40k Rumours - Space Marines, Black Templars vs Orks box and Ghazghkull - UPDATED OP 21.9.19

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.

**Theophony**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

There's a lot I like about him but yellow is so hard to paint well.

I really wish they'd made a Crimson Fists character instead.

Looks more like Jay Leno to me....maybe the chin isn't THAT big

**Nightlord1987**

BrianDavion wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
So, 1: doesent state Wholy within 6, so daisy chaining.

2: cannot target ANY Infantry, from the entire army?

How TF did this even get written, and printed?

It's like you shouldn't t even play a codex for 2 weeks till the FAQ comes out.

cannot target any infantry within 6 inches, unless they're the closest one. of course salamanders flamer bonus means chances are they're always going to have some infantry moving forward. I suspect this will, most often be used to squeeze a turn or two of life out of a back field heavy support unit like Hellblasters that otherwise would be deleted in the opening rounds

Yea. But it says Infantry, not Salamanders Infantry.
Have an untargettable Blob squad of Guardsman sit on an Objective, behind an untargettable Character, behind a LOS blocking wall.

**Racerguy180**

Nightlord1987 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
So, 1: doesent state Wholy within 6, so daisy chaining.

2: cannot target ANY Infantry, from the entire army?

How TF did this even get written, and printed?

It's like you shouldn't t even play a codex for 2 weeks till the FAQ comes out.

cannot target any infantry within 6 inches, unless they're the closest one. of course salamanders flamer bonus means chances are they're always going to have some infantry moving forward. I suspect this will, most often be used to squeeze a turn or two of life out of a back field heavy support unit like Hellblasters that otherwise would be deleted in the opening rounds

Yea. But it says Infantry, not Salamanders Infantry.
Have an untargettable Blob squad of Guardsman sit on an Objective, behind an untargettable Character, behind a LOS blocking wall.

why on earth would a Salamanders specific stratagem do anything for non-Salamanders? Furthermore what self respecting Salamanders player doing in the adding guard to their list?

As a Salamanders player these look good, not sure how many I'll use tho. I cant wait till the next "broken" thing comes out so I wont have to deal with OP bitching for too long.

Adrax looks dope and can wait to paint them up.

**Abadabadoobaddon**

I heard this one time in Deathwatch, Tor Garadon locked Kayvaan Shrike in his own arming vestibule! True story.

**the_scotsman**

BrianDavion wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
So, 1: doesent state Wholy within 6, so daisy chaining.

2: cannot target ANY Infantry, from the entire army?

How TF did this even get written, and printed?

It's like you shouldn't t even play a codex for 2 weeks till the FAQ comes out.

cannot target any infantry within 6 inches, unless they're the closest one. of course salamanders flamer bonus means chances are they're always going to have some infantry moving forward. I suspect this will, most often be used to squeeze a turn or two of life out of a back field heavy support unit like Hellblasters that otherwise would be deleted in the opening rounds

Yeah I mean on the other hand screw that ability because flamers are bad.

Backfield devs and stationary stern guard clumped around a captain and lieutenant is going to be ridiculously hard to deal with. The only unit that will ever use that flamer bonus is the invictus dread.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Racerguy180 wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
So, 1: doesent state Wholy within 6, so daisy chaining.

2: cannot target ANY Infantry, from the entire army?

How TF did this even get written, and printed?

It's like you shouldn't t even play a codex for 2 weeks till the FAQ comes out.

cannot target any infantry within 6 inches, unless they're the closest one. of course salamanders flamer bonus means chances are they're always going to have some infantry moving forward. I suspect this will, most often be used to squeeze a turn or two of life out of a back field heavy support unit like Hellblasters that otherwise would be deleted in the opening rounds

Yea. But it says Infantry, not Salamanders Infantry.
Have an untargettable Blob squad of Guardsman sit on an Objective, behind an untargettable Character, behind a LOS blocking wall.

why on earth would a Salamanders specific stratagem do anything for non-Salamanders? Furthermore what self respecting Salamanders player doing in the adding guard to their list?

Because it doesn't specify that only Salamanders are affected? That's what it says RAW, and you can bet that a lot of people will play it that way.

**tneva82**

Crazyterran wrote:
If there's a character sitting out with the Strategem on them, and you can't target the character, wouldn't there be a closer visible enemy unit for you to shoot regardless of the Stratagem?

