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.

I think we should all take a moment to appreciate that GW has released these at all in legends for free and without too much fail.

Because you know... rather then put them in the books and then split it into two charging us £40 a pop for two books instead of just one..

 Argive wrote:
I think we should all take a moment to appreciate that GW has released these at all in legends for free and without too much fail.

Because you know... rather then put them in the books and then split it into two charging us £40 for two books instead of one..

I know you're being sarcastic, but I find it interesting that these free rules seem to have been subject to the same level of quality control (or lack thereof) as the rules sold by gw.

 Valkyrie wrote:
While I'm disappointed to see some units reduced to Legends (mainly Lias and the Stormhammer), I honestly don't get why it's a big deal that R&H, Elysians and the like are in here.

From what I've seen mainly on the Facebook pages, people seem to be treating it as if the sky is falling:

"Well, guess I can't use my Elysian army anymore!"

"That's it!! I'm selling my DKK force!!!"

etc, etc.

What's the big deal? Nothing's stopping you from using them. Hell, if anything this gives you more flexibility to use Doctrines to better represent your army's flavour. Use your R&H as regular Guard, use Elysians as Tempestus, great! That sort of variation is what we should be seeing.

Yeah, this is puzzling. You'd think people who are honest in saying they use units because they like the look or want fluffy army would be OK with new, toned down rules...

...but the amount of whining on certain FW dreadnoughts being slightly less broken (and now having small CP fee that doesn't matter one bit unless you spammed like 6-9 of them) leads me to believe they just loved their OP nonsense giving them massive advantage against people who used all-plastic armies and are now throwing hissy fit now it's no longer the case. Go figure

Yeah God-Emperor forbid someone wants to play their DKOK army that costs more than a mid-range card as DKOK and not counts-as flavour of the month guardsmen!

Irbis, I don't see anyone whining about the dreadnoughts. . . they seem pretty reasonable. I have two leviathans and two iron Hands contemptors, btw.

You never fail to disappoint when there's an opportunity to insult forgeworld or anyone who owns any, though.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I think we should all take a moment to appreciate that GW has released these at all in legends for free and without too much fail.

Because you know... rather then put them in the books and then split it into two charging us £40 for two books instead of one..

I know you're being sarcastic, but I find it interesting that these free rules seem to have been subject to the same level of quality control (or lack thereof) as the rules sold by gw.

Ohh now.. No sarcasm.. I think the bar is set so low its generally a moment to appreciate

 Irbis wrote:
... people who used all-plastic armies and are now throwing hissy fit now it's no longer the case.

What an utterly bizarre thing to complain about. You don't like people using FW models?

 Irbis wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
While I'm disappointed to see some units reduced to Legends (mainly Lias and the Stormhammer), I honestly don't get why it's a big deal that R&H, Elysians and the like are in here.

From what I've seen mainly on the Facebook pages, people seem to be treating it as if the sky is falling:

"Well, guess I can't use my Elysian army anymore!"

"That's it!! I'm selling my DKK force!!!"

etc, etc.

What's the big deal? Nothing's stopping you from using them. Hell, if anything this gives you more flexibility to use Doctrines to better represent your army's flavour. Use your R&H as regular Guard, use Elysians as Tempestus, great! That sort of variation is what we should be seeing.

Yeah, this is puzzling. You'd think people who are honest in saying they use units because they like the look or want fluffy army would be OK with new, toned down rules...

...but the amount of whining on certain FW dreadnoughts being slightly less broken (and now having small CP fee that doesn't matter one bit unless you spammed like 6-9 of them) leads me to believe they just loved their OP nonsense giving them massive advantage against people who used all-plastic armies and are now throwing hissy fit now it's no longer the case. Go figure

You'd have a point if Relic Contemptors were OP at all. Spoiler Alert: they were literally the only way you could run a melee Dread. In reality people were just mad that there was a way to run Dreads for them to be good instead of the same old garbage VenBox that has two shooting weapons.

 Irbis wrote:
Yeah, this is puzzling. You'd think people who are honest in saying they use units because they like the look or want fluffy army would be OK with new, toned down rules...

...but the amount of whining on certain FW dreadnoughts being slightly less broken (and now having small CP fee that doesn't matter one bit unless you spammed like 6-9 of them) leads me to believe they just loved their OP nonsense giving them massive advantage against people who used all-plastic armies and are now throwing hissy fit now it's no longer the case. Go figure

Yeah, all those DKoK and Elysian players were sure in it for the broken rules...

Did you not read the post you were replying to, or just looking for an excuse for some axe-grinding?

 Argive wrote:
I think we should all take a moment to appreciate that GW has released these at all in legends for free and without too much fail.

