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.

 Arbitrator wrote:

Danny76 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Well seeing we have only one book left it's pretty safe assumption that's the name of the book. And name is certainly necron themed.

Is this still based on assumption? (Due to factions getting done etc)
Or have they somewhere confirmed it?

Pariah's were an old Necron unit. The only factions without PA content are Necrons, Deathwatch and Harlequins.

(Or is this that M E T A joke that was going around the Adepticon thread?)

*sigh*

...and Sisters of Battle.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I can confirm Pariahs were absolutely garbage in 4th. However the aesthetic was awesome so that kinda made up for it. I painted a squad (as well as I could anyway) and they never saw the light of day. For title of "War of the Spider", Bile has the extra "limbs" and since he's at the forefront it might reference him.

Really? I didn't like the models either. The designs didn't say 'scary' or 'cyborg' or anything I thought they should. They just made me think of bad scifi robots.



Of course, I recognize that would appeal to some folks.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

Danny76 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Well seeing we have only one book left it's pretty safe assumption that's the name of the book. And name is certainly necron themed.

Is this still based on assumption? (Due to factions getting done etc)
Or have they somewhere confirmed it?

Pariah's were an old Necron unit. The only factions without PA content are Necrons, Deathwatch and Harlequins.

(Or is this that M E T A joke that was going around the Adepticon thread?)

*sigh*

...and Sisters of Battle.

But they got a Scenario Stratagem in PA2. Technically it's rules.

;;^^))

 gorgon wrote:
Really? I didn't like the models either. The designs didn't say 'scary' or 'cyborg' or anything I thought they should. They just made me think of bad scifi robots.

Honestly, I thought they looked OK at the time, but yeah, looking back, they are pretty plain and dated. I actually bought them because they were awesome in the first Dawn of War game, in fact that is why I got into 40K and Necrons in the first place. But, I still plan to convert the ones I have by chopping off the flimsy end they had on them and replacing it with the top of plastic Warscythes. While they sculpt isn't great by any measure, I still have a nostalgic sentiment towards them. I think what you "want" in it is something that conveys threatening cyborg with the "horror" of being clad in stoic death-masks. I think that is what they were trying for with the old ones, but only somewhat alluded to the mark.

Whoa, Pariahs?! Nice, Necrons do need some new model love (although they need some new rules love more). Let's hope they are useful. I'm carefully optimistic.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
It's almost silly how much better the new Bile is. GW did a good job on this one.

It’s awesome. Everything is pretty much identical to the old one, just better.

Yeeeeeah! He looks badass.

I like that there isn't any terrain he's standing on. I've absolutely hated that recent trend,

I know - how is it that all of these epic heroes keep finding pieces of rubble to leap from? And why? Is there an intergalactic jumping competition?

 Dysartes wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

Danny76 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Well seeing we have only one book left it's pretty safe assumption that's the name of the book. And name is certainly necron themed.

Is this still based on assumption? (Due to factions getting done etc)
Or have they somewhere confirmed it?

Pariah's were an old Necron unit. The only factions without PA content are Necrons, Deathwatch and Harlequins.

(Or is this that M E T A joke that was going around the Adepticon thread?)

*sigh*

...and Sisters of Battle.

So the answer is no to any knowledge it’s the last book, aside from they’ll have all been seen to.

What was their announcement way back when, I don’t think they specifically said one and done in it?
(Not that I necessarily think it’s just gonna carry on, but of what we technically know..)

I was surprised to see that the Assassins are getting a look-in in Fabius' book. Makes me think two things:

1. Do you think we're just get a complete reprint of the Assassin rules?
2. Do you think this means there's a snowball's chance of the Inquisition getting some rules in Pariah or whatever the last book ends up being called?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I was surprised to see that the Assassins are getting a look-in in Fabius' book. Makes me think two things:

1. Do you think we're just get a complete reprint of the Assassin rules?
2. Do you think this means there's a snowball's chance of the Inquisition getting some rules in Pariah or whatever the last book ends up being called?

My money's on number one.

