Switch Theme:

New Unit Changes in 9th Edition Boxes  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




Rihgu wrote:
Necron quantum shielding? It's an edge case use but it is a technical use...


I mean, if you fired a multimelta at a quantum shielded target inside of half range, something went wrong I think?
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






Voss wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
There's been 2 different multi meltas for about year and the way overheats work vary wildly between armies as well


You've mentioned this (or something like this) a couple of times now - where are they, and what are the differences?

In more recent books, melta weapons let you discard a die of your choice rather than the lowest roll. (SM definitely has the choice, not sure how far back it goes- DG have 'lowest', anyone who cares might check Chaos 2.0)

Plasma weapons effect on rolling 1 varies between 'destroyed,' 'slain,' '1 MW' and '1 MW for each roll of 1' depending on the book and weapon. There may be other variations out there, but those are present in GSC and SM ('destroyed' is current, 'slain' is the old version).*

This is in contrast to the Demolisher Cannon, which was updated in every current FAQ (that can have one in the army) to have the same profile.

So there is precedent to update a weapon if they feel like it, or ignore the differences completely.

----
*Its worth noting that the 9th edition rules exclusively use the term 'destroyed.' Slain technically no longer has any game meaning that I can find..

----
It may be worthwhile to check the 'app' to see if codexes with the older versions have been updated, but I doubt it.
The intent of the Melta rules and Plasmas slain/destroyed was arguably the same, so Imo no difference there.

The difference of intent in slain/destroyed vs. MW is clear too, but in the cases I know, they are explicity differently named weapons.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull






So this is from the 'recruitment' article that went up today (though the same pics are in the starter set article). I was looking over the pic and the Necron Warrior datasheet (behind the space marine icons) looked a little strange. Comparing it to the Edge of Silence datasheet from Indomitus, the layout is reversed (the picture and description are on the right side in EoS) but notably, its special rules are gone. Stripped out between weapon options and Keywords. Just like the datasheets we've seen for the Invader, Firestrike, Doomstalker and Lokhust.

So rather than a draft for edge of silence, it looks like these 4 mystery datasheets were intended for a simplified box set, maybe even the starter set (before contents were finalized).

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/08/05 23:39:00


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






^Ahh, good catch. That makes sense, the datasheets in Indomitus reference the codexes with things like Ressurection Protocalls, etc. This being a starter set, and not having the codexes, it makes some sense that they'd strip that stuff out.

Not elegant though. They could have provided those referenced rules in the starter.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Not elegant though. They could have provided those referenced rules in the starter.
They could have provided the full Codex entries for the units in Indomitus as well so we weren't left guessing for months whether Outriders can have more than 3 models or Assault Intercessor Sergeants can take anything extra beyond plasma pistols, but GW is paranoid about anything getting out, so instead we got cut-down entries.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Not elegant though. They could have provided those referenced rules in the starter.
They could have provided the full Codex entries for the units in Indomitus as well so we weren't left guessing for months whether Outriders can have more than 3 models or Assault Intercessor Sergeants can take anything extra beyond plasma pistols, but GW is paranoid about anything getting out, so instead we got cut-down entries.
True that.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Insectum7 wrote:
True that.
And, if I had to guess, I'd say that because these are actual starter boxes (unlike Indomitus), and they don't want datasheets referring to a Codex that will be invalidated a month or two later, they're just cutting out all references to the current Marine/Necron Codices as Emperor Forbid they print the new/updated Reanimation Protocols or ATSKNF rules before the new Codex comes out...



This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 11:05:52


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
True that.
And, if I had to guess, I'd say that because these are actual starter boxes (inlike Indomitus), and they don't want datasheets referring to a Codex that will be invalidated a month or two later, they're just cutting out all references to the current Marine/Necron Codices as Emperor Forbid they print the new/updated Reanimation Protocols or ATSKNF rules before the new Codex comes out...


Doubtful perhaps - but its possible these were sent to print before the Codex was finalised.
Guess it depends on which takes longer to produce.
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.
   
