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 think the concern about organized play has more to do with future proofing than with the rules as they currently stand. Since these are models with key words and rules that could interact oddly with future rules, they probably want to make it very clear that these are not to be default part of organized play.

Strange how int chap on bike made the cut when regular chap on bike didn't.

 skchsan wrote:
Strange how int chap on bike made the cut when regular chap on bike didn't.

I think they're both in the DA pdf. Regular chappy is p6.

 Polonius wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Strange how int chap on bike made the cut when regular chap on bike didn't.

I think they're both in the DA pdf. Regular chappy is p6.

You're right. Missed page 9.

Still irked that rough riders have basically gone; they are such a unique thing that it's always surprised me they've not produced a kit, especially since it's the only non-VEHICLE fast attack the guard has ever had.

locarno24 wrote:
Still irked that rough riders have basically gone; they are such a unique thing that it's always surprised me they've not produced a kit, especially since it's the only non-VEHICLE fast attack the guard has ever had.

I think it was a minor case of Squat disease: lack of motivation, interest, or creativity to make them work in the modern game. The last citadel models were from 2nd edition, and the Attilan sculpts are what, 25 years old? It's a shame they never figured out a proper replacement or update for them. I loved playing with the riders.

Ahhh just finished painting my chaos lord on bike, hoping it would dodge a bullet. Seems like it's a worrting trend to get rid of kitbashing from the game.

while promoting kitbashing on some of their community posts

 small_gods wrote:
Ahhh just finished painting my chaos lord on bike, hoping it would dodge a bullet. Seems like it's a worrting trend to get rid of kitbashing from the game.

I don't think that's the primary concern. Characters on bikes tend not be a big consideration during rules designs, and so some odd interactions can occur. I think the combination of lack of kits and wanting to tamp down on potentially abusive combinations makes more sense than trying to eliminate kit bashing.

Now, I think they want to reduce the necessity of kit bashing to play a powerful model.

 Roknar wrote:
while promoting kitbashing on some of their community posts

And their codexes.

Looking at you SM Captain on Bike and GMNDK.

IIRC correctly the SM Captain on bike is an option for White Scars, and they re-released that model.

 warmaster21 wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
So while they say they will have points for Matched but aren't really meant for tournaments, that all but means they will not be allowed in regular games since inevitably the tournament suggestions are treated like Matched Play rules in the name of "balance". If tournaments ban Legends, then I guarantee the majority of Matched Play games will too.

if my opponent doesnt want me to use my warboss in mega armor or my sister superior with a SB or my herald of slaanesh on steed they arent someone i would want to play with in the first place

I\m sure you don't mind me running 6 detachments and 5 copies of same datasheet. After all equally valid suggestions.

tneva82 wrote:

 warmaster21 wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
So while they say they will have points for Matched but aren't really meant for tournaments, that all but means they will not be allowed in regular games since inevitably the tournament suggestions are treated like Matched Play rules in the name of "balance". If tournaments ban Legends, then I guarantee the majority of Matched Play games will too.

if my opponent doesnt want me to use my warboss in mega armor or my sister superior with a SB or my herald of slaanesh on steed they arent someone i would want to play with in the first place

I\m sure you don't mind me running 6 detachments and 5 copies of same datasheet. After all equally valid suggestions.

I think that's a bit of a false equivalence. Detachment limits and rule of 3 are ways to ensure that matched play games are, you know, fairly matched. Maybe not exactly, but corner cases of unit or detachment spam quickly become broken. Nothing in legends is close to being abusive, OP, or broken.

Even so, the rules for Legends provide points, which right of the bat lets you know that GW considers these appropriate for matched play. How organized play handles it will be up to the organizers, I'd imagine.

*sigh* just after I finished my first 5 converted Rough Riders and bought 6 more...
Anyway, for garagehammer and the likes that should not really be a problem.

