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.

 p5freak wrote:

Krull wrote:

I still don't know if you can use command protocols with SK and different dynasties like novokh.
I know he has the dynastic agent keyword. But you can't ignore his szarekhan keyword either right?

DYNASTIC AGENT units are excluded when it comes to check if every unit from your army has the same keyword. Is his SZAREKHAN keyword still present when the unit is excluded ?

Yeah, the Szarekhan keyword is still present because you'll have a Szarekhan supreme detachment in your army. The Szarekhan keyword on the Silent Kings profile is to do with unlocking the relevant stratagems.

Stratagems are unlocked via your choice of <dynasty> detachment. The keyword is there to stop you from putting the SK in a Novokh supreme command detachment just to unlock blood rites for example. He has to go in a Szarekhan supreme detachment as this is hard baked into his profile.

Because the SK is the only unit in the supreme command detachment, and is also a dynastic agent, he doesn't affect protocols for the rest of the army should I choose a different dynasty.

If I were to somehow put another Szarekhan unit in the supreme command detachment alongside the SK that wasnt a dynastic agent, for example a canoptek spyder, while the rest of my army was in Novokh detachments, then I wouldnt be able to unlock protocols as every unit is no longer counted as being from the same dynasty.

As long as the rest of the army is from the same dynasty the SK actually gives you more flexibility with how/when you use your protocols, rather than stopping you from using them

TheNEWnew wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Krull wrote:

I still don't know if you can use command protocols with SK and different dynasties like novokh.
I know he has the dynastic agent keyword. But you can't ignore his szarekhan keyword either right?

DYNASTIC AGENT units are excluded when it comes to check if every unit from your army has the same keyword. Is his SZAREKHAN keyword still present when the unit is excluded ?

Yeah, the Szarekhan keyword is still present because you'll have a Szarekhan supreme detachment in your army. The Szarekhan keyword on the Silent Kings profile is to do with unlocking the relevant stratagems.

Stratagems are unlocked via your choice of <dynasty> detachment. The keyword is there to stop you from putting the SK in a Novokh supreme command detachment just to unlock blood rites for example. He has to go in a Szarekhan supreme detachment as this is hard baked into his profile.

Because the SK is the only unit in the supreme command detachment, and is also a dynastic agent, he doesn't affect protocols for the rest of the army should I choose a different dynasty.

If I were to somehow put another Szarekhan unit in the supreme command detachment alongside the SK that wasnt a dynastic agent, for example a canoptek spyder, while the rest of my army was in Novokh detachments, then I wouldnt be able to unlock protocols as every unit is no longer counted as being from the same dynasty.

As long as the rest of the army is from the same dynasty the SK actually gives you more flexibility with how/when you use your protocols, rather than stopping you from using them

Ok thanks for the explanation.
The way you explain it is very good and clear.
It isnt always that obvious if english isnt your native language!

Thanks for all the feedback guys. Dropping the nightscythe for a max unit of scarabs. A little too beefy to really be a screen but with a 5++ and great reanimate they can lead the charge.

I’m not sure but the wraiths feel useful just in speed and the invuln. A second unit of scarabs wouldn’t get the 5++ because the scythguard would need it more.

I’ve got spare points now which bothers me. I guess if I have two full units of scarabs I could drop a unit of cryptothralls and throw in a rando spider with gloom prism.

Edit: Don’t have the 5 points for the gloom prism, the scarabs are just going to run away from the spyder. Not very appetizing.

Since the codex dropped I couldn't take my eyes from the void Dragon. No point saying I started a necron force right?

Right now, I am looking into expanding my C'tan collection but both the nightbringer and the deceiver are incredible all models and don't fit current rules.

So 2 Q,
1) any good alternative models for these guys?
2) any experience with the tranacended? With a reasonable price (270) it is growing on me.

Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote:
Since the codex dropped I couldn't take my eyes from the void Dragon. No point saying I started a necron force right?