Made in us
Deranged Necron Destroyer




 Insectum7 wrote:
^Ahh, good catch. That makes sense, the datasheets in Indomitus reference the codexes with things like Ressurection Protocalls, etc. This being a starter set, and not having the codexes, it makes some sense that they'd strip that stuff out.

Not elegant though. They could have provided those referenced rules in the starter.


Or they're in another box set that is still to be announced, like a reinforcements box set designed to buff up the forces in the main box?
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Spoletta wrote:
Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.


I thought this too - but I think history shows GW generally doesn't like taking away rules.

They could however change it so for instance bolter discipline only applies in the tactical doctrine, the extra attack only occurs in the Assault Doctrine.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Spoletta wrote:
Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.


I highly doubt this. Especially for bolters. It'd also turn assault bolters into the king of bolters.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

It would also most likely mean the loss of Malefic Volleys and Hateful Assault, which would make csm even worse, so I hope this theory is wrong.
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
It would also most likely mean the loss of Malefic Volleys and Hateful Assault, which would make csm even worse, so I hope this theory is wrong.


I'm saying that those rules are removed with the new codex, not with a FAQ.
Sure, it would mean that those are also going from CSM in the next codex, but every new codex is a partial redesign. You can't assume that CSM would come out worse.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Tyel wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.


I thought this too - but I think history shows GW generally doesn't like taking away rules.

They could however change it so for instance bolter discipline only applies in the tactical doctrine, the extra attack only occurs in the Assault Doctrine.


I dare you to say that to a Dark Eldar player.

GW takes rules away all the time. I forget if it was the 2nd -> 3rd or the 3rd -> 4th transition, but I remember when Assault Marines went from having the weapon options of the current Vanguard Veterans (...minus Storm Shields I think) to just Chainswords and a Melta Gun/Plasma Gun/Flamer or two. I couldn't tell you when TAC Marines and Devastators lost Autocannons. Librarians used to come at four different levels of increasing power and we only just got one of them back. No more Vortex Grenades, and a lot of other universal wargear. That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are a lot of other things I'm forgetting and that's not even mentioning all the things that went to Legends since Primaris came out.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Annandale, VA

Spoletta wrote:
Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.


TBH if I were designing doctrines, I'd probably have mechanics like Bolter Discipline and Shock Assault be what doctrines do in the first place. Have Devastator let your infantry move and shoot Heavy without penalty, Tactical let you rapid fire to full range while stationary, and then Assault give you an extra attack when you charge. Seems more thematic than blanket AP bonuses.

But this is GW, so I don't expect Bolter Discipline, Shock Assault, and Doctrines are going anywhere. GW has only just 'fixed' Marines; I can't imagine they're keen to reduce their power again by stripping out any of those bespoke army-wide rules they've created.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 14:17:59


   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Biloxi, MS USA

The Newman wrote:
Tyel wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.


I thought this too - but I think history shows GW generally doesn't like taking away rules.

They could however change it so for instance bolter discipline only applies in the tactical doctrine, the extra attack only occurs in the Assault Doctrine.


I dare you to say that to a Dark Eldar player.

GW takes rules away all the time. I forget if it was the 2nd -> 3rd or the 3rd -> 4th transition, but I remember when Assault Marines went from having the weapon options of the current Vanguard Veterans (...minus Storm Shields I think) to just Chainswords and a Melta Gun/Plasma Gun/Flamer or two. I couldn't tell you when TAC Marines and Devastators lost Autocannons. Librarians used to come at four different levels of increasing power and we only just got one of them back. No more Vortex Grenades, and a lot of other universal wargear. That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are a lot of other things I'm forgetting and that's not even mentioning all the things that went to Legends since Primaris came out.


Everything you're describing is from 2nd Ed over 20 years ago, which was a radically different game from 3rd and later editions. The entire point of removing those options was to streamline the game.

You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie
The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Spoletta wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
It would also most likely mean the loss of Malefic Volleys and Hateful Assault, which would make csm even worse, so I hope this theory is wrong.


I'm saying that those rules are removed with the new codex, not with a FAQ.
Sure, it would mean that those are also going from CSM in the next codex, but every new codex is a partial redesign. You can't assume that CSM would come out worse.

