Forgeworld Book

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.

**Grimtuff**

From what I'm hearing DG can only take the Greater Blight Drone and TS get nothing. Seems whomever wrote the book forgot (again) DG and TS cannot be taken as <LEGION> keyword by default and it will need to be errataed, just like last time.

GW's rule incompetence strikes again!

**Gadzilla666**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Anybody get a good look at the Chaos Land Raider Achilles? It looks to me like the Soulburner Bombard has gone back to being a quad launcher and did I see twin volkite as an option? Do they still have twin multi-meltas? Anything on the points?

Also, am I crazy, or are the Chaos Falchion and Fellblade both 600 PPM? And I don't see a havoc launcher in the options, but I do think I see a multi-melta. Anyone squinting at something bigger than a phone? Daed?

Yea no bombard and yes to twin volkite. Volkites can become twin MM. 320 base - no spike tax. No havoc - it is now a hellforged hunter killer missile oddly enough.

Thanks Daed, that's what I thought I was seeing. It seems that chaos and loyalist vehicles have the same weapons now, thus the loss of the havoc launcher in favor of the hk missile. Looks like it's 4++ went to a 5++ as well, and I think I'm seeing 16W instead of 19, good, that means it can benefit from terrain.

**Catulle**

Denegaar wrote:
VladimirHerzog wrote:
Roknar wrote:
So no model, no rule now means we lost all our chaos tech because FW happens to only make loyalist versions?

what did chaos lose exactly?

It looks like 1000kSons and DG lost access to all the FW stuff, except the DG special model. It looks like a keyword misstep, but right now we have to wait for the day 1 FAQ.

One MILLION Sons!

**Umbros**

My personal theory is that the new DG and TS books will give them the Legion <> keywords, so this is actually future proofed but not present-proofed. If that even makes sense

**Sherrypie**

Right, I'm rather pissed now looking at how the loyalist and traitor equivalent models get treated.

For the same price, the loyalist ones get better synergies, traits that actually work (no Helbrute keywords for the chaos dreads, one can only hope the whole helbrute name gets deleted in favor of them returning to just being chaos dreadnoughts), Angels of Death rules (whereas the chaos dreads DON'T seem to have Hateful Assault NOR Death to the False Emperor)... the traitors also lost healing abilities, special guns like soulburners and are rife with lack of quality control, FFS the writers try to actually say that the Fellblade has a transport capacity of 25 when it is a premier battle tank. And before we even get to the DG and TS exclusion...

Boy, this thing is going to require some day 0 erratas as well as some serious redesign of DG, TS and CSM codicies to work.

**Roknar**

Sherrypie wrote:
Right, I'm rather pissed now looking at how the loyalist and traitor equivalent models get treated.

For the same price, the loyalist ones get better synergies, traits that actually work (no Helbrute keywords for the chaos dreads, one can only hope the whole helbrute name gets deleted in favor of them returning to just being chaos dreadnoughts), Angels of Death rules (whereas the chaos dreads DON'T seem to have Hateful Assault NOR Death to the False Emperor)... the traitors also lost healing abilities, special guns like soulburners and are rife with lack of quality control, FFS the writers try to actually say that the Fellblade has a transport capacity of 25 when it is a premier battle tank. And before we even get to the DG and TS exclusion...

Boy, this thing is going to require some day 0 erratas as well as some serious redesign of DG, TS and CSM codicies to work.

Right the more I see about this, the more it looks like they did a really lazy copy paste job of the loyalists versions without putting any thought into the rules...
And even that they screwed up as we lost the laser vindicator which was faqed to be available for chaos too.
Very disappointing.

**Orodhen**

Vilehydra wrote:
Hmmm - The only FW I used was Bray'arth Ashmantle and boy did he get changed

- He dropped ~ 100 points (220)
- He went from T9 to T7 (boo)
- He no longer has the restriction barring him from taking a WLT unless he's the only character (meaning he can be made T9 again)
- His FNP went from 4+++ to 5+++
- He has the same inbuilt damage resistance as all other Dreadnoughts
- Dreadfire heavyflamers went from 3D to 2D, but the range is up to 12" as per the new standard
- His attacks went up by 2 and damage changed to flat 4 making him an absolute beast in CC - (7 attacks first round of combat)
- Burning wrath is still completely useless because his dreadfire heavyflamers are still usable when locked and BW are pistols.