I think assassins are gonna get a rule that allows them to go in other detachments without breaking them. In a way, I kinda hope it happens so I can add a Callidus to my Raptors and not break anything. On the other hand, that might get broken hahaha!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I was surprised to see that the Assassins are getting a look-in in Fabius' book. Makes me think two things:

1. Do you think we're just get a complete reprint of the Assassin rules?
2. Do you think this means there's a snowball's chance of the Inquisition getting some rules in Pariah or whatever the last book ends up being called?

It's probably just a reprint, since it's easier to 'find' the rules inside an 'in-print' book than old copies of WD. Might have an update though, but nothing more than a balance pass (by GW standards).

Assassins weren't on the original Faction Chart I believe, so I suppose it's possible. What makes me sceptical is that they don't have any plastic kits (barring Greyfax) and everything is Direct Only, but then again, no reason they couldn't suddenly spring plastic Inquisition kits on us.

When I saw Pariah, I immediately thought "At last, book II of the Bequin trilogy". But Pariah was book one. Anyway, there's a very tenuous link from Pariah to =][=.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think assassins are gonna get a rule that allows them to go in other detachments without breaking them. In a way, I kinda hope it happens so I can add a Callidus to my Raptors and not break anything. On the other hand, that might get broken hahaha!

GW's ability to copypasta rules without editing even the most obvious of mistakes makes me think that is unlikely, however much I believe it should have been part of the Assassin rules from day 1.

"Pariah" could also just be refering to the Silent King, since he's an outcast (pariah) in self-exile. A little nod and wink in title only at the old unit for those in the know.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think assassins are gonna get a rule that allows them to go in other detachments without breaking them. In a way, I kinda hope it happens so I can add a Callidus to my Raptors and not break anything. On the other hand, that might get broken hahaha!

GW's ability to copypasta rules without editing even the most obvious of mistakes makes me think that is unlikely, however much I believe it should have been part of the Assassin rules from day 1.

IIRC the assassin rules came out in their current form before Marines and Sisters picked up their no-soup bonuses.

Y'all can keep talking about Necrons and Pariahs, I'll just be warming up the Blackstar's engines and ready to drop in and purge some filthy Xenos scum!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think assassins are gonna get a rule that allows them to go in other detachments without breaking them. In a way, I kinda hope it happens so I can add a Callidus to my Raptors and not break anything. On the other hand, that might get broken hahaha!

GW's ability to copypasta rules without editing even the most obvious of mistakes makes me think that is unlikely, however much I believe it should have been part of the Assassin rules from day 1.

I'm not particularly convinced it is a mistake. You're including outside forces in a detachment, its supposed to break them. That's literally the point of the detachment purity rules, exceptions make them pointless.

Voss wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think assassins are gonna get a rule that allows them to go in other detachments without breaking them. In a way, I kinda hope it happens so I can add a Callidus to my Raptors and not break anything. On the other hand, that might get broken hahaha!

GW's ability to copypasta rules without editing even the most obvious of mistakes makes me think that is unlikely, however much I believe it should have been part of the Assassin rules from day 1.

I'm not particularly convinced it is a mistake. You're including outside forces in a detachment, its supposed to break them. That's literally the point of the detachment purity rules, exceptions make them pointless.

Should things like Inquisitors and Assassins break them though? I don't think they should. Hell we need more ways to benefit detachments like that. I mean, we have Inquisitors, and the current way Tyranid Special Characters work is excellent. We need certain ways to expand on that concept though. Ynari characters should've worked exactly how Inquisitors worked, for example.

Shouldn't be that way for assassins though. They don't belong to any imperial faction other than themselves and, not being able to form an army themselves, they should have a place in any imperial army. They aren't marines or guard or inquisition and obviously an army of assassins isn't a thing.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Voss wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think assassins are gonna get a rule that allows them to go in other detachments without breaking them. In a way, I kinda hope it happens so I can add a Callidus to my Raptors and not break anything. On the other hand, that might get broken hahaha!

GW's ability to copypasta rules without editing even the most obvious of mistakes makes me think that is unlikely, however much I believe it should have been part of the Assassin rules from day 1.

I'm not particularly convinced it is a mistake. You're including outside forces in a detachment, its supposed to break them. That's literally the point of the detachment purity rules, exceptions make them pointless.