Right now, I am looking into expanding my C'tan collection but both the nightbringer and the deceiver are incredible all models and don't fit current rules.

So 2 Q,
1) any good alternative models for this guys?
2) any experience with the tranacended? With a reasonable price (270) it is growing on me.

I made my own nightbringer using a spyder kit. So instead of connecting the front part of the body to the rear part, I put the front part on the top of the back, vertically, so he’s upright, with his gun in between (which shoots his mortal wounds output work with me). His legs become choppy looking, he’s pretty tall and definitely intimidating. He’s as tall as the nightbringer but overall bulkier so I’m 100% not modeling for advantage. It’s a gamesworkshop model so it’s allowed in store.

Cauthon wrote:

Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote:
Since the codex dropped I couldn't take my eyes from the void Dragon. No point saying I started a necron force right?

Right now, I am looking into expanding my C'tan collection but both the nightbringer and the deceiver are incredible all models and don't fit current rules.

So 2 Q,
1) any good alternative models for this guys?
2) any experience with the tranacended? With a reasonable price (270) it is growing on me.

I made my own nightbringer using a spyder kit. So instead of connecting the front part of the body to the rear part, I put the front part on the top of the back, vertically, so he’s upright, with his gun in between (which shoots his mortal wounds output work with me). His legs become choppy looking, he’s pretty tall and definitely intimidating. He’s as tall as the nightbringer but overall bulkier so I’m 100% not modeling for advantage. It’s a gamesworkshop model so it’s allowed in store.

I'm curious how it looks.
Care to share a picture?

Well, the models of Nightbringer and Deceiver are not up to date (appearance and metal).
I'd take a Voidbringer as a proxy model for them.

A good alternative model for the nightbringer is this : https://creaturecaster.com/eu/product/death-elemental/

If you prefer GW, Nagash from AoS, or Morghast Archai.

Ok thanks for the explanation.
The way you explain it is very good and clear.
It isnt always that obvious if english isnt your native language!

Dont mention it mate I had to re-read it a couple times just to make sure I had it right anyway. Sometimes I think GW tries to make things appear more complicated then they actually are just to seem clever lol

2) any experience with the tranacended? With a reasonable price (270) it is growing on me.

I was talking to someone the other day who saw a couple lists on tabletop simulator that went wide on the transcended c'tan and they actually put in a lot of work.

There was one list running 3 of them, and another list running 2. For 100pts less you're literally just as durable as the nightbringer, and with the amount of mortals you dish out at that point, you make up for the loss in killyness. A lot of armies just dont have the resources to consistently deal with 3 models that have a 4++ and can only take 3 wounds per phase either.

If memory serves, the list running 3 was a canoptek obsec list with 3x8 scarabs, 3x4 wraiths, 3x transcendent c'tan, 2x5 immortals (1 squad with tesla i think), 2 plasmancers and a chronomancer. I might have missed something out but you get the idea. Between the plasmancers, c'tan and scarabs/tesla strats this list actually deals a significant amount of mortals per turn

I can see running 1 c'tan at 1k points being very potent but at 2k IMO you'd probably need to go wide on them. That said, and i have mentioned this before, i reckon its easier to maximise the efficiency of the transcended c'tan, from a points perspective, than it is to maximise the efficiency for the named shards.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, the models of Nightbringer and Deceiver are not up to date (appearance and metal).
I'd take a Voidbringer as a proxy model for them.

I Wish they were metal, but no, you’re getting them Finecast. I’m planning to convert a C’Tan from that big Slaanesh dude with the demonette on his back.

 AduroT wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, the models of Nightbringer and Deceiver are not up to date (appearance and metal).
I'd take a Voidbringer as a proxy model for them.

I Wish they were metal, but no, you’re getting them Finecast. I’m planning to convert a C’Tan from that big Slaanesh dude with the demonette on his back.

My Nightbringer and Deceiver are metal.
But I'd prefer plastic models.