I could imagine one reason to axe them was their weird CAVALRY interaction with some LoW rules that allowed falling back over INFANTRY. Together with their cheap cost and relatively large base size you might play some funny positioning games to cheaply trap knights and the like in CC.

 warmaster21 wrote:
No cannoness veridian

codex sisters of battle specificly says just use her a s a canonness with a bolt pistol and power sword


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Polonius wrote:
I think the concern about organized play has more to do with future proofing than with the rules as they currently stand. Since these are models with key words and rules that could interact oddly with future rules, they probably want to make it very clear that these are not to be default part of organized play.

that's my read too

 Polonius wrote:


I think that's a bit of a false equivalence. Detachment limits and rule of 3 are ways to ensure that matched play games are, you know, fairly matched. Maybe not exactly, but corner cases of unit or detachment spam quickly become broken. Nothing in legends is close to being abusive, OP, or broken.

Even so, the rules for Legends provide points, which right of the bat lets you know that GW considers these appropriate for matched play. How organized play handles it will be up to the organizers, I'd imagine.

i mean, just because you run a list that ignores the rule of 3 doesnt mean its automatically abusive.... If i want to run an aeldari wraith list with more than 3 wraithlords doesnt mean its abusive..
And if legends having points means that GW considers appropriate for matched play, why is no tournament allowing the drukhari Raiding party special rule? after all, its litterally printed in their codex, this means they consider it appropriate for matched play, no? You could even say that they built the codex with that rule in mind.

deviantduck wrote:So... how long until ITC/ETC bans Legends?

who cares

small_gods wrote:Ahhh just finished painting my chaos lord on bike, hoping it would dodge a bullet. Seems like it's a worrting trend to get rid of kitbashing from the game.

not really, narrative play wont be effected

Roknar wrote:while promoting kitbashing on some of their community posts

It wont be removed from the game GW(and my flgs) plays, just the type that feth you players actively trying to break the game play

Racerguy180 wrote:

deviantduck wrote:So... how long until ITC/ETC bans Legends?

who cares

small_gods wrote:Ahhh just finished painting my chaos lord on bike, hoping it would dodge a bullet. Seems like it's a worrting trend to get rid of kitbashing from the game.

not really, narrative play wont be effected

Roknar wrote:while promoting kitbashing on some of their community posts

It wont be removed from the game GW(and my flgs) plays, just the type that feth you players actively trying to break the game play

Agreed. The article even explicitly mentions legends being allowed in matched play (and the files provide points values). So, if someone decides not to use their models it's not GWs problem in this case. Not throwing these options out of the codizes would have been the better option of course, but that's not a question anymore.

I remember GW said they won't be updating Legend points anymore, so while they may be "balanced" for Match Play now, as new material is published, they may end up being either horribly underpowered or incredibly overpowered. So I can understand people saying "I'd rather you didn't use them."

As for me, let me see your list and the datasheet in question and I'll consider whether it's abusive or fine (whether it's Legends or Ro3 or any other "not recommended by GW" option). Most of the time, it'll be the latter, but every so often you get those gamey types who just want to stomp ya.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Actually there is no FW there at all!

That either means that FW got once more NOT informed, OR that FW isn't on the chopping block.

Or that the fw pdfs will be released in a day or so like in the last big faq.

It confuses me that power axes [and eviscerators] were cut from our inventory when power mauls weren't.

This is slightly irritating, considering I have a small number modified to have power axes, but like it's not a big deal, I just have to wonder what process made them go:

"We're going to have power mauls, but cut power axes."

Considering the new kit was literally just launched, I have to wonder why someone went out of their way to include power mauls as an option for everything in the codex. And how did mauls get chose over axes? Was there a spin-the-bottle?

Losing stormbolters on sergents for SoB is a big hit, it basically cuts out a third of the squads damage potential (at least under blessed bolts) because regular bolters suck.

There's also no good replacement option. Plasma pistols are trash, I don't think we can take inferno pistols or hand flamers (not that you would), combi-flamers, like most flamers, are garbage, and combi-meltas are expensive.

 small_gods wrote:
Ahhh just finished painting my chaos lord on bike, hoping it would dodge a bullet. Seems like it's a worrting trend to get rid of kitbashing from the game.

Mono pose, mono pose, mono pose. Was totally depressed seeing the new sorcerer model has pauldrons molded into the arms. Means no legion specific heraldry.

