless if it was not compatible with the supplements stuff.

Right, there is no need for a FAQ so not sure why people are asking for one. In the wording for successor chapters in the UM/WS supplements it VERY Specifically allows whatever traits you picked. The only restriction is that you have to use the parent chapter tactic if you picked Heirs to the Primarch. It was entirely designed this way.

Found the excerpt and yeah it's in there, seems a bit gakky though to be honest and genuinely pushes the supplements back into "why bother" territory.

Because players want to play with the best rules they can for their army (Except for a very very very small amount of players that just love to be contrarian). Supplements give you extra free abilities for no downside, plus GW can sell you a full codex for 70$ instead of just 40$!

Well yeah, beyond the cash grab at least the only point is you get special characters locked to parent chapter at least but that seems to be it.

Are the new Datacards the same as the old ones or is it all complete new stratagems etc...

Are all the Salamanders’ stuff in the new book or is that something we should expect a supplement for?

 Dynas wrote:
Are the new Datacards the same as the old ones or is it all complete new stratagems etc...

Its a new book, not a v2.0 like CSM. gotta rebuy everything you bought in 2017

 AduroT wrote:
Are all the Salamanders’ stuff in the new book or is that something we should expect a supplement for?

Just the Chapter Tactic and a Warlord trait. The rest will most assuredly be in the supplement (if they get one, and they will). Hopefully we will find out soon what the next supplement is. My guess is Sunday will have the release for one or two of them, but I also said that this past Sunday and was wrong.

I really wish they release the supplements rapidly, or at least announce the schedule. I bought the codex but I didn't buy either of the supplements, as I want to first know what all my options are.