A good alternative model for the nightbringer is this : https://creaturecaster.com/eu/product/death-elemental/

If you prefer GW, Nagash from AoS, or Morghast Archai.

P5freak: nice alternatives!

 p5freak wrote:
A good alternative model for the nightbringer is this : https://creaturecaster.com/eu/product/death-elemental/

If you prefer GW, Nagash from AoS, or Morghast Archai.

Another GW option is the Nightmare Predator from the Bonereapers Endless Spells kit. That's what I'm using till I can afford the CC model!

CC nightbringer is no doubt an incredible model. However, I was looking into finding something more...cosmic.

Syll'esske is certainly my main candidate right now. I have seen a take or two and looks ace.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheNEWnew wrote:

Ok thanks for the explanation.
The way you explain it is very good and clear.
It isnt always that obvious if english isnt your native language!

Dont mention it mate I had to re-read it a couple times just to make sure I had it right anyway. Sometimes I think GW tries to make things appear more complicated then they actually are just to seem clever lol

2) any experience with the tranacended? With a reasonable price (270) it is growing on me.

I was talking to someone the other day who saw a couple lists on tabletop simulator that went wide on the transcended c'tan and they actually put in a lot of work.

There was one list running 3 of them, and another list running 2. For 100pts less you're literally just as durable as the nightbringer, and with the amount of mortals you dish out at that point, you make up for the loss in killyness. A lot of armies just dont have the resources to consistently deal with 3 models that have a 4++ and can only take 3 wounds per phase either.

If memory serves, the list running 3 was a canoptek obsec list with 3x8 scarabs, 3x4 wraiths, 3x transcendent c'tan, 2x5 immortals (1 squad with tesla i think), 2 plasmancers and a chronomancer. I might have missed something out but you get the idea. Between the plasmancers, c'tan and scarabs/tesla strats this list actually deals a significant amount of mortals per turn

I can see running 1 c'tan at 1k points being very potent but at 2k IMO you'd probably need to go wide on them. That said, and i have mentioned this before, i reckon its easier to maximise the efficiency of the transcended c'tan, from a points perspective, than it is to maximise the efficiency for the named shards.

Reasoning is sound. Going on doubles may be the sweet spot. Although that's a hefty part of the army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So....which would the preferred transcended skill? Number 6 is very tempting, a -2 to being chargedcould.be the difference between killing it in one turn or not.

Also, transhuman could be decent as most weapons that can saturate already have a -1 and all AT will go also to the 4+

Krull wrote:

Cauthon wrote:

Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote:
Since the codex dropped I couldn't take my eyes from the void Dragon. No point saying I started a necron force right?

Right now, I am looking into expanding my C'tan collection but both the nightbringer and the deceiver are incredible all models and don't fit current rules.

So 2 Q,
1) any good alternative models for this guys?
2) any experience with the tranacended? With a reasonable price (270) it is growing on me.

I made my own nightbringer using a spyder kit. So instead of connecting the front part of the body to the rear part, I put the front part on the top of the back, vertically, so he’s upright, with his gun in between (which shoots his mortal wounds output work with me). His legs become choppy looking, he’s pretty tall and definitely intimidating. He’s as tall as the nightbringer but overall bulkier so I’m 100% not modeling for advantage. It’s a gamesworkshop model so it’s allowed in store.

I'm curious how it looks.
Care to share a picture?

^That's a great conversion, definitely suitably creepy and intimidating!

On a somewhat related note, am I the only one who actually prefers the old GW Nightbringer and Deceiver models over the Void Dragon? Don't get me wrong, I think the Void Dragon is cool I'm just not into this trend of making huge models that dominate the table. To each their own but I feel like it throws off the scale of the game for me. I feel like a piece of the god of death doesn't have to be huge to represent how killy it is, its power doesn't come from brute strength or size. Not to rant or put down people who like it, I would still run the Void Dragon myself if the model weren't over $100, I just think it didn't have to be so massive.

Thank you! Sorry about the lousy pics.