I'd run him I think, still an absolute anchor unit despite losing the innate T9 and 4+++. The inbuilt duty eternal, FNP, invuln, 2++, and ability to make T9 as a Salamander WLT still make it a tough cookie. With the point drop and the CC increase it feels potentially worth it to just own the midfield with him.
I've had a kitbash I was ready to put together but I was holding off before I saw the rules.

I'm pretty sure all SM named characters in this book are required to take the Inspiring Leader trait, so no more T9 sadly.

**yukishiro1**

GW gee-dubbed it up again with the Chaos stuff, once again locking TS and DG out of all FW models (except the DG special one). So embarrassing for them to screw it up again...or, it would be, if they cared.

**chimeara**

I'm both happy and sad. Happy that, Kytan, Decimators and blood Slaughterers got some love. Sad that all my Dreadnoughts are ded. I have been working on my IW for next season ITC. It includes a contemptor and 2 deredo. Deredo got hit pretty hard, losing the no los missiles and butcher cannon arrays, plus the CP requirements means I need to find something else for heavy support to assist the oblits.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Plus the 3 contemptors I use as fire support for my WE.

**Argive**

Saber wrote:
Eldar are underwhelming. I'll comment on the models I've played with.

Shadow Spectres lost the auto-hit setting of their gun in exchange for a blast setting. The concentrated setting lost the ability to get extra hits but became damage 3. They gained a "deep strike" option. Everything else looks the same, or near enough. 26 points per. Probably a sidegrade.

Warp Hunters basically swapped out their blast profile for a D-cannon, which is worse but not drastically so. Looks like 195 for points.

Hornets are now -1 to hit all the time; no need to advance. 80 points each.

Wraithseer is now Heavy Support, and is no longer a character. That's a big loss. It seems to have lost its invulnerable save in exchange for reducing AP -1 to AP 0 on incoming attacks. It also lost its bespoke psychic powers for Smite and 1 Runes of Battle power, which is definitely an upgrade (though I wish they had fixed the bespoke powers to be useful, just because that's cool). Points are 130, 170 with a D-cannon (yikes!). It's hard to tell if the profile has changed, but absent something like more wounds or a 2+ save the Wraithseer looks a lot worse. Though it can use Runes of Fortune now...

vaklor4 wrote:
How many units do ya think ya gotta own for this book to be "worth it" in paperback? I'm mulling over biting the bullet, but with me only owning 7 FW models, I am /hard pressed/ not to just pirate it and print off the 7 datasheets and points listings.

It's an expensive book with nothing interesting in it other than rules, and even the rules aren't much. If it was like the old index and I could buy an electronic version for $25 or whatever I'd definitely do that. However, I have very little interest in lugging around a huge, $65 book for the three-pages worth of rules I actually use in my games.

The wraithseer stull has a 5++.
Taking ynnari relics on wraithseers was just too OP I guess..(looks back at the ridiculous year we had) XD

I think the specters + irylith look much more interesting than dark reapers.

**Vilehydra**

Orodhen wrote:
Vilehydra wrote:
Hmmm - The only FW I used was Bray'arth Ashmantle and boy did he get changed

- He dropped ~ 100 points (220)
- He went from T9 to T7 (boo)
- He no longer has the restriction barring him from taking a WLT unless he's the only character (meaning he can be made T9 again)
- His FNP went from 4+++ to 5+++
- He has the same inbuilt damage resistance as all other Dreadnoughts
- Dreadfire heavyflamers went from 3D to 2D, but the range is up to 12" as per the new standard
- His attacks went up by 2 and damage changed to flat 4 making him an absolute beast in CC - (7 attacks first round of combat)
- Burning wrath is still completely useless because his dreadfire heavyflamers are still usable when locked and BW are pistols.

