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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Beyond the fact some of that list is already redundant with existing options in the deathguard codex. I.e. you want unique dg flavour terminators... and blightlords and death shroud? Why would you ever not take the supplement army that has nigh on 100% core with added options and more units on top.

To make it worse I don't really understand why you think having death guard chaos marines is even a feasible concept. They're plague marines, that's the point of them.

How many of the equivalent units can not be sorted with a couple of rules options and name option

REALLY Hopes some idiot will not go into a stupid whiny rant that doing this would be the same as Making Guardsmen and Titans the same - like idiots usually do.....

You have to differentiate a profile for a mutilator to cover all god specific legions and the renegades etc.

If you give it meaningful rules for being in deathguard (+1 t & dr), it will need to cost more points, it also has a different stat line.

Then repeat this for Ec, WE and Tsons and rules that fit if it isn't in one of those legions.

Or, you write its DG points and profile, separately... in a DG codex.

Look at it this way. They didn't just say "use tacticals" to represent grey hunters and they don't even have a different stat line. Why is it then rational to give units with different stat lines all printed in 1 entry with 5/6 different base costs with 4-5 different wargear lists based on a supplement you may or may not have?

Well GW has clearly shown they don't think all Death Guard have a FNP equivalent. So there's no point in having a separate codex.

All Death Guard units should have Disgustingly Resilient, and I bet they'll get it in the new codex. Everything not having it is just a relic of the poor design of early 8th edition codexes.

Based on the choices made with the two new codices, you're going to be SUPER mistaken.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Beyond the fact some of that list is already redundant with existing options in the deathguard codex. I.e. you want unique dg flavour terminators... and blightlords and death shroud? Why would you ever not take the supplement army that has nigh on 100% core with added options and more units on top.

To make it worse I don't really understand why you think having death guard chaos marines is even a feasible concept. They're plague marines, that's the point of them.

How many of the equivalent units can not be sorted with a couple of rules options and name option

REALLY Hopes some idiot will not go into a stupid whiny rant that doing this would be the same as Making Guardsmen and Titans the same - like idiots usually do.....

You have to differentiate a profile for a mutilator to cover all god specific legions and the renegades etc.

If you give it meaningful rules for being in deathguard (+1 t & dr), it will need to cost more points, it also has a different stat line.

Then repeat this for Ec, WE and Tsons and rules that fit if it isn't in one of those legions.

Or, you write its DG points and profile, separately... in a DG codex.

Look at it this way. They didn't just say "use tacticals" to represent grey hunters and they don't even have a different stat line. Why is it then rational to give units with different stat lines all printed in 1 entry with 5/6 different base costs with 4-5 different wargear lists based on a supplement you may or may not have?

Well GW has clearly shown they don't think all Death Guard have a FNP equivalent. So there's no point in having a separate codex.

All Death Guard units should have Disgustingly Resilient, and I bet they'll get it in the new codex. Everything not having it is just a relic of the poor design of early 8th edition codexes.

Based on the choices made with the two new codices, you're going to be SUPER mistaken.

Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Beyond the fact some of that list is already redundant with existing options in the deathguard codex. I.e. you want unique dg flavour terminators... and blightlords and death shroud? Why would you ever not take the supplement army that has nigh on 100% core with added options and more units on top.

To make it worse I don't really understand why you think having death guard chaos marines is even a feasible concept. They're plague marines, that's the point of them.

How many of the equivalent units can not be sorted with a couple of rules options and name option

REALLY Hopes some idiot will not go into a stupid whiny rant that doing this would be the same as Making Guardsmen and Titans the same - like idiots usually do.....

You have to differentiate a profile for a mutilator to cover all god specific legions and the renegades etc.

If you give it meaningful rules for being in deathguard (+1 t & dr), it will need to cost more points, it also has a different stat line.

Then repeat this for Ec, WE and Tsons and rules that fit if it isn't in one of those legions.

Or, you write its DG points and profile, separately... in a DG codex.