Considering the "redesigns" of the last three csm codexes you'll understand if I'm not optimistic.
   
Made in us
Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





 Platuan4th wrote:
The Newman wrote:
Tyel wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.


I thought this too - but I think history shows GW generally doesn't like taking away rules.

They could however change it so for instance bolter discipline only applies in the tactical doctrine, the extra attack only occurs in the Assault Doctrine.


I dare you to say that to a Dark Eldar player.

GW takes rules away all the time. I forget if it was the 2nd -> 3rd or the 3rd -> 4th transition, but I remember when Assault Marines went from having the weapon options of the current Vanguard Veterans (...minus Storm Shields I think) to just Chainswords and a Melta Gun/Plasma Gun/Flamer or two. I couldn't tell you when TAC Marines and Devastators lost Autocannons. Librarians used to come at four different levels of increasing power and we only just got one of them back. No more Vortex Grenades, and a lot of other universal wargear. That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are a lot of other things I'm forgetting and that's not even mentioning all the things that went to Legends since Primaris came out.


Everything you're describing is from 2nd Ed over 20 years ago, which was a radically different game from 3rd and later editions. The entire point of removing those options was to streamline the game.
I mean you could just use CSM as an example. Where Marks went from actual stats to just stratagem markers.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




The Newman wrote:
I dare you to say that to a Dark Eldar player.


I'll tell myself? GW wiping whole units is a bit different from rules.
I.E. "uh uh, Hellion stun claw is a bit odd... just make it do a mortal wound on 6s. Because it used to do something more but we don't want to kill it completely.")

Even if you don't like the ghost of the rule that lingers - it does.

Case in point would obviously be marks mentioned above. Its a fundamentally stupid system in 8th - it would actually be buff in terms of flexibility to just remove them entirely.
But GW can't bring themselves to let go. "Marks of Chaos" are a feature of 40k. So they have to keep on existing, even if they don't do anything useful.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Spoletta wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
It would also most likely mean the loss of Malefic Volleys and Hateful Assault, which would make csm even worse, so I hope this theory is wrong.


I'm saying that those rules are removed with the new codex, not with a FAQ.
Sure, it would mean that those are also going from CSM in the next codex, but every new codex is a partial redesign. You can't assume that CSM would come out worse.


It'd be pretty painful for old marines, too. It props them up a good bit.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Tyel wrote:
The Newman wrote:
I dare you to say that to a Dark Eldar player.


I'll tell myself? GW wiping whole units is a bit different from rules.
I.E. "uh uh, Hellion stun claw is a bit odd... just make it do a mortal wound on 6s. Because it used to do something more but we don't want to kill it completely.")

Even if you don't like the ghost of the rule that lingers - it does.

Case in point would obviously be marks mentioned above. Its a fundamentally stupid system in 8th - it would actually be buff in terms of flexibility to just remove them entirely.
But GW can't bring themselves to let go. "Marks of Chaos" are a feature of 40k. So they have to keep on existing, even if they don't do anything useful.


GK lost a ton of rules when they got their new books. I saw what the old GK codex can do, like kill stuff on an Ld test or get blanket +1str to all weapons, including tanks just by paying points and without stratagems. NDKs could jump around as if they had jump packs etc.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in ie
Battleship Captain





Saying GW doesn't like to get rid of rules is just objectively wrong. The necron and GK codexes basically had all the flavour ripped out if them since the Ward books got replaced and they removed anything remotly interesting about them and tyranids haven't had anything to make them interesting since 5th.


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Sim-Life wrote:
Saying GW doesn't like to get rid of rules is just objectively wrong. The necron and GK codexes basically had all the flavour ripped out if them since the Ward books got replaced and they removed anything remotly interesting about them and tyranids haven't had anything to make them interesting since 5th.


The necron book in 8th got phoned in hard. I hope the new one is more interesting instead of C'tan power being a thing that does mortal wounds, another thing that does mortal wounds, an additional thing that does mortal wounds, etc.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Sim-Life wrote:
Saying GW doesn't like to get rid of rules is just objectively wrong. The necron and GK codexes basically had all the flavour ripped out if them since the Ward books got replaced and they removed anything remotly interesting about them and tyranids haven't had anything to make them interesting since 5th.