GW has been enjoying a lot of success with all the large centerpiece models in AOS and have started running with it in 40k now too.

They like to charge extra for models “when you’re only going to be buying one“ so I’d be happy you’re at least getting a lot of model to go with the price tag.

They have been systematically getting rid of all the failcast and I was surprised the old c’tan made the new codex.

With the lumineth elves getting a random second wave and the sisters getting a random new model I would no longer be shocked if the c’tan get redone in the not super distant future. Unfortunately looks like there will be a necessary supplement to go along with them.

They probably don’t mind you getting a few paychecks in between 100$+ single model purchases.

 TheArchmagos wrote:
^That's a great conversion, definitely suitably creepy and intimidating!

On a somewhat related note, am I the only one who actually prefers the old GW Nightbringer and Deceiver models over the Void Dragon? Don't get me wrong, I think the Void Dragon is cool I'm just not into this trend of making huge models that dominate the table. To each their own but I feel like it throws off the scale of the game for me. I feel like a piece of the god of death doesn't have to be huge to represent how killy it is, its power doesn't come from brute strength or size. Not to rant or put down people who like it, I would still run the Void Dragon myself if the model weren't over $100, I just think it didn't have to be so massive.

Sorry but you are insane. Nobody gets to say anything bad about Voidy. It isn't that big either - it just happens to be floating. Necrons did feel like they got too any centre piece units tbf.

Could anyone who has been keeping up with the new Death Guard Codex give me a few pointers on what I should be aiming for to bolster my Necron Legions against them?

Many Thanks.

Pahil wrote:
Could anyone who has been keeping up with the new Death Guard Codex give me a few pointers on what I should be aiming for to bolster my Necron Legions against them?

Many Thanks.

Same thing for what you'll want against DA. Lots of D1 weapons and liberal use of autowounding with Gauss Reapers / Scarabs.

 TheArchmagos wrote:
...I would still run the Void Dragon myself if the model weren't over $100...

Ah, if only it were closer to $100, instead of the 4180 we are charged :( Yeah, not happening with me, either, despite the good mini.

And $250 for the Silent King? Nope.

@Pahil, Volume of 1-damage, 1-ap shots will probably be the go-to way to deal with most competitive Death Guard. Dealing with Mortarion is a drastically different can of worms that most armies outside of Sororitas and maybe the new Dark Angels, will struggle to answer.

Pft. Eighteen Eradicators should take care of him just fine. ‘Course that doesn’t really help Necrons...

 AduroT wrote:
Pft. Eighteen Eradicators should take care of him just fine. ‘Course that doesn’t really help Necrons...

You mean Mortarion.

SM get more and more shiny toys other armies are jealous of.
I don't play SM anymore, simply because of this. Too boring to play and tin cans are too boring to paint.
E.g. Necrons are more challenging.

Faced off against morty this weekend with a 2 Monolith and SK list.
Rest of the army was 19 warriors
9 Lych
a techno
and a crono
2 heavy destroyers

Out of interest to see how he performs I opted no to shoot him turn 1 and instead killed a PBC and a bloat drone and like 7 possesed marines and 2 spawn.

Morty was able to make an 11 inch charge and kill a monolith essentially automatically. The next turn I was able to deal 10 wounds to him with essentially all the shooting in my army...charged with second monolith and got him to 4 wounds. You'd think hed be limping at this point but he doesn't degrade in any meaningful way. He still 1 shots monoliths even at his final tier...which is really just -2 attacks and -4 movement. Why he doesn't lose WS as he degrades is baffling.

Anyways I was able to pull off the win because SK dominated his side of the table and lych and warriors rolled like bosses on reanimations. So in a world where morty exists I'd probably run nothing but infantry. Remove all flat 2 damage from your army - if it doesn't do 1 or 3_+ damage it is useless.

Apart from morty the disgustingly resilient on everything is just plane too good vs flat 2 damage weapons...it is easy to avoid though which is dumb...an army that makes flat 2 damage useless just means no one will take them. SK does a lot of flat 2...He probably needs a point drop now - esp comparing how he degrades to campared to morty...