Should things like Inquisitors and Assassins break them though? I don't think they should. Hell we need more ways to benefit detachments like that. I mean, we have Inquisitors, and the current way Tyranid Special Characters work is excellent. We need certain ways to expand on that concept though. Ynari characters should've worked exactly how Inquisitors worked, for example.

I'd rather see more restrictions than benefits at this point. 8th is too much of a mess with piling on random crap, multiple detachments and random assorted stuff as is. It needs to be reined in, not loosened even more.
If people want to soup their way to combo-breakers, pay the cost.

The more things that don't break faction benefits, the less incentive there is to actually use the Auxiliary Detachments that subtract a CP in exchange for the Detachment being a separate thing.

You wouldn't use an Auxiliary Detachment anyway to take Assassins without a new rule if you play Marines and Sisters as you'd break Doctrines (of Tides for GK) and Rites.

That and also you can just spend CP on the strat to cherry-pick the best of the 4 Assassins for the opponent you're facing.

 Kanluwen wrote:
The more things that don't break faction benefits, the less incentive there is to actually use the Auxiliary Detachments that subtract a CP in exchange for the Detachment being a separate thing.

However, Inquisitors aren't breaking anything as is, and neither is the wide availability of Tyranid Special Characters. Assassins and Ynarri Characters wouldn't break anything either.

Also nobody uses the Aux detachment because most things you want aren't going to give you such an advantage that losing a detachment slot + a lost CP is even close to worth it. It SOUNDS like good design for balance until you look at what's actually the kinda unit that should be there.

You want an assassin you pay 2cp for operative requisition sanctioned. What's the problem with that? Do imperials really need more advantages?

Gadzilla666 wrote:
You want an assassin you pay 2cp for operative requisition sanctioned. What's the problem with that? Do imperials really need more advantages?

Except you don't if you're playing Marines and Sisters, because you lose your benefits.

What people want is a rule that makes that not the case, like Inquisitors have (and not necessarily the part of the Inquisitor rule that allows you to take them in the same detachment).

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
You want an assassin you pay 2cp for operative requisition sanctioned. What's the problem with that? Do imperials really need more advantages?

Except you don't if you're playing Marines and Sisters, because you lose your benefits.

What people want is a rule that makes that not the case, like Inquisitors have (and not necessarily the part of the Inquisitor rule that allows you to take them in the same detachment).

Well wasn't that the entire point of giving them their mono faction bonuses? How about gw just gives them a rule that allows them to take a knight without losing their doctrines while they're at it?

It'll just be a reprint of the wd assassin rules anyway, same as they did for Ynarri in pa1.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
You want an assassin you pay 2cp for operative requisition sanctioned. What's the problem with that? Do imperials really need more advantages?

I already don't think that strat is fair to begin with and rather it be gone.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
You want an assassin you pay 2cp for operative requisition sanctioned. What's the problem with that? Do imperials really need more advantages?

Except you don't if you're playing Marines and Sisters, because you lose your benefits.

What people want is a rule that makes that not the case, like Inquisitors have (and not necessarily the part of the Inquisitor rule that allows you to take them in the same detachment).

Well wasn't that the entire point of giving them their mono faction bonuses? How about gw just gives them a rule that allows them to take a knight without losing their doctrines while they're at it?

It'll just be a reprint of the wd assassin rules anyway, same as they did for Ynarri in pa1.

Yes a Knight is the same level as an Inquisitor.

Give me a fething break. If that's the best comeback you have, you don't have a legit argument to begin with.

Can't take a little hyperbole? The entire point of doctrines was to give a bonus for playing mono faction and cut down on soup. If you want an assassin that's fine, you just lose doctrines. It's a tradeoff. And there isn't much point in arguing because it will just be a reprint of the wd rules. You know how gw operates.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Can't take a little hyperbole? The entire point of doctrines was to give a bonus for playing mono faction and cut down on soup. If you want an assassin that's fine, you just lose doctrines. It's a tradeoff. And there isn't much point in arguing because it will just be a reprint of the wd rules. You know how gw operates.

Except was it broken when Inquisitors broke that rule, yes or no?

For Marines, it makes sense that having Assassins allied to them would be discouraged. In the lore, they're more commonly used against Astartes than supporting them.