Yeah. Cheap chaff. If you don't mind losing combat doctrine for it even cheap IG infantry by the bucketload.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
[
Because it doesn't specify that only Salamanders are affected? That's what it says RAW, and you can bet that a lot of people will play it that way.

Certainly I can think up bunch of ways I could use small salamanader detachment for this. Hell even IG heavy weapon teams with lascannon might become somewhat viable being immune to shooting behind salamanader character.

**Warhams-77**

Regarding the BT vs Orks rumor in the title. This is from a source on a french forum, who had accurate information before. The posts were collected and shared and translated by Sete and Metaliptica on Bolter & Chainsword

Metaliptica - B&C

French guy here. Here is a translation of the OG post.

"BT isn't a SM supplement. From the SM supplement, only the IF and Salies will be out around end of October. Looking at the infos that are starting to get through, I'm expecting an article about the preorder of these supplements this week end.
BT rules will be in Psychic Awakening Vol.2. In October, we will have the first book featuring Drukharis and Eldars. My personnal opinion is that we'll have to wait until the end of the year. The BT vs Ork box is censored.gif . If a box is to accompany every Psychic Awakening book, then it will more likely be a BT vs Chaos, keeping in mind that we still have a Rumor engine about a chaos sorcerer. But please remember : nothing is sure about a potential box right now"

The source says no BT vs Orks set but SW vs Orks.

From earlier this week, before GW's announcement and artwork reveal on WarCom, collected by Sete on B&C

Kikasstou on french forum

"I read somewhere that a priori we go to +1 to hit and +1 to hurt the characters for the RG. And no penalty with heavy weapons moving IH side. But I do not know for what doctrine. And the BT should be able to hurt self on the 6 to hit in Assault Doctrine.

I think that the IH are being had because the UM indirectly have this bonus with the current formulation of Scion of Guilliman. I do not know if it's totally wanted and that GW was not in the lead to just spin the bonus bolter discipline all the time.

I'm not sure but it seems to me that the Crimson Fist are in the IF supplement. If this is the case they will not have strats / relic / traits / distinctive power unlike BT.

Yes we already had information that the BT would have their own rules but that it would rather be in a campaign supplement and not a supplement SM so logically in Psychic Awakening

The BT will be in closed doctrine indeed. [Sete: The only specific info he said is that BT assault doctrine wounds on hits of 6. ]

It fits quite well with what I read somewhere that the rules of the Blood Angels would be in Volume 3 of Psychic Awakening

I read somewhere that the first volume Psychic Awakening would be dedicated to Drukhari, Arsuyani & Ynarri.

I will repeat myself but the Orks are planned facing the SW and not the BT. The BT should arrive after the Eldar in the next book

It may well be that a Battlebox is planned for the first Tome Psychic Awakening. It will be 100% Aeldaris and 100% plastic. We already know more or less the 2 characters. But what unity could we have in front of the banshees?

I wonder that it will be the redesign of plastic incubations in the box with plastic banshees : P

Here is a Black Templars tab that appeared in Games Workshop site menu ��

You also have an IH / RG / Salamanders / IF / WS / UM tab. No jealous everyone is entitled to its customization kits, supplements, cards etc ..."

Deadfingers - B&C

This all put together, along with rumours from other sources, Rumour Engines, and a bit of recent lore setups and teases from GW, sounds to me like a Shadowspear type of starter with Eldar/Ynnari Vs. Dark Eldar, and he seems to be implying that Jain Zar and Drazhar, like it was mentioned earlier in this thread, will be leading them.

There was a rumor about a potential plastic *edit* Ragnar Blackmane and an Ork character, possibly Ghazhgkull *edit* but I could not find the quote atm...

**zamerion**

Interesting.. maybe that second box black templar VS chaos will be traitor guard, with dark mechanicum etcetc..

Also.. nothing about genestealer cults?

**Kinetochore**

BT vs Traitor guard would be awesome. Not just for new models but for finally getting a 1/2 decent Renegade Guard rules. Doesn't look like FW index lists are going to see any love any time soon...

**Warpspy**

Warhams-77 wrote:

Deadfingers - B&C

This all put together, along with rumours from other sources, Rumour Engines, and a bit of recent lore setups and teases from GW, sounds to me like a Shadowspear type of starter with Eldar/Ynnari Vs. Dark Eldar, and he seems to be implying that Jain Zar and Drazhar, like it was mentioned earlier in this thread, will be leading them.