ERJAK wrote:
Losing stormbolters on sergents for SoB is a big hit, it basically cuts out a third of the squads damage potential (at least under blessed bolts) because regular bolters suck.

Dominions still take 4, so losing 20% of the stratagem that was kind of niche already isn't a huge deal-breaker.

Just got back into 40k with 8th edition so these are all models I bought/converted relying on 8th edition materials...

3x Auto-cannon+las cannon ven dreads (45$ just for the stupid FW auto-cannons)
DA libby on bike
DA master on bike
SW wolf lord on bike
SW libby on bike
5x wolf guard on bikes
Minny tiggy
Minny Shrike

So about 250$ (peanuts for the rough rider guys) removed in valid models + hours of conversion/painting (this hurts the most). For what gain? The game is already an unbalanced piece of gak, I doubt removing a couple options is going to help GW out (maybe they can buff marines more now?). And they wonder why people turn to recasters and pirate their terribly written rules...

Already salty about having to wait months for my boys to get rules so I can put them on the table (DA/SW/DW) without looking like the proverbial red-headed step child and now this.

bananathug wrote:
Just got back into 40k with 8th edition so these are all models I bought/converted relying on 8th edition materials...

3x Auto-cannon+las cannon ven dreads (45$ just for the stupid FW auto-cannons)
DA libby on bike
DA master on bike
SW wolf lord on bike
SW libby on bike
5x wolf guard on bikes
Minny tiggy
Minny Shrike

So about 250$ (peanuts for the rough rider guys) removed in valid models + hours of conversion/painting (this hurts the most). For what gain? The game is already an unbalanced piece of gak, I doubt removing a couple options is going to help GW out (maybe they can buff marines more now?). And they wonder why people turn to recasters and pirate their terribly written rules...

Already salty about having to wait months for my boys to get rules so I can put them on the table (DA/SW/DW) without looking like the proverbial red-headed step child and now this.

Shrike and Tiggy you can just put on a thicker base and call them counts-as.

bananathug wrote:
Just got back into 40k with 8th edition so these are all models I bought/converted relying on 8th edition materials...

3x Auto-cannon+las cannon ven dreads (45$ just for the stupid FW auto-cannons)
DA libby on bike
DA master on bike
SW wolf lord on bike
SW libby on bike
5x wolf guard on bikes
Minny tiggy
Minny Shrike

So about 250$ (peanuts for the rough rider guys) removed in valid models + hours of conversion/painting (this hurts the most). For what gain? The game is already an unbalanced piece of gak, I doubt removing a couple options is going to help GW out (maybe they can buff marines more now?). And they wonder why people turn to recasters and pirate their terribly written rules...

Already salty about having to wait months for my boys to get rules so I can put them on the table (DA/SW/DW) without looking like the proverbial red-headed step child and now this.

If you're not going to tournaments, you'll still be able to use all that stuff.

Legends is basically only a thing for people who go to events. I am one of thise people so I'll be ditching some stuff. People who don't, don't need to worry about it.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 small_gods wrote:
Ahhh just finished painting my chaos lord on bike, hoping it would dodge a bullet. Seems like it's a worrting trend to get rid of kitbashing from the game.

Mono pose, mono pose, mono pose. Was totally depressed seeing the new sorcerer model has pauldrons molded into the arms. Means no legion specific heraldry.

Don't worry, it's plastic you can cut them off and add you own as a kitbash -GWWC Team (probably).

Hate that they talk out of both sides of their mouths. Pick a lane GW.

They should at least have brought the rules in line with the current state if they're never gonna touch these units again. And in CSM case I'm really worried what that means for the future of daemonic mounts or lack thereof :(

ERJAK wrote:
Losing stormbolters on sergents for SoB is a big hit, it basically cuts out a third of the squads damage potential (at least under blessed bolts) because regular bolters suck.

Sure bothers me, since i focused on stormbolters myself at one point. it's nice to lose out on the fire efficiency, really. i knew it was likely, but now it's clear. even more than before ill need a dedicated dominion squad if i ever want to REALLY use the storm bolter strategem now...