Look at it this way. They didn't just say "use tacticals" to represent grey hunters and they don't even have a different stat line. Why is it then rational to give units with different stat lines all printed in 1 entry with 5/6 different base costs with 4-5 different wargear lists based on a supplement you may or may not have?

Well GW has clearly shown they don't think all Death Guard have a FNP equivalent. So there's no point in having a separate codex.

All Death Guard units should have Disgustingly Resilient, and I bet they'll get it in the new codex. Everything not having it is just a relic of the poor design of early 8th edition codexes.

Based on the choices made with the two new codices, you're going to be SUPER mistaken.

Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

FNP is not their Legion Trait, which is part 1. Two, with the design of characters being given specific datasheets for wargear loadouts, I will guarantee that, once again there being no "Death Guard Chaos Lord" model, you will get the non-FNP entry once more. Three, you already have separate entries for the Sorcerer and "Plaguecaster", which is just a Sorcerer with the good benefits so you buy that new model.

You have too much hope for someone that should know how GW operates at this point.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

We're more likely to see standard Chaos Lords and Sorcerers just get cut from the book rather than given Death Guard rules.

Remember, they didn't get the DG rules in the 8th Codex because they're not Death Guard models. GW doesn't sell a "Death Guard Chaos Lord" or "Death Guard Terminator Sorcerer", so they didn't get rules. They just got the regular Chaos Lord/Termy Sorc rules.

If they get updated rules I'll be positively amazed. I think they're more likely to just get cut.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

We're more likely to see standard Chaos Lords and Sorcerers just get cut from the book rather than given Death Guard rules.

Remember, they didn't get the DG rules in the 8th Codex because they're not Death Guard models. GW doesn't sell a "Death Guard Chaos Lord" or "Death Guard Terminator Sorcerer", so they didn't get rules. They just got the regular Chaos Lord/Termy Sorc rules.

If they get updated rules I'll be positively amazed. I think they're more likely to just get cut.

That's possible, but if they cut everything that isn't a Death Guard model, and therefore doesn't get DR, isn't it possible all of the remaining units has it?

@Slayer-Fan123: Settle down. I admit I could be wrong. No reason to get so worked up.

Probably not the vehicles.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Probably not the vehicles.

Maybe, but why not? All the daemon engines have DR except for the Defiler don't they? So cut it, give DR to Rhinos, Land Raiders, and Predators (if they keep those) and up their points compared to the Undivided Legions. It's why they have their own codex and section in CA isn't it? They cut them off from all of the Legion units in the Imperial Armour Compendium for some reason.

Daemon Engines are different to vehicles though. I think that might be there justification. That doesn't mean you're wrong, it's just the weird way GW looks at things.

I just think that Death Guard are going to end up losing more than they gain.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Daemon Engines are different to vehicles though. I think that might be there justification. That doesn't mean you're wrong, it's just the weird way GW looks at things.

I just think that Death Guard are going to end up losing more than they gain.

Oh I definitely agree with you on that. They already have if the rules in the Compendium don't get errated. All those 2W Plague Marines dropping on an objective turn 1 in a Dreadclaw would have been sweet.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Oh I definitely agree with you on that. They already have if the rules in the Compendium don't get errated. All those 2W Plague Marines dropping on an objective turn 1 in a Dreadclaw would have been sweet.

The Dreadlcaw is a good example of the way GW treats Chaos compared to Marines. Death Guard can't use Dreadclaws because it's a "Chaos Space Marine Dreadclaw" and not a "Death Guard Dreadclaw". Meanwhile, Marines get to Drop Pods no matter what symbol is on their shoulder pad.

The Dreadlcaw is a good example of the way GW treats Chaos compared to Marines. Death Guard can't use Dreadclaws because it's a "Chaos Space Marine Dreadclaw" and not a "Death Guard Dreadclaw". Meanwhile, Marines get to Drop Pods no matter what symbol is on their shoulder pad.

This only became true of a number of SM vehicles with the Codex/Supplement style release. Do you want that style release or not? To me it sounds like DG players want their own Codex. Which means giving up things like Dreadclaws, at least currently.