Because you know... rather then put them in the books and then split it into two charging us £40 a pop for two books instead of just one..

And yet they can't even be bothered to do Legends rules for a huge amount of the Corsairs list (no Prince, no Felarchs, no Voidseer, no Malevolents, no Ghostwalkers, no Balestrike band...) or any of the 30k Mechanicum stuff.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I think we should all take a moment to appreciate that GW has released these at all in legends for free and without too much fail.

Because you know... rather then put them in the books and then split it into two charging us £40 a pop for two books instead of just one..

And yet they can't even be bothered to do Legends rules for a huge amount of the Corsairs list (no Prince, no Felarchs, no Voidseer, no Malevolents, no Ghostwalkers, no Balestrike band...) or any of the 30k Mechanicum stuff.

Inetersting. Thats wierd I saw corsairs when I skimmed it but didint notice the HQ were missing. Saw the troopers and bikes and then got side tracked.
Voidseer, Malevolents, Ghostwalkers, Balestrike were these even in the 8th index ? those names don't ring any bells for me.

In the grand scheme of things though I';m not surprised some things got removed completely.
I think by GW standards they did a stellar job !

 Argive wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I think we should all take a moment to appreciate that GW has released these at all in legends for free and without too much fail.

Because you know... rather then put them in the books and then split it into two charging us £40 a pop for two books instead of just one..

And yet they can't even be bothered to do Legends rules for a huge amount of the Corsairs list (no Prince, no Felarchs, no Voidseer, no Malevolents, no Ghostwalkers, no Balestrike band...) or any of the 30k Mechanicum stuff.

Inetersting. Thats wierd I saw corsairs when I skimmed it but didint notice the HQ were missing. Saw the troopers and bikes and then got side tracked.
Voidseer, Malevolents, Ghostwalkers, Balestrike were these even in the 8th index ? those names don't ring any bells for me.

In the grand scheme of things though I';m not surprised some things got removed completely.
I think by GW standards they did a stellar job !

I'm grousing at the "dude, you're getting it for free, stop complaining" attitude given that GW couldn't be bothered to make enough effort to even do 8e rules for around a third of my Warhammer collection.

Not trying to defend GW. They are garbage when it comes to rules support. I get it.

Doesn't change the fact im surprised they didin't botch the FW/Legends thing biblical..

On a side note, if the models are cool can you not just play them using other flavour of eldar rules? Not ideal but maybe a workaround to avoid "this is my home made legend datasheet" nobody wants to play against?

Yeah at this point who cares about things that didn't make the cut. I'm more worried that the obvious mistakes in this new document won't ever get corrected.

The sky is truly failing actually.
Elysians got ... two units. Lol ? That's...all ? What a joke. Why can't Forge World do a single thing right with a compendium for once ?
Snipers don't even get aerial drop anymore

 godardc wrote:
The sky is truly failing actually.
Elysians got ... two units. Lol ? That's...all ? What a joke. Why can't Forge World do a single thing right with a compendium for once ?
Snipers don't even get aerial drop anymore

This is GWs work. I think it's important to point out because if Forgeworld would have put a bit of thought into it these rules could be better. I know their Indizes were of a similar quality as this legends document, but rumor has it the FW Team was informed about 8th Edition about the same time as the Community . FWs rules usually aren't that bad, they even made 7th Edition work somehow. And their specialist games rules are usually well rounded, too.

godardc wrote:The sky is truly failing actually.
Elysians got ... two units. Lol ? That's...all ? What a joke. Why can't Forge World do a single thing right with a compendium for once ?
Snipers don't even get aerial drop anymore

This wasn't written by Forge World, it was written by the gw rules team. If you want to see books written by Forge World, look at the old Imperial Armour books, which were always way better written and more balanced than the stuff that the main studio was putting out in 7th.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah at this point who cares about things that didn't make the cut. I'm more worried that the obvious mistakes in this new document won't ever get corrected.

Well, they at least gave the Gorgon back its transport capacity. But like you, I fear most of this is cast in stone.

Irbis wrote:

Spoiler:

 Valkyrie wrote:
While I'm disappointed to see some units reduced to Legends (mainly Lias and the Stormhammer), I honestly don't get why it's a big deal that R&H, Elysians and the like are in here.

From what I've seen mainly on the Facebook pages, people seem to be treating it as if the sky is falling:

"Well, guess I can't use my Elysian army anymore!"

"That's it!! I'm selling my DKK force!!!"

etc, etc.

What's the big deal? Nothing's stopping you from using them. Hell, if anything this gives you more flexibility to use Doctrines to better represent your army's flavour. Use your R&H as regular Guard, use Elysians as Tempestus, great! That sort of variation is what we should be seeing.

Yeah, this is puzzling. You'd think people who are honest in saying they use units because they like the look or want fluffy army would be OK with new, toned down rules...

...but the amount of whining on certain FW dreadnoughts being slightly less broken (and now having small CP fee that doesn't matter one bit unless you spammed like 6-9 of them) leads me to believe they just loved their OP nonsense giving them massive advantage against people who used all-plastic armies and are now throwing hissy fit now it's no longer the case. Go figure

Ah, the comedic stylings of dakka's funniest poster. I'm sure this is just another drive-by "I hate fw/Xenos/anything I don't play" post, but I'll respond anyway.

Can't speak for everyone, but I'm cool with the Martial Legacy rule on things like Leviathans and Daredeos now: csm and loyalists pay the same price, for the same units, with the same rules. Cool.

What I'm not cool with is Martial Legacy on Contemptors. Loyalists can get a codex Contemptor with a cc weapon and a multi-melta for 150 PPM. Meanwhile, csm can get the exact same unit, with the same loadout and the same rules, for 150 PPM +1CP. That's a "Spike Tax" if I ever saw one. The only thing that the Chaos and "relic" Contemptors have over the codex model is more weapons options, which they pay for in points. So your basically just paying that 1CP to get your rules from a different book. Not cool. The fix is simple: Either remove Martial Legacy from the two fw Contemptors, or add it to the codex Contemptor. Then it's all even stevens.

Same deal with the Legion Super Heavys: The changes to their rules bring them in line with the other LOWs in the game, no more T9. But they cost that extra 1CP, because they're "old". So, again, just an arbitrary cost, no balance involved. Not cool.

 Valkyrie wrote:
While I'm disappointed to see some units reduced to Legends (mainly Lias and the Stormhammer), I honestly don't get why it's a big deal that R&H, Elysians and the like are in here.

From what I've seen mainly on the Facebook pages, people seem to be treating it as if the sky is falling:

"Well, guess I can't use my Elysian army anymore!"

"That's it!! I'm selling my DKK force!!!"

etc, etc.

What's the big deal? Nothing's stopping you from using them. Hell, if anything this gives you more flexibility to use Doctrines to better represent your army's flavour. Use your R&H as regular Guard, use Elysians as Tempestus, great! That sort of variation is what we should be seeing.

I find the reccomendation of playing the R&H as Guard insulting and it shows a severe lack of understanding the army as to what the list was representing and how it was doing it or respect torwards the players of said.


And not only that indeed there are actually a lot of things from stopping people using them some internal in the list and some external:
Let's see the external first:
There are groups that out of principle disallow Legend rule sets. So these players are now fethed and depending on where you are.Great. A collectors army more or less worthless or "count as guard /GSC"

Then let's see the internal, the issue with the list:
I allready made a list but TLDR: For a regular R&H army the list is so gak that it is a point where you don't even need to bother, whilest that is nothing new comparatively to the 8th index it is this time supposed to be a farwell and GW somehow managed to make it worse then these uninspired rules there. infact they even cut out the last bit of fluff options with differing Covenants, ruined psy by removing it and frankly showed once again why we can't have a balanced ruleset for cheapish infantry with this.
It allready has other issues, as also pointed out, it IS frankly absurdly easy to break appart and make your opponent feel bad with the few choices that are so ridicoulus for pts that this list alone will probably cement legends rulesets alone as prohibitted in a lot of playgroups if they have a THAT GUY, deciding to feth with some people with this list.

So iow they better would've left the list untouched and should've just outright squatted instead of sending whoever the moron was that wrote this list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 godardc wrote:
The sky is truly failing actually.
Elysians got ... two units. Lol ? That's...all ? What a joke. Why can't Forge World do a single thing right with a compendium for once ?
Snipers don't even get aerial drop anymore

was gw rules team only for compendium and it shows in the pts cost for units...
7ppm mutant f.e. compared to a 5ppm superior cultist...

 Irbis wrote:
...but the amount of whining on certain FW dreadnoughts being slightly less broken (and now having small CP fee that doesn't matter one bit unless you spammed like 6-9 of them) leads me to believe they just loved their OP nonsense giving them massive advantage against people who used all-plastic armies and are now throwing hissy fit now it's no longer the case. Go figure

Our marine players have been very happy about the leviathan changes because they finally feel in line with similar units like the redemptor or the repulsor executioner.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Did the Bubonic Astartes and Arcana Astartes keywords exist prior to this document?