I'd run him I think, still an absolute anchor unit despite losing the innate T9 and 4+++. The inbuilt duty eternal, FNP, invuln, 2++, and ability to make T9 as a Salamander WLT still make it a tough cookie. With the point drop and the CC increase it feels potentially worth it to just own the midfield with him.
I've had a kitbash I was ready to put together but I was holding off before I saw the rules.

I'm pretty sure all SM named characters in this book are required to take the Inspiring Leader trait, so no more T9 sadly.

Hmm, where did you find that? Would be sad if true. I was still going by old 8E restrictions that <Chapter> characters had to have a chapter WLT but I could be wrong in that assumption

**SturmOgre**

Unusual Suspect wrote:
Poor T'au.

Maybe 10th edition will be kinder.

On the bright side, it seems like railguns will generally be more useful if those changes are ported to the codex.

**Ice_can**

SturmOgre wrote:
Unusual Suspect wrote:
Poor T'au.

Maybe 10th edition will be kinder.

On the bright side, it seems like railguns will generally be more useful if those changes are ported to the codex.

I don't think they have changed, your maybe missing that the aircraft have a different named weapon and most of the models tend to have 2 railguns, not the 1 that the hammer head has.

**Agamemnon2**

p5freak wrote:
The cyclops demolition vehicle now gives away 2 VP to your opponent when its destroyed after shooting, when he picked bring it down as a secondary.

Fantastic. That was already a flaw in the unit back in ... ugh, I think it was 5th edition, when did Kill Points first appear? The Cyclops has never been worth fielding in all of its long history (I think it was introduced back in 3rd or 4th edition, it's a very venerable sculpt by FW standards).

**Unusual Suspect**

Ice_can wrote:
SturmOgre wrote:
Unusual Suspect wrote:
Poor T'au.

Maybe 10th edition will be kinder.

On the bright side, it seems like railguns will generally be more useful if those changes are ported to the codex.

I don't think they have changed, your maybe missing that the aircraft have a different named weapon and most of the models tend to have 2 railguns, not the 1 that the hammer head has.

It feels more likely to me than not, based purely on gut feeling, that at least some of the basic profile changes from the Forgeworld book herald changes being made in the codex.

The specific number of shots not so much, but the damage (3+d3D instead of 1d6D) and mortal wound mechanic (MW if you wound, instead of MW on 6+) for Railguns seem like they're indicative of what 9th edition Codex T'au Empire railguns are going to be. I don't expect 3+d3D Rail Rifles (though I do think they'll get better), but I do expect that Mortal Wound on wound mechanic to port over.

It's a decent consistency boost for Rail weapons, if so. A roughly 60% increase in expected damage for broadsides/hammerheads, with far less variance, and more consistent Mortal Wound generation to boot. Enough to be worth the effort and the chassis? Hmm.

Rail Rifles will, I expect, remain mostly academic, except perhaps as a suicide unit - Pathfinders are simply too squishy to exist past a round of shooting, and putting expensive special weapons in them only makes them a tastier target.

**Ice_can**

Ah, maybe we just need to be clearer as to what we are discussing as my eyesight is struggling to read the fuzzy out of focus text on youtube videos.

The damage changes are certainly a boost, however the aircraft going to hitting on 4+'s is also something that might happen to the hammerhead too.

Also while more consistent damage is better still being stuck with 1 shot makes it feel way to swingy.

Sadly I've been unimpressed with everything but remora's so far while they have finally got a points drop almost all of the Tau stuff also took nerf's aswell which doesn't help them relative to the field.

Also I haven't seen any hint of core, I'm really worried that Tau will get the Necron core treatment and not get the boost they desperately need.

**cody.d.**

For what it's worth the FW book is fairly good for orks. I feel in regards to rules they may have come out as the winners. Pretty much every unit is either, okay or pretty good. With the biker bosses being pretty awesome with the buffs you can stack on it.

**Saber**

Argive wrote:

The wraithseer stull has a 5++.
Taking ynnari relics on wraithseers was just too OP I guess..(looks back at the ridiculous year we had) XD

I think the specters + irylith look much more interesting than dark reapers.