As justyn notes, loyalist marine s have been hit by this plenty of times in the past.


one solution GW could take for some of the stuff is to rename units. the chaos lord suddenly becomes the "Lord of putrification" etc. one model box for several units is something GW's proven willing to do, what with death company intercessors and hounds of morkai

Justyn wrote:
This only became true of a number of SM vehicles with the Codex/Supplement style release. Do you want that style release or not? To me it sounds like DG players want their own Codex. Which means giving up things like Dreadclaws, at least currently.

I don't see how these two are related at all.

Nothing is stopping GW from allowing things to carry on between books. They already carry Land Raiders, Rhinos and Predators. Why not other types of units as well, just with the DG special rules added.

If they're so desperate to keep the CSM units unchanged as a base profile in the DG Codex let's just hope they add contaminated monstrosity with a points cost to any of these profiles.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

Necrons have heaps of units that don't get their dynasty traits, including the Silent King not getting the Szarekhan Dynasty benefits, which could easily be a precedent for Mortarion not getting Disgustingly Resilient (if it plays out that way).

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

Necrons have heaps of units that don't get their dynasty traits, including the Silent King not getting the Szarekhan Dynasty benefits, which could easily be a precedent for Mortarion not getting Disgustingly Resilient (if it plays out that way).

Dynastic agents don't get it because they don't belong to any one dynasty or in the case of the silent king, supercede it in their own right. They will work with any dy asty for the good of the race.

There is no fluff reason a death guard chaos lord isn't some form of plague marine. Well, not beyond not existing witb a specific kit as others have noted.

Also the correct comparison for dynastic codes is the plague hosts.

Dudeface wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

Necrons have heaps of units that don't get their dynasty traits, including the Silent King not getting the Szarekhan Dynasty benefits, which could easily be a precedent for Mortarion not getting Disgustingly Resilient (if it plays out that way).

Dynastic agents don't get it because they don't belong to any one dynasty or in the case of the silent king, supercede it in their own right. They will work with any dy asty for the good of the race.

There is no fluff reason a death guard chaos lord isn't some form of plague marine. Well, not beyond not existing witb a specific kit as others have noted.

Also the correct comparison for dynastic codes is the plague hosts.

Not really. Plague Marines are an old Elite-Slot Finecast selection from CSM, which they turned into a spin off with some Heresy-novels fluff. They are a sub-faction to CSM like Ultramarines are to Space Marines or Ulthwe are to Eldar or Novok are to Necrons.

The equivalent to Death Guard would be a dedicated Novok Flayed-Ones-focussed Spin-Off Codex from Necrons (with Plague Hosts then being variants of Flayed-One-centric armies).

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

Necrons have heaps of units that don't get their dynasty traits, including the Silent King not getting the Szarekhan Dynasty benefits, which could easily be a precedent for Mortarion not getting Disgustingly Resilient (if it plays out that way).

Dynastic agents don't get it because they don't belong to any one dynasty or in the case of the silent king, supercede it in their own right. They will work with any dy asty for the good of the race.

There is no fluff reason a death guard chaos lord isn't some form of plague marine. Well, not beyond not existing witb a specific kit as others have noted.

Also the correct comparison for dynastic codes is the plague hosts.

Not really. Plague Marines are an old Elite-Slot Finecast selection from CSM, which they turned into a spin off with some Heresy-novels fluff. They are a sub-faction to CSM like Ultramarines are to Space Marines or Ulthwe are to Eldar or Novok are to Necrons.

The equivalent to Death Guard would be a dedicated Novok Flayed-Ones-focussed Spin-Off Codex from Necrons (with Plague Hosts then being variants of Flayed-One-centric armies).

dismissing them as "just a subfaction" is remarkably blind. they're a VERY VERY differant army. at this point calling DG "just a CSM subfaction" is like claiming sisters of battle are "just space marines with boobplate and S3+T3"

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Sorry, don't all loyalist units get their chapter trait, doctrines, Angels of Death, etc? Are you referring to the CORE rule?