 Xenomancers wrote:
Faced off against morty this weekend with a 2 Monolith and SK list.
Rest of the army was 19 warriors
9 Lych
a techno
and a crono
2 heavy destroyers

Out of interest to see how he performs I opted no to shoot him turn 1 and instead killed a PBC and a bloat drone and like 7 possesed marines and 2 spawn.

Morty was able to make an 11 inch charge and kill a monolith essentially automatically. The next turn I was able to deal 10 wounds to him with essentially all the shooting in my army...charged with second monolith and got him to 4 wounds. You'd think hed be limping at this point but he doesn't degrade in any meaningful way. He still 1 shots monoliths even at his final tier...which is really just -2 attacks and -4 movement. Why he doesn't lose WS as he degrades is baffling.

Anyways I was able to pull off the win because SK dominated his side of the table and lych and warriors rolled like bosses on reanimations. So in a world where morty exists I'd probably run nothing but infantry. Remove all flat 2 damage from your army - if it doesn't do 1 or 3_+ damage it is useless.

Apart from morty the disgustingly resilient on everything is just plane too good vs flat 2 damage weapons...it is easy to avoid though which is dumb...an army that makes flat 2 damage useless just means no one will take them. SK does a lot of flat 2...He probably needs a point drop now - esp comparing how he degrades to campared to morty...

In this kind of world, its better to play on the objectives and leave everything else aside.

Mortarian's new datasheet makes the C'tan look even more overpriced

IMO the c'tan aren't that bad points wise. For the same price as Morty you can field the nightbringer and 32 wounds of scarabs. 41 wounds of anything for 490pts is decent.

I get where you're coming from though, the named c'tan shards are costed just high enough to make you really want to build around them, even though they dont give force multipliers/massive area debuffs in the same way morty does.

Where I would love to see a points drop is in immortals and destroyers right across the board. 19pts for Tesla is steep whichever way you look at it, and why would you pay 35pts for ophydians when skorphekhs cost the same lol? I know the roles are pretty different but still, durability is key in 9th and skorphekhs take the cake in that regard every time.

What are people's thoughts on the value of owning 60 Warriors?

We've got 40 w/Reapers, but since I wanted more Scarabs anyway and Indomitus Warrior sprues are soooo cheap, I am thinking of getting 20 more. This would also net us 6 more Scarabs, taking us to 18 total.

Will I ever use 60 Warriors in a single 2000pt list, or 18 Scarabs? If I do get 'em should I build them with the old Gauss just to future-proof our collection some?

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
What are people's thoughts on the value of owning 60 Warriors?

We've got 40 w/Reapers, but since I wanted more Scarabs anyway and Indomitus Warrior sprues are soooo cheap, I am thinking of getting 20 more. This would also net us 6 more Scarabs, taking us to 18 total.

Will I ever use 60 Warriors in a single 2000pt list, or 18 Scarabs? If I do get 'em should I build them with the old Gauss just to future-proof our collection some?

Well, I think an army with 60 Warriors (3x20 Warriors w/ reapers in my book) form a decent core of a Necron army and will be hard to shift.
I plan to use a SK leading this kind of army but the model has not yet arrived due to Brexit.

While I already owned 48 warriors, I just started building them after the release of Indomitus. It certainly is now possible and viable to field 60 warriors in one army. Whether you are actually going to do it is up to you
On the weapon loadouts: Very hard to say. I think it is smart to not put all your eggs in one basket and build the last 20 with flayers. I went about the same with my immortals last edition and am very happy about it now.... And while the reapers are probably the better gun at the moment, it is not like the flayers are unusable, especially if you already have 40 guys with reapers.

18 scarabs is two full units. I would argue it is about the most you would reasonably field, but still not excessive.

I also find myself debating whether it would be unreasonable to get more reanimators and destroyer.