It also seems that the Wraithseer has 9 wounds; am I reading that correctly? If so, that almost certainly heralds a profile change for Wraithlords as well.

I can understand wanting to deny Wraithseers access to Relics and Warlord Traits, but it's unfortunate that they're now Heavy Support. I liked it as an HQ, and Eldar have too many Heavy Support to choose from as it is.

Shadow Spectres look good, but I don't think they're notably better than their previous rules. Although with the 9th edition change to overwatch the dispersed mode of their gun had lost some its luster, so maybe they're a little better with the new rules?

The more I think about, the more annoyed I am about the Warp Hunter. 24" is just such a limiting range.

**Argive**

Saber wrote:
Argive wrote:

The wraithseer stull has a 5++.
Taking ynnari relics on wraithseers was just too OP I guess..(looks back at the ridiculous year we had) XD

I think the specters + irylith look much more interesting than dark reapers.

It also seems that the Wraithseer has 9 wounds; am I reading that correctly? If so, that almost certainly heralds a profile change for Wraithlords as well.

I can understand wanting to deny Wraithseers access to Relics and Warlord Traits, but it's unfortunate that they're now Heavy Support. I liked it as an HQ, and Eldar have too many Heavy Support to choose from as it is.

Shadow Spectres look good, but I don't think they're notably better than their previous rules. Although with the 9th edition change to overwatch the dispersed mode of their gun had lost some its luster, so maybe they're a little better with the new rules?

The more I think about, the more annoyed I am about the Warp Hunter. 24" is just such a limiting range.

They used to be 13 Wounds I think. Now though his profile doesn't degrade so... Swings and rounabouts I guess.
I like the change to D-weapons. 3+D3 Damage is pretty nifty I hope they FAQ that to the CWE book for platforms. Having acess to Smite and PA spells plus runes of battle is inetersing also. Extra deny etc not bad.
Not sure about the cost though.. Its a lot of point ask for monster in the the world of new melta..

The specters are a really interesting one IMO. With a 24" -3 flat 3 Dmg assult profile thats some potential. They are fast.
They seem really glass cannony with high damage output and no defence (T3 1W 3+...

). With their big movement and fire+fade plus use of terrain i think they could really do some work especially if supported by irylith who is a shooty+CC beatstick in his own right. I think i will actually get around to painting mine up properly now. I might get some more. I could see running 2x5 +Irylith.

The wraith-knights though.. Yieks... Looks like we wont be seeing those on the table top for yet another edition.

**Semper**

Well wax my nipples and call me Rita. The Daemon Lords are actually not costed in line with insanity! In fact, two of them are actually more than just usable!

The GBS is still a little over costed imho but it's better. Outright ignores PP on a roll now (and can be targeted by friendly until FAQ'd) flamers are no longer pistols so can actually be used and it retained much of its durability and seemingly went UP in wounds (nice!). Kept it's increased charge too. Should still probably be more closer to 450 than its 525 cost but i'll stomach the improvement.

Decimator went down in points and, as far as I can see, didn't get nerfed. Maybe still a little too expensive without the -1 damage though but I believe I saw infernal regeneration.

**mokoshkana**

Argive wrote:
The wraith-knights though.. Yieks... Looks like we wont be seeing those on the table top for yet another edition.

What’s wrong with the skathach WK? It got a lot cheaper.

**Argive**

mokoshkana wrote:
Argive wrote:
The wraith-knights though.. Yieks... Looks like we wont be seeing those on the table top for yet another edition.
What’s wrong with the skathach WK? It got a lot cheaper.

That virtualy makes no difference..its still clocking in at something around 400pts-450pts without an inbuilt invuln.. + 3CP ? yeah.. No..
The fact it still needs to sacrifice a shooting arm weapon to get a 5++ as it has no innate invuln and is a LOW.... Also the inferno lance which is a knight sized alien monstrous weapon is basicaly a D6 shot melta for 65 pts?

I imagine the codex ones will be just as bad so you will not see them on table tops outside of someone taking one for a laugh knowing it will cost them the game.

The scorpion for example gets an inbuilt 5++ 12x str 12 -4 D3 shots and can DS for about 450pts.. as a LOW you could make it work sort of and not really handicap yourself.

All that said Its not an eldar specific issue.. LOW are just basically redundant in the world of nu-melta and the 9th edition mission structure and core rules.

**Gadzilla666**

MinscS2 wrote:
Oh nice surprise: The Macharius Vanquisher.
Unlike it's brother, the Vanquisher-version actually got some well-needed improvements.
Costs less than the Valdor Tank Hunter, and while it has one less shot, the two shots it does have are quite likely to hit given it's +to hit against vehicles/monsters and wound with it's respectable S16 AP4 - and when it does it, it will hurt with it's flat D9.

Ok, I'm not being salty, as I'm absolutely thrilled that I can actually afford to play my Fellblade in a 2000 point game now without kneecaping the rest of my army, and I'm happy that the Macharius Vanquisher got this buff, but I'd just like to point out:

Vanquisher cannon 7th edition: heavy 1, S8, AP2, <Armourbane>
9th edition: heavy 2, S16, AP-4, D9

Fellblade accelerator cannon AE shells 7th edition: heavy 1, S9, AP2, <Armourbane>
9th edition: heavy 2, S14, Ap-4,D6 (exactly the same as in 8th)

Like really gw? Couldn't give it a little boost too?

**mokoshkana**

Argive wrote:
mokoshkana wrote:
Argive wrote:
The wraith-knights though.. Yieks... Looks like we wont be seeing those on the table top for yet another edition.
What’s wrong with the skathach WK? It got a lot cheaper.

That virtualy makes no difference..its still clocking in at something around 400pts-450pts without an inbuilt invuln.. + 3CP ? yeah.. No..
The fact it still needs to sacrifice a shooting arm weapon to get a 5++ as it has no innate invuln and is a LOW.... Also the inferno lance which is a knight sized alien monstrous weapon is basicaly a D6 shot melta for 65 pts?

I imagine the codex ones will be just as bad so you will not see them on table tops outside of someone taking one for a laugh knowing it will cost them the game.

The scorpion for example gets an inbuilt 5++ 12x str 12 -4 D3 shots and can DS for about 450pts.. as a LOW you could make it work sort of and not really handicap yourself.

All that said Its not an eldar specific issue.. LOW are just basically redundant in the world of nu-melta and the 9th edition mission structure and core rules.

So using the Deathshroud Cannons and Star Cannons, my expensive Skathach clocks in at 465 points, which is a lot, but it can deep strike and wait out the board a bit. Plus with the Deathshroud/Star cannons it has a nice amount of range to hit anything it wants. Will it be top table? No, but it is playable.

**Argive**

mokoshkana wrote:
Argive wrote:
mokoshkana wrote:
Argive wrote:
The wraith-knights though.. Yieks... Looks like we wont be seeing those on the table top for yet another edition.
What’s wrong with the skathach WK? It got a lot cheaper.

That virtualy makes no difference..its still clocking in at something around 400pts-450pts without an inbuilt invuln.. + 3CP ? yeah.. No..
The fact it still needs to sacrifice a shooting arm weapon to get a 5++ as it has no innate invuln and is a LOW.... Also the inferno lance which is a knight sized alien monstrous weapon is basicaly a D6 shot melta for 65 pts?

I imagine the codex ones will be just as bad so you will not see them on table tops outside of someone taking one for a laugh knowing it will cost them the game.

The scorpion for example gets an inbuilt 5++ 12x str 12 -4 D3 shots and can DS for about 450pts.. as a LOW you could make it work sort of and not really handicap yourself.

All that said Its not an eldar specific issue.. LOW are just basically redundant in the world of nu-melta and the 9th edition mission structure and core rules.

So using the Deathshroud Cannons and Star Cannons, my expensive Skathach clocks in at 465 points, which is a lot, but it can deep strike and wait out the board a bit. Plus with the Deathshroud/Star cannons it has a nice amount of range to hit anything it wants. Will it be top table? No, but it is playable.