Necrons have heaps of units that don't get their dynasty traits, including the Silent King not getting the Szarekhan Dynasty benefits, which could easily be a precedent for Mortarion not getting Disgustingly Resilient (if it plays out that way).

Dynastic agents don't get it because they don't belong to any one dynasty or in the case of the silent king, supercede it in their own right. They will work with any dy asty for the good of the race.

There is no fluff reason a death guard chaos lord isn't some form of plague marine. Well, not beyond not existing witb a specific kit as others have noted.

Also the correct comparison for dynastic codes is the plague hosts.

Not really. Plague Marines are an old Elite-Slot Finecast selection from CSM, which they turned into a spin off with some Heresy-novels fluff. They are a sub-faction to CSM like Ultramarines are to Space Marines or Ulthwe are to Eldar or Novok are to Necrons.

The equivalent to Death Guard would be a dedicated Novok Flayed-Ones-focussed Spin-Off Codex from Necrons (with Plague Hosts then being variants of Flayed-One-centric armies).

Except that doesn't exist.

Death guard are an existing codex with 7 death guard sub-faction. Maybe we should have a root codex and 7 supplements for the plague hosts.

Either way I'll leave it here because its going too far off topic, ultimately they're getting a codex regardless.

Dudeface wrote:

Except that doesn't exist.

Death guard are an existing codex with 7 death guard sub-faction. Maybe we should have a root codex and 7 supplements for the plague hosts.

Either way I'll leave it here because its going too far off topic, ultimately they're getting a codex regardless.

Maybe. Thus far, they rolled back all the campaign-book specific stuff like Chapter-specific litanies, Vigilus detachments, etc.. .

I am doubtful the Death Guard, TS, Custodes, etc.. sub-sub-factions for previous "mono-sub-faction-books" will stay around anymore than 7th Edition campaign book formations and such did, or even previous CSM spin-off books like Khorne Daemonkin (though DG, TS seem to have made at least one additional edition).

But we'll see.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Except that doesn't exist.

Death guard are an existing codex with 7 death guard sub-faction. Maybe we should have a root codex and 7 supplements for the plague hosts.

Either way I'll leave it here because its going too far off topic, ultimately they're getting a codex regardless.

Maybe. Thus far, they rolled back all the campaign-book specific stuff like Chapter-specific litanies, Vigilus detachments, etc.. .

I am doubtful the Death Guard, TS, Custodes, etc.. sub-sub-factions for previous "mono-sub-faction-books" will stay around anymore than 7th Edition campaign book formations and such did, or even previous CSM spin-off books like Khorne Daemonkin (though DG, TS seem to have made at least one additional edition).

But we'll see.

GW has already said DG are getting their own codex. frankly I think they're more likely to spin off more. it's pretty clear to me a SINGLE codex for CSMs just wasn't making anyone happy.

You guys are only getting 2/3 of GW's long game:
Release a Deathguard codex
A year later release a CSM codex with "ALL CSM!!"
Release a Deathguard Supplement

And now you have bought 3 books in 2 years.

You guys are only getting 2/3 of GW's long game:
Release a Deathguard codex
A year later release a CSM codex with "ALL CSM!!"
Release a Deathguard Supplement

And now you have bought 3 books in 2 years.

They may not. They may decide on another 'campaign' book series like PA first. They need to get everyone used to paying them $400 a year for the right to play before printing your miniatures is something you do right before a game.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Beyond the fact some of that list is already redundant with existing options in the deathguard codex. I.e. you want unique dg flavour terminators... and blightlords and death shroud? Why would you ever not take the supplement army that has nigh on 100% core with added options and more units on top.

To make it worse I don't really understand why you think having death guard chaos marines is even a feasible concept. They're plague marines, that's the point of them.

How many of the equivalent units can not be sorted with a couple of rules options and name option

REALLY Hopes some idiot will not go into a stupid whiny rant that doing this would be the same as Making Guardsmen and Titans the same - like idiots usually do.....

You have to differentiate a profile for a mutilator to cover all god specific legions and the renegades etc.

If you give it meaningful rules for being in deathguard (+1 t & dr), it will need to cost more points, it also has a different stat line.