Or when csm went from the 3.5 codex to 4th? 4th to 6th, 6th to 8th? Remember when Chosen could infiltrate? When marks actually did something? Csm players remember.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 16:50:13


 
   
Made in us
Pious Palatine




 Platuan4th wrote:
The Newman wrote:
Tyel wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
Crazy thought.
I'm starting to see it as a possibility that Shock assault and Bolter discipline are going away in the new codex.

They were bandaid rules to help the marines in a moment of desperate need, but now that the melee version of the primaris has 3 attacks base, and the bikes have been given a better shock assault, I could actually see that rules going away. Same for bolter discipline, it was made to make bolters scarier, but now there are doctrines for that. There is no longer a reason for a rule that tries to limit the mobility of a force which should be highly mobile.

The datasheets of indomitus only report "Angels of Death" as a rule, because right now those 2 rules are embedded inside that. Making them disappear would be easy and would make sense in many cases.

Just wishful thinking, I know, but the chances aren't zero.


I thought this too - but I think history shows GW generally doesn't like taking away rules.

They could however change it so for instance bolter discipline only applies in the tactical doctrine, the extra attack only occurs in the Assault Doctrine.


I dare you to say that to a Dark Eldar player.

GW takes rules away all the time. I forget if it was the 2nd -> 3rd or the 3rd -> 4th transition, but I remember when Assault Marines went from having the weapon options of the current Vanguard Veterans (...minus Storm Shields I think) to just Chainswords and a Melta Gun/Plasma Gun/Flamer or two. I couldn't tell you when TAC Marines and Devastators lost Autocannons. Librarians used to come at four different levels of increasing power and we only just got one of them back. No more Vortex Grenades, and a lot of other universal wargear. That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are a lot of other things I'm forgetting and that's not even mentioning all the things that went to Legends since Primaris came out.


Everything you're describing is from 2nd Ed over 20 years ago, which was a radically different game from 3rd and later editions. The entire point of removing those options was to streamline the game.


How about power of the machine spirit just straight up not existing anymore, rather than being updated to be consistent with the new edition?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote:
The Newman wrote:
I dare you to say that to a Dark Eldar player.


I'll tell myself? GW wiping whole units is a bit different from rules.
I.E. "uh uh, Hellion stun claw is a bit odd... just make it do a mortal wound on 6s. Because it used to do something more but we don't want to kill it completely.")

Even if you don't like the ghost of the rule that lingers - it does.

Case in point would obviously be marks mentioned above. Its a fundamentally stupid system in 8th - it would actually be buff in terms of flexibility to just remove them entirely.
But GW can't bring themselves to let go. "Marks of Chaos" are a feature of 40k. So they have to keep on existing, even if they don't do anything useful.


Power of the machine spirit.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 17:05:46



 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

LMAO. Entire armies and units were deleted on 9th Edition's release.

Removing rules is not unbelievable at all.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
LMAO. Entire armies and units were deleted on 9th Edition's release.

Removing rules is not unbelievable at all.

Aye, Renegades and Heretics, Elysium Drop Troops, and the Kharybdis Assault Claw R.I.P..
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
LMAO. Entire armies and units were deleted on 9th Edition's release.

Removing rules is not unbelievable at all.

Aye, Renegades and Heretics, Elysium Drop Troops, and the Kharybdis Assault Claw R.I.P..

And the Stormhammer superheavy tank.

FFFFFFFFFF
FF
FFFFFFF
FF
FF
FF
   
Made in ca
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
LMAO. Entire armies and units were deleted on 9th Edition's release.

Removing rules is not unbelievable at all.

Aye, Renegades and Heretics, Elysium Drop Troops, and the Kharybdis Assault Claw R.I.P..


at this point i'll just start bringing stuff that my night lords SHOULD have access to. Screw GW's rules, i'll bring land speeders to my friendly games even if theyre not in the codex. I'll also start playing my Dreadclaw so that it can arrive turn 1 like the loyalists.

   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: