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 could see that getting changed pretty easily. No justifyable reason why SHD that shares the same faction as the rest of your army not getting your army trait but 3 LOW from another faction getting their own army trait. Just let SHD have army traits if they share the same faction as your warlord.

So it works a lot better with 3 Monoliths due to this rule. I have been experimenting with it and winning. In fact all I do is win with crons no matter what I bring. With 5+ FNP you become quite tough to haywire and with a reroll to wound per phase you get a big damage boost. Both weapon setups are good. 3 with mini death rays is not necessary anyways. 1 with deathrays and 3 particle whips is more than enough anti tank. The gauss is not terrible in rapid fire range with 24 str 5 ap-2 at 15" range.

Melta is a big bummer against you though...the AP-4 and 5 weapons really own the monolith. You can always deepstrike against those armies though and if it's eradicators pray to the dice gods they fail to wound on 4+.

I'm suprised no one is talking about the worst issue about the monolith. The true CP cost.

Yes, I know, people have mentioned the CP cost before, but the cost is much higher than most players even realize. It's not just the fact that the two detachments you can take them in cost 3cp for one and 5cp for the other, its the fact that IF you take only one monolith (3cp AND 360 points minimum) you lose all of the Necron stratagem goodness that you would normally gain for them (Necron Codex pg 58.). You also lose dynastic stratagems too (Necron Codex pg60.)

This means no Techno-Orcular Targeting to auto-wound on shots, no Stellar Alignment Protocols to use your highest stat line, no Curse of the Phaeron to autoexplode, no Disintegration Capacitors to auto wound on 6's, no Solar Pulse to ignore cover, no dynastic stratagem chicanery and most importantly no Prismatic Dimensional Breach to pull models out of strategic reserves through the eternity gate. There goes your ability to pull two squads through the gate starting at turn 2. This is a HUGE limiting factor.

In order to bring one monolith that can use stratetgems, you have to take a full super heavy detachment. That requires three lords of war. You have access to Monolith (360 points minimum), Obelisk (370 points minimum), Tesseract Vault (500 points minimum), and The Silent King (450 points minimum) from GW and the Gauss Pylon (475 points minimum) and Sereptek Heavy Construct (650 points minimum) from forgeworld (if you can convince yourself to spend hundreds of dollars on FW models that are eventually going to hit legends).

The cheapest 3 LOW you can bring for a full super heavy detachment is 3 monoliths at 1,080 points minimum. Plus 5cp because they are titanic. Just so you can use the stratagem DESIGNED FOR THE MONOLITH (also night scythe but that's another issue)! Completely worthless in a standard 1500-2000 point game.

Who decided that it was a good idea to completely cripple the monolith this badly. The shooting is mediocre (sure it does a bunch of theoretical wounds, but the d6 shots from the particle whip averages out poorly, and death rays just don't do enough to warrant taking them when you have other, cheaper, more efficient units), no fly keyword, no quantum shielding, no invuln, has a HUGE base so easy to screen, requires LOW slot, and is TITANIC.

Thank the gods that Portal of Exile auto-hits, it has 24 *chuckle* wounds and toughness 8. /s

I am with you, that the Monolith is not worth it right now, but I think you are wrong regarding the stratagems.
You can still use the non-dynastic stratagems anyway, and the way I read it you only lose the access to the Monolith with the dynasty specific stratagem, not with your whole army.

savemelmac wrote:
I am with you, that the Monolith is not worth it right now, but I think you are wrong regarding the stratagems.
You can still use the non-dynastic stratagems anyway, and the way I read it you only lose the access to the Monolith with the dynasty specific stratagem, not with your whole army.

Crazy thing is, I thought something similar. Reading the codex rules at the top of page 56 for stratagems and page 60 for dynastic stratagems states:

If your army includes any Necrons Detachments (excluding Auxiliary Support, Super-heavy Auxiliary or Fortification Network Detachments), you have access to the Stratagems shown here, and can spend CPs to use them. When one of these Stratagems instructs you to select a unit from your army, replace all instances of the <Dynasty> keyword on the Stratagem (if any) with the name of the dynasty that your selected unit is from.

and

If your army includes a Mephrit, Nephrekh, Nihilakh, Novokh, Sautekh, or Szarekhan Detachment (excluding Auxiliary Support, Super-heavy Auxiliary or Fortification Network Detachments), you have access to that Dynasty's Stratagem,shown below in addition to the ones on pages 56-59. Such a Detachment is one where every unit in that Detachment (excluding Dynastic Agents and C'Tan Shard units) is from the same dynasty (and it is one of the ones listed above).