They did not, this is hinting at new keywords binding these two codexes (instead of simply heretic astartes)

This is GW's nice way of telling us to stop casting warptime on Mortarion
It's not surprising that heretic astartes got the aeldari treatment though.

On the upside, it allows them to change him without assuming that he will do first turn charges.

 Irbis wrote:

Yeah, this is puzzling. You'd think people who are honest in saying they use units because they like the look or want fluffy army would be OK with new, toned down rules...

...but the amount of whining on certain FW dreadnoughts being slightly less broken (and now having small CP fee that doesn't matter one bit unless you spammed like 6-9 of them) leads me to believe they just loved their OP nonsense giving them massive advantage against people who used all-plastic armies and are now throwing hissy fit now it's no longer the case. Go figure

A single CP can make all the difference, especially at lower pts level. Chaos space marines as they are designed right now lose all their legion flavor once they run out of CP.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

godardc wrote:The sky is truly failing actually.
Elysians got ... two units. Lol ? That's...all ? What a joke. Why can't Forge World do a single thing right with a compendium for once ?
Snipers don't even get aerial drop anymore

This wasn't written by Forge World, it was written by the gw rules team. If you want to see books written by Forge World, look at the old Imperial Armour books, which were always way better written and more balanced than the stuff that the main studio was putting out in 7th.

Except when they weren't. Looking at you Riptide variants.

An important distinction, in my opinion, to make is that the Imperial Armour books were a hugely mixed bag. And they could go for some time without any updating or even FAQing.

The big issue with Legends is that whilst the model rules stay as they are, the core rule changes, and there is no guarantee that the two remains compatible even after a single iteration.

For example, all the Characters like the Bike Librarian for SM that did go into Legends during 8th can't be used anymore (even if 8th codex are theoretically compatible with 9th) because
A) not necessarily the rule can be applied as they are between edition
B) the point increase in the SM range made it overpowered/undercosted (and please note that, if it was the opposite, I would have no issue using overpriced rules because I like the miniature... It is different to handicap yourself, and exploits a bad rules interaction.

If, as announced, 8th would remained sort of a "live" rulebook with small fixing, this idea might have worked (with th caveat that points would had to decrease). With release of 9th, it's clear it won't work.


That be honest, it would have been better if "Legends" would have been related to the last release of a legacy codex (like 8th). Core rules will be fixed, and so will be any Legends datasheet.

The current status is a good example of GW inability to design (I don't mean game design, I mean design in general).

I agree however with the suggestion to proxy rules from other armies: at least this way you will have compatible rules.

Just having a peruse though the Chaos entries, looks like Samus could be pretty decent at getting your enemies to flee if you can get him close enough, but anyone noticed the rather glaring error in his datasheet?

 Argive wrote:
Not trying to defend GW. They are garbage when it comes to rules support. I get it.

Doesn't change the fact im surprised they didin't botch the FW/Legends thing biblical..

On a side note, if the models are cool can you not just play them using other flavour of eldar rules? Not ideal but maybe a workaround to avoid "this is my home made legend datasheet" nobody wants to play against?

"My Troops are Scourges, my jetbikes have made-up guns you've never heard of, my vehicles are all Craftworlds except there are Venoms..."

Yeah, totally not a munchkin trying to powergame my way into stitching the best things in two books together, here.

Not to mention the degree to which the card game has taken over the minis game means I still can't really play until I go through and figure out how to design playable but non-OP stratagems, which GW doesn't even know how to do and they've been writing stratagems for four years.

When in doubt, start with them being slightly UP, then tweak from there *nods*

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Not trying to defend GW. They are garbage when it comes to rules support. I get it.

Doesn't change the fact im surprised they didin't botch the FW/Legends thing biblical..

On a side note, if the models are cool can you not just play them using other flavour of eldar rules? Not ideal but maybe a workaround to avoid "this is my home made legend datasheet" nobody wants to play against?

"My Troops are Scourges, my jetbikes have made-up guns you've never heard of, my vehicles are all Craftworlds except there are Venoms..."

Yeah, totally not a munchkin trying to powergame my way into stitching the best things in two books together, here.

Not to mention the degree to which the card game has taken over the minis game means I still can't really play until I go through and figure out how to design playable but non-OP stratagems, which GW doesn't even know how to do and they've been writing stratagems for four years.

The problem is Strats is that a lot of them aren't...Strategic. Some of the movement ones can be SUPER good I'll give you that, but at least that's more Strategic than all the ones that are just straight up offensive or defensive buffs with basically no caveats. I'd basically delete a wholesale of those.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Not trying to defend GW. They are garbage when it comes to rules support. I get it.

Doesn't change the fact im surprised they didin't botch the FW/Legends thing biblical..