I would love a boxset like that, but I think the shown banshees and incubus are more likely to be separate multipart boxes.

**GaroRobe**

Warpspy wrote:
Warhams-77 wrote:

Deadfingers - B&C

This all put together, along with rumours from other sources, Rumour Engines, and a bit of recent lore setups and teases from GW, sounds to me like a Shadowspear type of starter with Eldar/Ynnari Vs. Dark Eldar, and he seems to be implying that Jain Zar and Drazhar, like it was mentioned earlier in this thread, will be leading them.

I would love a boxset like that, but I think the shown banshees and incubus are more likely to be separate multipart boxes.

Nothing stopping GW from making a boxset, like Forgebane, looncurse, fang & claw, deathmasque, etc. It would be unusual to see a set have more than 2 new models in it, since they usually just release 2 hqs. But If the boxart models make up the gist of the box, they could easily add some older models to fill out the remaining unit. Drazhar, incubii, and a transport. Jain zharr, banshees, and another unit. etc.

**tneva82**

Forgebane had 3 new models. Speed freak had 2 new boxed sets. Shadowspear has whole bunch of new models. Introducing new models in boxed set and solo release separately later is quite common for GW. I can 100% see banshees and incubi first in boxed set only, separately later. Jain zar could fit it as well or that could be solo release along the boxed set.

And it\s not like boxed set and multipart kit are mutually exclusive either...They can be 100% same sprues as in solo release. Just initially in boxed set that costs more than solo box alone but combined worth more than price of boxed set. Again forgebane, speed freaks, shadowspear...

It's not set in stone it is like that but there's precedence for release pattern like that.

**An Actual Englishman**

Warhams-77 wrote:

There was a rumor about a potential plastic Russ and Ghazhgkull but I could not find the quote atm...

Thanks for the summary Warhams, I'll add it to the front page.

I've been doing my own research and the rumour of the SW vs Ork box is that it will be Ragnar vs a new plastic Ork character, possibly Ghazzy.

Posters are going wild for Primarch speculation (as they always do on B&C) but none of them have any concrete information, as far as I can tell.

**Mr Morden**

Uhhh Gods can you imagine how Wolfy wolf they will ruin Leman Russ into being.

A different Ork Character would be more interesting to me - Orkemedies etc....

**Voss**

For a boxed set? Have there been any that are for real special characters, rather than some <Captain> who happens to be assigned a name?

Seems like a way to reduce sales of the box, and then not have major sales of the shiny big kit later.

**Jack Flask**

Voss wrote:
For a boxed set? Have their been any that are for real special characters, rather than some <Captain> who happens to be assigned a name?

Seems like a way to reduce sales of the box, and then not have major sales of the shiny big kit later.

Battle for Prospero was Geigor Fell-hand and Ahriman.

(Edit) Death Masque had Eldrad and WC Artemis

**Voss**

Eldrad, and 30k Ahriman, that's true.

Artemis is one of the few that got assigned SC status afterwards. (Or is he an SC even now?

**An Actual Englishman**

I don't think it will be a known or current named character.

If I had to place bets I'd have thought a named Weirdboy was the Ork character.

Ragnar the rumourmonger was a lot more specific with.

**Kanluwen**

Voss wrote:
Eldrad, and 30k Ahriman, that's true.

Artemis is one of the few that got assigned SC status afterwards. (Or is he an SC even now?

Artemis had SC status from the outset. They literally made a big deal about it being Watch-Captain Artemis, as he was from the Inquisitor 54mm game.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Forgebane had 3 new models.

Forgebane had two new kits.

Armigers come two to a box and you only got Warglaives.

**Racerguy180**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
So, 1: doesent state Wholy within 6, so daisy chaining.

2: cannot target ANY Infantry, from the entire army?

How TF did this even get written, and printed?

It's like you shouldn't t even play a codex for 2 weeks till the FAQ comes out.

cannot target any infantry within 6 inches, unless they're the closest one. of course salamanders flamer bonus means chances are they're always going to have some infantry moving forward. I suspect this will, most often be used to squeeze a turn or two of life out of a back field heavy support unit like Hellblasters that otherwise would be deleted in the opening rounds

Yea. But it says Infantry, not Salamanders Infantry.
Have an untargettable Blob squad of Guardsman sit on an Objective, behind an untargettable Character, behind a LOS blocking wall.

why on earth would a Salamanders specific stratagem do anything for non-Salamanders? Furthermore what self respecting Salamanders player doing in the adding guard to their list?

