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.

Maybe make it a vehicle then? In 8th/9th, it’s right about as durable as a Mauler or Forge Fiend.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Maybe make it a vehicle then? In 8th/9th, it’s right about as durable as a Mauler or Forge Fiend.

I might, I'll give it some thought.

I wouldn't do that; the helstalker seems comparable in size and role to a Bloodcrusher to me, +1T/+1W coupled with the extra weapon mounts seems perfectly reasonable.

Cheers for the heads up! It's also less of headache to rebuild.

 The Warp Forge wrote:
They may stand out but I don't see the issue here. As far as I'm aware there's no downside, nor anything to frown upon by making them AP: 3

Just something to watch in playtesting. There are a number of ways to bunch up units in 5th edition (not to mention deepstrikers being bunched on deployment) - it was actually something of a speciality of the 4e chaos army.

I'd like to see this play tested. see what happens. DT is quite powerful but it's only a 6" bubble.

It isn't entirely out of order for a 5e psychic power - wolves have a few dangerous terrain effects for example.

Ammended. WT are now 50pts a piece and the Warpflame Strike rule has no effect if an Independent character has joined them in reserve.

I suspect that will just flip them all the way over to too expensive to field. Warp Talons are in the awkward position of having too much gear on too little a base unit (units like vanguard would field a lot of cheap bullet catchers). Just an awkward one to get right.

Amended. Now the 'chosen' unit must choose the characteristic rather than having all the characteristic buffs.

Playtest toughness 8 possessed. Remember that this makes them completely immune to all small arms short of pulse rifles and the majority of units in close combat.

Yes, but also to note that most of these existing codex's can hold up their own in their own regard and the ones that can't will be getting the retool/overhaul

To clarify - if they can hold up against an opponent that is gaining table-wide rerolls against them surely they would be stronger against all those that do not.
It's just the nature of faction-on-faction bonuses, it is very hard to be equally good against those with the bonuses and those without.

Now this is interesting as I've never known allies in 5th ed.

The last legacy of the allies rules could be found in the daemonhunters and witch hunters books (the full codex, not the free pdfs that they put up on the games workshop site). They were valid throughout most of 5th, probably best remembered for the ordo malleus inquisitor that turned up in all of the leafblower lists to screen against drop pods.
Mainly the restriction was to prevent players circumventing the FoC limits by taking units from different books.

A.T. wrote:

Ammended. WT are now 50pts a piece and the Warpflame Strike rule has no effect if an Independent character has joined them in reserve.

I suspect that will just flip them all the way over to too expensive to field. Warp Talons are in the awkward position of having too much gear on too little a base unit (units like vanguard would field a lot of cheap bullet catchers). Just an awkward one to get right...

I don't know that 5e VV are a good comparison here; 1-wound units in 4e-6e tended to have horrendously expensive upgrade equipment if it wasn't already baked into their profile since GW priced out everything for characters and didn't start fixing any of it until 7e. In the 4e SM Codex, for instance, you could get a Terminator with twin lightning claws for 83pts if you used a Veteran and took kit out of the character armoury, compared to the 40pts you'd pay off the Terminator statline. In 7e the twin-LC VV is 35pts, and the Dark Fury in 30k is 30pts for similar stuff.

Consider also that a twin-LC Terminator in the 4e CSM book you're pricing this against is only 40pts, and a GK Interceptor with falchions in the 5e book is all of 36pts (with one fewer attack, no Inv, but the choice between ID and S6 and a whole Storm Bolter).

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I don't know that 5e VV are a good comparison here

Same statline, assault from deepstrike with power weapons. They are vanguard.

Now i'd agree that they shouldn't cost as much as lightning claw vanguard if for no other reason than that the vanguard aren't forced to take lightning claws on every model, and nobody ever ran them that way because as you say they get very expensive very quickly.

Also, for what it's worth, you didn't even see that many vanilla vanguard in 5e after the novelty wore off. There was a real gulf in capability between them and the more common blood angels vanguard when it comes to pinning all your points on a reserve roll followed by a deepstrike scatter roll. But the original 20 points was waaaay off the mark for a 5e jump assault veteran with an invulnerable, rerolling to hit and wound, probably coming in at I5 and perhaps even scouting... at those points you'd run at least two squads every game.

A.T. wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I don't know that 5e VV are a good comparison here

Same statline, assault from deepstrike with power weapons. They are vanguard.

Now i'd agree that they shouldn't cost as much as lightning claw vanguard if for no other reason than that the vanguard aren't forced to take lightning claws on every model, and nobody ever ran them that way because as you say they get very expensive very quickly.

Also, for what it's worth, you didn't even see that many vanilla vanguard in 5e after the novelty wore off. There was a real gulf in capability between them and the more common blood angels vanguard when it comes to pinning all your points on a reserve roll followed by a deepstrike scatter roll. But the original 20 points was waaaay off the mark for a 5e jump assault veteran with an invulnerable, rerolling to hit and wound, probably coming in at I5 and perhaps even scouting... at those points you'd run at least two squads every game.

Fair comparison for the statline/kit/role, yes, but a terrible benchmark for pricing. If VV were priced like they are in 7th, sure, but hiking the price of Warp Talons to match such a horrendously overpriced unit is just going to make them useless.

Ok so, done one last update in and re-uploaded.

I've changed voice of the Gods' rule from tuning up toughness to Initiative.

I've also priced WT at 40pts now. This makes them on par with other elite units in the points bracket. Lychguard for example are also 40pts with a bunch of stuff they have. It's also important to remember that you will be spending 40pts to make them I: 5, so for two bare minimum of two units you'll be paying 480pts which is a huge chunk out of your points.

For the Tyranid book, I'll be making making that update slightly different to the CSM one. The Bug book will be separated into different documents. One for bug special USR. Others for each Force Org Slot. I'm doing this because it means that I won't get lost as easy as I did in one document.

 The Warp Forge wrote:
This makes them on par with other elite units in the points bracket. Lychguard for example are also 40pts with a bunch of stuff they have.

You'll get a better feel for them once you get them on the board. Vanguard were always hugely swingy outside of the BA book as assault from deepstrike so do also run them as regular deployment (especially with scouting) and off of any deepstrike beacons when you test them. You may just come to the conclusion that vanguard cost too much.

A.T. wrote:

 The Warp Forge wrote:
This makes them on par with other elite units in the points bracket. Lychguard for example are also 40pts with a bunch of stuff they have.

You'll get a better feel for them once you get them on the board. Vanguard were always hugely swingy outside of the BA book as assault from deepstrike so do also run them as regular deployment (especially with scouting) and off of any deepstrike beacons when you test them. You may just come to the conclusion that vanguard cost too much.

Noted, Hopefully I'll get to playtest these rules. Now onto the Bugs!

When you mean Updated Renegades and heretics?
Do you intend to update Vraks? Or do you want to make a general R&H army that covers more then a specific type of uprising?

Not Online!!! wrote:
When you mean Updated Renegades and heretics?
Do you intend to update Vraks? Or do you want to make a general R&H army that covers more then a specific type of uprising?

General R&H. Something that can be a bit more versitile than just one specific campaign.

 The Warp Forge wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
When you mean Updated Renegades and heretics?
Do you intend to update Vraks? Or do you want to make a general R&H army that covers more then a specific type of uprising?

General R&H. Something that can be a bit more versitile than just one specific campaign.

So basically a backwards Adapted ia 13 list?

Not Online!!! wrote:
So basically a backwards Adapted ia 13 list?

Forgeworld released an updated generic list for 5th edition. Warp - I think there was a copy of it in the FAQs/Erratas I uploaded for you, if not i'll dig it out. IA 6 and 7 were also 5e rules for renegades.

IA13 was a 6th edition ruleset. Just look at the ogryns entry for example - hammer of wrath, rampage, soul blaze...

---------------------------

In terms of editions of the various imperial armour books -

IA 1 - use IA1update28AUG.pdf - Imperial Guard and Guard armoured battlegroup rules
IA 2 - use IA2update28AUG.pdf - Space Marines, Inquisition, and Sisters of Battle unit updates for 5e. Inquisition characters updated for GK codex in greyknightsupd.pdf
IA 3 - use Tauupdate.pdf - 5e tau units
IA 4 - tyranids. 4th edition, i'm not aware of any 5th edition specific update for it, but there are rules in the apocalypse books (imperial armour 2008 is a good start)
IA 5 - use renegades and heretics 5e.pdf
IA 6 - Krieg and Renegades - this is the khorne variant of the renegades. Released 2008 (the renegades and heretics pdf above was 2010)
IA 7 - Krieg armoured battlegroup and Renegades - nurgle variant
IA 8 - Orks and Elysians - the Impgupdate.pdf file has rules for the D-99s from IA2 for use with rules from this book
IA 9 - Tyrants Legion
IA 10 - Marine Siege Assault Vanguard
IA 11 - Eldar Corsairs (and vehicles for regular eldar)

Apocalypse Reloaded, Imperial Armour Apocalypse (2nd edition), Imperial Armour Apocalypse 2 are the 5e era apocalypse releases.

IA 12 and onwards and the 2nd edition releases are all 6e or later. You can also start to see the power ramping up as you work through the books - the last 5e book (IA11) has such wonders as the eldar warp hunter.

There was a no vraks specific one in 5th? Wow that went over my head completely, mind sharing it?

Not Online!!! wrote:
There was a no vraks specific one in 5th? Wow that went over my head completely, mind sharing it?

I've sent you a link to the same pack of errata and update I sent Warp Forge. It was an update for the IA5 (5th edition) rules, and was released a couple of years after IA6.

Cheers! Uploaded R&H to drive!

As i mentioned in a conversation with A.T.

The list is "still" vraks. From xaphan disciples to AL legionaires to the heavy focus on defense.

It is workable though , however you relly need the corresponding FAQ for multiple reasons.