Then repeat this for Ec, WE and Tsons and rules that fit if it isn't in one of those legions.

Or, you write its DG points and profile, separately... in a DG codex.

Look at it this way. They didn't just say "use tacticals" to represent grey hunters and they don't even have a different stat line. Why is it then rational to give units with different stat lines all printed in 1 entry with 5/6 different base costs with 4-5 different wargear lists based on a supplement you may or may not have?

Well GW has clearly shown they don't think all Death Guard have a FNP equivalent. So there's no point in having a separate codex.

All Death Guard units should have Disgustingly Resilient, and I bet they'll get it in the new codex. Everything not having it is just a relic of the poor design of early 8th edition codexes.

Don't pay too much attention to slayer. He has repeatedly shown that he doesn't know the first thing about DG and just takes extreme stances on things to start discussions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Probably not the vehicles.

Maybe, but why not? All the daemon engines have DR except for the Defiler don't they? So cut it, give DR to Rhinos, Land Raiders, and Predators (if they keep those) and up their points compared to the Undivided Legions. It's why they have their own codex and section in CA isn't it? They cut them off from all of the Legion units in the Imperial Armour Compendium for some reason.

Capturing vehicles (loyalist and chaos) after killing the crew of marine with bio-weapons is part of their fluff, and one of the reason given why they still have ready access to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
one solution GW could take for some of the stuff is to rename units. the chaos lord suddenly becomes the "Lord of putrification" etc. one model box for several units is something GW's proven willing to do, what with death company intercessors and hounds of morkai

Honestly, ever since Lords of Contagion got access to the chaos lord aura in War of the Spider, I haven't fielded a single chaos lord.
If they just roll the aura into the datasheet, neither Chaos Lords nor Sorcerers would be missed, since there already are DG variants of them. The only loss would be from a competitive viewpoint, as chaos lords and sorcerers are significantly cheaper than the more powerful and durable DG variants.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:
IMO the following should be a Deathguard option with DG themed options - job done.

On some of those on your list I agree, some would just be nice to have but aren't necessary.
However, quite a few have no place in the Death Guard legion:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Justyn wrote:

There's a massive leap between letting death guard use them (which is what they have now with cultists and chaos lords), because they don't get DR and an obliterator having DR and +1 toughness and mysteriously costing the same because its in the same core codex as everyone else's.

Which is why I didn't mention obliterators.

All Death Guard units should have Disgustingly Resilient, and I bet they'll get it in the new codex. Everything not having it is just a relic of the poor design of early 8th edition codexes.

I disagree. Vehicles should not. Death Guard Astartes infantry sure.

Oddly all the dg players and fans want everything to have the fnp equivalent.

Well why wouldn't they want all of their everything to have damage reduction. I mean I want everything I have to get fnp too. Guard, Mechanicum, you name it.

Are you guys not aware that everything but possessed and cultists already can have DR?

Are you guys not aware that everything but possessed and cultists already can have DR?

Are you not aware that things might not be the same in your new Codex? Because GW has never taken anything away from any army.

Justyn wrote:

Are you guys not aware that everything but possessed and cultists already can have DR?

Are you not aware that things might not be the same in your new Codex? Because GW has never taken anything away from any army.

You forgot the sarcasm and salt emoticons.

My bad!

Justyn wrote:
My bad!

Not to worry, the IW salt brigade is here.

Justyn wrote:

Are you guys not aware that everything but possessed and cultists already can have DR?

Are you not aware that things might not be the same in your new Codex? Because GW has never taken anything away from any army.

I apparently also wasn't aware that you were just here for the negativity and not for discussion. Keep going, don't mind me.

 Jidmah wrote:

Justyn wrote:

Are you guys not aware that everything but possessed and cultists already can have DR?

Are you not aware that things might not be the same in your new Codex? Because GW has never taken anything away from any army.

I apparently also wasn't aware that you were just here for the negativity and not for discussion. Keep going, don't mind me.

I've seen more parades rained on here then in real life, and I live in the pacific northwest