Because it doesn't specify that only Salamanders are affected? That's what it says RAW, and you can bet that a lot of people will play it that way.

But again, explain how a SPACE MARINE STRAT would effect anything that's not a SPACE MARINE. So we should start using strats from other factions on stuff it doesnt belong to? Everyone that I've spoken with agrees that it wouldn't work on anyone other than Salamanders.

RAW makes sense that it wouldnt. Anyone that thinks otherwise is trying to be an removed - kindly stop circumventing the language filter and use it to their advantage. Typical dick move.

**tneva82**

Racerguy180 wrote:
But again, explain how a SPACE MARINE STRAT would effect anything that's not a SPACE MARINE. So we should start using strats from other factions on stuff it doesnt belong to? Everyone that I've spoken with agrees that it wouldn't work on anyone other than Salamanders.

RAW makes sense that it wouldnt. Anyone that thinks otherwise is trying to be an as_shoale and use it to their advantage. Typical dick move.

By keyword. Book stratagems have long been able to affect things outside book if keywords match. Check death guard FAQ where it's even specifically said so. As long as keywords match it's irrelevant from what book unit and stratagems are.

FAQ specifically gives you ability to affect units outside your codex with your stratagems...Is GW rule team, as you worded it, donkey-cave then?

**Mr Morden**

Racerguy180 wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Nightlord1987 wrote:
So, 1: doesent state Wholy within 6, so daisy chaining.

2: cannot target ANY Infantry, from the entire army?

How TF did this even get written, and printed?

It's like you shouldn't t even play a codex for 2 weeks till the FAQ comes out.

cannot target any infantry within 6 inches, unless they're the closest one. of course salamanders flamer bonus means chances are they're always going to have some infantry moving forward. I suspect this will, most often be used to squeeze a turn or two of life out of a back field heavy support unit like Hellblasters that otherwise would be deleted in the opening rounds

Yea. But it says Infantry, not Salamanders Infantry.
Have an untargettable Blob squad of Guardsman sit on an Objective, behind an untargettable Character, behind a LOS blocking wall.

why on earth would a Salamanders specific stratagem do anything for non-Salamanders? Furthermore what self respecting Salamanders player doing in the adding guard to their list?

Because it doesn't specify that only Salamanders are affected? That's what it says RAW, and you can bet that a lot of people will play it that way.

But again, explain how a SPACE MARINE STRAT would effect anything that's not a SPACE MARINE. So we should start using strats from other factions on stuff it doesnt belong to? Everyone that I've spoken with agrees that it wouldn't work on anyone other than Salamanders.

RAW makes sense that it wouldnt. Anyone that thinks otherwise is trying to be an donkey-cave and use it to their advantage. Typical dick move.

IF the start (currently) just say Infantry then it effects ALL Infantry - now it is likely to be FAQed - UNLESSS of course someone at GW likes the idea of a heroric Marine standing there shielding the other Imperials nearby.....sounds quite Salamander like in fact if you know the lore.

**Binabik15**

I actually love the idea of a Salamander squad shielding their guard allies with their hulking Ceramite-clad frames. Compared to, say, Minotaurs, who'd strap them on as ablative armour or Flesh Tearers who don't actually have allies, only tiny bits of meat to wade through.

And I can't get my hopes up for new Orks *again* to be let down. I miss the days of Armageddon campaigns and Orks as important players in 40k (and WHFB). Their brutal sillyness goes so well with the SM's silly brutalness and the Guard's grim hopelessness.

**tneva82**

Binabik15 wrote:
I actually love the idea of a Salamander squad shielding their guard allies with their hulking Ceramite-clad frames. Compared to, say, Minotaurs, who'd strap them on as ablative armour or Flesh Tearers who don't actually have allies, only tiny bits of meat to wade through.

Of course if there's IG allies around what probably happens is that IG troopers cover salamander character who covers everybody else so until you clear the cheap chaff from front(preferably out of LOS to make that hard) character and everybody behind him are nearly 100% immune to shooting. Not even snipers able to target the units behind the character.