What I'm trying to say say is: Are you more or less likely to loose if you put those 460pts(and 3 CP) into anything else(literly anything) ?
I think they are very cool unit. So the rule of cool prevails... Id still field one on occasion for lolz... And need to get around to building my knight soon.. but they just have terrible rules unfortunately.

**Mr Nobody**

cody.d. wrote:
For what it's worth the FW book is fairly good for orks. I feel in regards to rules they may have come out as the winners. Pretty much every unit is either, okay or pretty good. With the biker bosses being pretty awesome with the buffs you can stack on it.

That's good to hear. I'm hoping the Orks don't have to deal with that martial legacy rule. I have a plethora of grot tanks and kannon wagons to put on the field.

**Gadzilla666**

Sherrypie wrote:
Right, I'm rather pissed now looking at how the loyalist and traitor equivalent models get treated.

For the same price, the loyalist ones get better synergies, traits that actually work (no Helbrute keywords for the chaos dreads, one can only hope the whole helbrute name gets deleted in favor of them returning to just being chaos dreadnoughts), Angels of Death rules (whereas the chaos dreads DON'T seem to have Hateful Assault NOR Death to the False Emperor)... the traitors also lost healing abilities, special guns like soulburners and are rife with lack of quality control, FFS the writers try to actually say that the Fellblade has a transport capacity of 25 when it is a premier battle tank. And before we even get to the DG and TS exclusion...

Boy, this thing is going to require some day 0 erratas as well as some serious redesign of DG, TS and CSM codicies to work.

How did I miss THAT?! That's

hilarious! Me and my 300+ ton station wagon!

Jeez gw, hire a proofreader already.

**Not Online!!!**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Sherrypie wrote:
Right, I'm rather pissed now looking at how the loyalist and traitor equivalent models get treated.

For the same price, the loyalist ones get better synergies, traits that actually work (no Helbrute keywords for the chaos dreads, one can only hope the whole helbrute name gets deleted in favor of them returning to just being chaos dreadnoughts), Angels of Death rules (whereas the chaos dreads DON'T seem to have Hateful Assault NOR Death to the False Emperor)... the traitors also lost healing abilities, special guns like soulburners and are rife with lack of quality control, FFS the writers try to actually say that the Fellblade has a transport capacity of 25 when it is a premier battle tank. And before we even get to the DG and TS exclusion...

Boy, this thing is going to require some day 0 erratas as well as some serious redesign of DG, TS and CSM codicies to work.

How did I miss THAT?! That's hilarious! Me and my 300+ ton station wagon!

Jeez gw, hire a proofreader already.

reminds me of khorne berzerkers riding defielers...
Still, i second the demand for an editor, because at this stage, it is getting hillarious.

**Sherrypie**

Not Online!!! wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Sherrypie wrote:
Right, I'm rather pissed now looking at how the loyalist and traitor equivalent models get treated.

For the same price, the loyalist ones get better synergies, traits that actually work (no Helbrute keywords for the chaos dreads, one can only hope the whole helbrute name gets deleted in favor of them returning to just being chaos dreadnoughts), Angels of Death rules (whereas the chaos dreads DON'T seem to have Hateful Assault NOR Death to the False Emperor)... the traitors also lost healing abilities, special guns like soulburners and are rife with lack of quality control, FFS the writers try to actually say that the Fellblade has a transport capacity of 25 when it is a premier battle tank. And before we even get to the DG and TS exclusion...

Boy, this thing is going to require some day 0 erratas as well as some serious redesign of DG, TS and CSM codicies to work.

How did I miss THAT?! That's hilarious! Me and my 300+ ton station wagon!

Jeez gw, hire a proofreader already.

reminds me of khorne berzerkers riding defielers...
Still, i second the demand for an editor, because at this stage, it is getting hillarious.

I can only imagine the Fellblade being actually just a cardboard cover over a Spartan...

In all honesty, though, while this is just an example of idiotic oversight and lack of proofreading, it is a pretty chunky vehicle and tank riding is marginally safer if you're wearing power armour. Where my Astartes tank surfers at

**Lance845**

What is sad is that despite the complete steaming gak that is it's production quality and the questionable usefulness of it's content when compared to price there will still be some who give GW money for this piece of crap.