-Minefields, basically the FAQ makes them work.

- Artillery strikes; Frankly you might need to revise the pts.

-The list is unaligned early Vraks so there's a lack of marks.

The net positives of you using this is that it is more balanced torwards the edition you are rewriting for. It's a fun list. Allbeit some of the options need maybee a look at, especially the emplacements.

GL with your rewrite, it looks decent.


PM me if you want to see another version of the R&H list.

Worth noting that with the exception of the ork codex there are no factions (to my knowledge) that have any mine removal ability outside of forgeworld rules.

Playtest a few scenarios and see if any of them have you throwing the rulebook at your opponent. Examples include mining the entire no-mans land infront of your opponents deployment (especially on narrow deployment - can really screw the nids), mining every piece of good/los blocking cover, and mining your own tanks/artillery/emplacements (as long as your vehicle doesn't move it is safe).

A.T. wrote:
Worth noting that with the exception of the ork codex there are no factions (to my knowledge) that have any mine removal ability outside of forgeworld rules.

Playtest a few scenarios and see if any of them have you throwing the rulebook at your opponent. Examples include mining the entire no-mans land infront of your opponents deployment (especially on narrow deployment - can really screw the nids), mining every piece of good/los blocking cover, and mining your own tanks/artillery/emplacements (as long as your vehicle doesn't move it is safe).

Aye the minefield is also rather devastating, and has an extremely high reliability rate.I found the 2010 FAQ i printed again, they changed the minefield in that one i'll quote here:

SPECIAL RULES

Minefield
the minefield is made up of 6 minefield markers, each non a 40mm base. These are deployed alongside the renegade force, and can be placed anywhere on the battlefield outside of the enemy deployment zone. Mines can never be held in reserve, and must always be deployed on the tabletop at the start of the game.
As soon as a unit (friend or foe) moves within 2" of a minefield marker, roll a D6. On a roll of a 1, the maker is a dud - the mines are faulty, or have been defused by forward sappers prior to the battle. On a 2+ however centre a 5" template on the marker the area defiend counts as Dangerous Terrain for the rest of the game.

this can lead to massive issues since one buy of a minefield is 6 markers.

Hey folks! Hope everyone's had a good new year!

A small update: Started the 'Nid codex. This projects gonna take a lot longer as I'm re-creating a codex from the ground up but also taking a lot from previous codex's and regurgitating them on an A4 Microsoft Word Document. This isn't a task that can be done quickly whilst I have other things going in life. Once I have a few more things done this week I'll be getting back to this project, but I'll also be working on adding the new units from the Ork stuff as well in the meantime as I feel that will be quicker and easier to release than the fully-fledged Tyranid codex.

Thanks for your patience and understanding folks!

Codex writing can take time. I've been through a lot of different word and open office frameworks over the years and nothing seems to cut and paste between them properly when you are trying to format things :p

Hey folks! It's been a 'lil while. Been rather busy making Lore for my own game, painting commissions and graduating from my Masters Degree.

So I'm planning on making future additions to be a bit more bite-size than one big release like the CSM update.

I'll be doing them in sections, especially for the new/overhauled codex's and to show a snippet I've done some Ork units to add to its existing range:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kiPMiGAy0wGffhhmeAbvyRcJuJYzYUBg/view?usp=sharing

Yes, I said I would do bugs next, which is true, I'm just taking that project as a slow ride as there is just so much to go through and read. I just needed something a bit smaller to motivate me into the swing of things again. I'll probably post up their new Army-specific special rules soon!

In the meantime, can folks give me feedback on the additional units to the Ork Heavy support roles please?

Cheers to all your responses so far! We're gonna make this the potential 5th should have had!

I'm such a fan of this idea that I had to sign up just to get involved!

I started 40K in 5th Edition, and though I later got into 6th Edition as well, when 7th came out and looked like a pointless extension of 6th, I realised there was no point in just chasing the next Edition all the time. To this day I play 5th and 6th with friends and family, and I haven't bothered with any of the current Editions.

I'm in full support of this idea of expanding and balancing out 5th, as it's something I'm already doing for 6th. I especially approve of your decision to exclude Imperial Knights and Primarchs from the standard 5th rules - those things really ruined 40K for me as they were the catalyst for the "mine's bigger" arm's race that now exists in the current editions, and were another reason why I didn't get into 7th or later Editions. By no means should fans of those units be barred from fielding them in Apocalypse, which was designed for everyone to bring their biggest and most OP units to the field, but certainly they shouldn't be allowed in the standard game. The same goes for the Wraithknight for Craftworld Eldar, which started the mess in the first place.

I notice you're already working on an updated ruleset for Tyranids, but I'd be happy to write 5th updates for the following factions if you're happy to divide the work of rules writing:
Orks
Necrons
Genestealer Cults
Squats/Leagues of Votann
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Craftworld Eldar

As these are the other factions that I play or am interested in.

I'm also writing some 6th Edition rules for some new Xenos factions that I'd be willing to translate into 5th if you're interested in those as well.