On a side note, if the models are cool can you not just play them using other flavour of eldar rules? Not ideal but maybe a workaround to avoid "this is my home made legend datasheet" nobody wants to play against?

"My Troops are Scourges, my jetbikes have made-up guns you've never heard of, my vehicles are all Craftworlds except there are Venoms..."

Yeah, totally not a munchkin trying to powergame my way into stitching the best things in two books together, here.

Not to mention the degree to which the card game has taken over the minis game means I still can't really play until I go through and figure out how to design playable but non-OP stratagems, which GW doesn't even know how to do and they've been writing stratagems for four years.

I guess I meant "count as". If the models are cool does it really matter if they have dire avenger/quin rules (or whatever) for the infantry etc..

 Argive wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Not trying to defend GW. They are garbage when it comes to rules support. I get it.

Doesn't change the fact im surprised they didin't botch the FW/Legends thing biblical..

On a side note, if the models are cool can you not just play them using other flavour of eldar rules? Not ideal but maybe a workaround to avoid "this is my home made legend datasheet" nobody wants to play against?

"My Troops are Scourges, my jetbikes have made-up guns you've never heard of, my vehicles are all Craftworlds except there are Venoms..."

Yeah, totally not a munchkin trying to powergame my way into stitching the best things in two books together, here.

Not to mention the degree to which the card game has taken over the minis game means I still can't really play until I go through and figure out how to design playable but non-OP stratagems, which GW doesn't even know how to do and they've been writing stratagems for four years.

I guess I meant "count as". If the models are cool does it really matter if they have dire avenger/quin rules (or whatever) for the infantry etc..

What infantry? My Troops are Scourges. The only infantry in the list are the heavy weapon guys. There are no suitable proxies for the foot riflemen you need to have a Troops choice in the Craftworld or DE book.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Argive wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Not trying to defend GW. They are garbage when it comes to rules support. I get it.

Doesn't change the fact im surprised they didin't botch the FW/Legends thing biblical..

On a side note, if the models are cool can you not just play them using other flavour of eldar rules? Not ideal but maybe a workaround to avoid "this is my home made legend datasheet" nobody wants to play against?

"My Troops are Scourges, my jetbikes have made-up guns you've never heard of, my vehicles are all Craftworlds except there are Venoms..."

Yeah, totally not a munchkin trying to powergame my way into stitching the best things in two books together, here.

Not to mention the degree to which the card game has taken over the minis game means I still can't really play until I go through and figure out how to design playable but non-OP stratagems, which GW doesn't even know how to do and they've been writing stratagems for four years.

I guess I meant "count as". If the models are cool does it really matter if they have dire avenger/quin rules (or whatever) for the infantry etc..

What infantry? My Troops are Scourges. The only infantry in the list are the heavy weapon guys. There are no suitable proxies for the foot riflemen you need to have a Troops choice in the Craftworld or DE book.

Sorry but I have no idea what models/list you have man... I assumed you were using the OOP FW corsair conversion kits or something.. Did FW sell other stuff apart from that ?
I assumed 25mm infantry man with fancy backpack...
If they are scourges then play them as DE scourges?

There are people out there with t-rex converted up to be exodite falcon grav tanks...
Obviously if what you have doesn't work in any capacity as count as anything else, then that sucks indeed.
I think Perhaps I don't fully understand the problem.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
While I'm disappointed to see some units reduced to Legends (mainly Lias and the Stormhammer), I honestly don't get why it's a big deal that R&H, Elysians and the like are in here.

From what I've seen mainly on the Facebook pages, people seem to be treating it as if the sky is falling:

"Well, guess I can't use my Elysian army anymore!"

"That's it!! I'm selling my DKK force!!!"

etc, etc.

What's the big deal? Nothing's stopping you from using them. Hell, if anything this gives you more flexibility to use Doctrines to better represent your army's flavour. Use your R&H as regular Guard, use Elysians as Tempestus, great! That sort of variation is what we should be seeing.

I find the reccomendation of playing the R&H as Guard insulting and it shows a severe lack of understanding the army as to what the list was representing and how it was doing it or respect torwards the players of said.

R&H has the huge gap, even ignoring different playstyle and options, that GI can't be fielded alongside chaos (like the marines, characters, and daemons that are part of their list, not to mention previously able to be allied)

Elysians could, with some effort, have fit, but there are lots of exceptions, not the least of which is their lack of HW options or light vehicles.

GW could, actually, have dome some pretty easy and not very space-consuming lists in which very few modifications would have allowed the armies to function as you suggest. But, they didn't, and without those changes, it does an extremely poor job representing forces