**Warhams-77**

An Actual Englishman wrote:
Warhams-77 wrote:

There was a rumor about a potential plastic Russ and Ghazhgkull but I could not find the quote atm...

Thanks for the summary Warhams, I'll add it to the front page.

I've been doing my own research and the rumour of the SW vs Ork box is that it will be Ragnar vs a new plastic Ork character, possibly Ghazzy.

Posters are going wild for Primarch speculation (as they always do on B&C) but none of them have any concrete information, as far as I can tell.

You are welcome. And sorry, I was in a hurry and meant Ragnar Blackmane, not Russ

**Selfcontrol**

French long time lurker here. If I were you, I would definitely take seriously what Kikasstout (the french forumer) says.

Long before the release of Codex SM V2 he accurately guessed the Combat Doctrines (at the time, he told us that it was going to be a system where you get a buff to either heavy weapons AP or Rapid Fire / Assault weapons AP or melee AP and that you had to "choose" which buff to use), the number of stratagems and the release date (August). He told us these informations as soon as June if I remember correctly. He also told us at the same time that each First Founding Chapter was going to get its own supplement, relics and stratagems on top of several new units and not just the stuff from Shadowspear.

Many of us didn't really believe him because it kinda sounded like Christmas for SM players, especially after seeing what Codex CSM V2 ended up being. In the end, he was right !

Although he didn't describe perfectly the Combat Doctrines (he described them at first as some kind of boost that you have to choose at the beginning of each battle round and not a progressive system), it is very clear to us now that he has good sources regarding upcoming GW releases.

He also gave us several hints regarding the upcoming Drukhari vs Eldar thing, in Psychic Awakening.

**BrianDavion**

Warhams-77 wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
Warhams-77 wrote:

There was a rumor about a potential plastic Russ and Ghazhgkull but I could not find the quote atm...

Thanks for the summary Warhams, I'll add it to the front page.

I've been doing my own research and the rumour of the SW vs Ork box is that it will be Ragnar vs a new plastic Ork character, possibly Ghazzy.

Posters are going wild for Primarch speculation (as they always do on B&C) but none of them have any concrete information, as far as I can tell.

You are welcome. And sorry, I was in a hurry and meant Ragnar Blackmane, not Russ

I dunno has GW EVER put an actual special character in a box? the most the do is put a unique mini that they give a name to but represents a generic, Haldor Icepelt being an excellent example

**Platuan4th**

BrianDavion wrote:
Warhams-77 wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
Warhams-77 wrote:

There was a rumor about a potential plastic Russ and Ghazhgkull but I could not find the quote atm...

Thanks for the summary Warhams, I'll add it to the front page.

I've been doing my own research and the rumour of the SW vs Ork box is that it will be Ragnar vs a new plastic Ork character, possibly Ghazzy.

Posters are going wild for Primarch speculation (as they always do on B&C) but none of them have any concrete information, as far as I can tell.

You are welcome. And sorry, I was in a hurry and meant Ragnar Blackmane, not Russ

I dunno has GW EVER put an actual special character in a box? the most the do is put a unique mini that they give a name to but represents a generic, Haldor Icepelt being an excellent example

Eldrad, Artemis, the Wolf Lord from the old Orks vs Wolves box that remained a SC in the 7th Ed Wolf book.

**MajorWesJanson**

BrianDavion wrote:
Warhams-77 wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
Warhams-77 wrote:

There was a rumor about a potential plastic Russ and Ghazhgkull but I could not find the quote atm...

Thanks for the summary Warhams, I'll add it to the front page.

I've been doing my own research and the rumour of the SW vs Ork box is that it will be Ragnar vs a new plastic Ork character, possibly Ghazzy.

Posters are going wild for Primarch speculation (as they always do on B&C) but none of them have any concrete information, as far as I can tell.

You are welcome. And sorry, I was in a hurry and meant Ragnar Blackmane, not Russ

I dunno has GW EVER put an actual special character in a box? the most the do is put a unique mini that they give a name to but represents a generic, Haldor Icepelt being an excellent example

Wrath and Rapture had Karanak and a generic harp herald, plus new fiends and flesh hounds in it. That's my speculation for how we might see these eldar- banshees and jain zar vs drazhar and incubi, some troops for both sides to bulk it out to the 100 GBP price point, and Banshee exarch either included or sold separately as a blister, with individual sets for the units out later.