I was informed that because the text specifically excludes those detachments, they can't use the stratagems and that only the units in those detachments lose access to the stratagems, not the rest of the army. I disagreed with the call but I'm still learning the new edition. It's worth noting that the conversations online I could find covering this issue agree with them. I initially read it to intend that those detachments simply don't count when determining if you can use the stratagems. The more experienced players and judges in my neck of the woods disagreed. The argument was basically if you lose your dynastic stratagem then you lose the general stratagems too because they are worded essentially the same.

If I want to play with the local players here, that's what I have to deal with because of GW's inability to be clear in their rules or actually FAQ anything useful for Necrons; and the locals use GW's FAQ or Reddit (ugh) consensus to make calls.

Oh wow I didn't even notice that. Very much a "blink and you'll miss it" rule.

GW really doesn't understand their own rules then.

crazysaneman wrote:

savemelmac wrote:
I am with you, that the Monolith is not worth it right now, but I think you are wrong regarding the stratagems.
You can still use the non-dynastic stratagems anyway, and the way I read it you only lose the access to the Monolith with the dynasty specific stratagem, not with your whole army.

Crazy thing is, I thought something similar. Reading the codex rules at the top of page 56 for stratagems and page 60 for dynastic stratagems states:

If your army includes any Necrons Detachments (excluding Auxiliary Support, Super-heavy Auxiliary or Fortification Network Detachments), you have access to the Stratagems shown here, and can spend CPs to use them. When one of these Stratagems instructs you to select a unit from your army, replace all instances of the <Dynasty> keyword on the Stratagem (if any) with the name of the dynasty that your selected unit is from.

and

If your army includes a Mephrit, Nephrekh, Nihilakh, Novokh, Sautekh, or Szarekhan Detachment (excluding Auxiliary Support, Super-heavy Auxiliary or Fortification Network Detachments), you have access to that Dynasty's Stratagem,shown below in addition to the ones on pages 56-59. Such a Detachment is one where every unit in that Detachment (excluding Dynastic Agents and C'Tan Shard units) is from the same dynasty (and it is one of the ones listed above).

I was informed that because the text specifically excludes those detachments, they can't use the stratagems and that only the units in those detachments lose access to the stratagems, not the rest of the army. I disagreed with the call but I'm still learning the new edition. It's worth noting that the conversations online I could find covering this issue agree with them. I initially read it to intend that those detachments simply don't count when determining if you can use the stratagems. The more experienced players and judges in my neck of the woods disagreed. The argument was basically if you lose your dynastic stratagem then you lose the general stratagems too because they are worded essentially the same.

If I want to play with the local players here, that's what I have to deal with because of GW's inability to be clear in their rules or actually FAQ anything useful for Necrons; and the locals use GW's FAQ or Reddit (ugh) consensus to make calls.

Nah - they can use those stratagems on the SHA even. "you" have access to "if" you have a detachment that is "dynasty". No where does it state you lose access. Only that certain detachments are excluded from being able to grant you access. These are very different things. So tell them to learn reading comprehension and just do it anyways. This is a big stretch even for a WAAC player really.

Anyone remember when Monoliths were scary tough because rules like Lance and Melta meant literally nothing to them, so only Broadside squads carried any significant threat?

I'm sure Pepperidge Farms remembers, but I'm not sure how that rule would propagate in to the current system.

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone remember when Monoliths were scary tough because rules like Lance and Melta meant literally nothing to them, so only Broadside squads carried any significant threat?

I'm sure Pepperidge Farms remembers, but I'm not sure how that rule would propagate in to the current system.

I remember. Surprised that they didn't bring that rule back.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Nah - they can use those stratagems on the SHA even. "you" have access to "if" you have a detachment that is "dynasty". No where does it state you lose access. Only that certain detachments are excluded from being able to grant you access. These are very different things. So tell them to learn reading comprehension and just do it anyways. This is a big stretch even for a WAAC player really.

This is the correct reading. You can still use Dynasty strats on them. They still gain the keyword. They just don't gain the abilities of the keyword.

 Xenomancers wrote:
...I remember. Surprised that they didn't bring that rule back.

What would it do now? Weapons don't have keywords/special anti-armour abilities anymore. Melta still has "bonus damage at short range", sure, but Bright/Dark Lances are just lascannons with lower S/better AP now.

Quantum Shielding used to block melta really well. In fact so well that it probably would have been busted against the new melta. Now it is basically transhuman and a 5++.

Monolith never had that. As far bar as I recall it was just living metal. But it was also 14/14/14.

The latest monolith is +2M (lost FLY), +4W, 2+ up from 3+ armor.
Portal used to do D6 MW on a 4+ (at best) only if something ( not VEHICLE or MONSTER ) charged it. Now it does 6 auto-hit S8 AP3 D3.
Particle Whip used to be 24" 6 S8 AP2 DD3. Now it is 36" D6 S12 AP3 D3 Blast.
It didn't have access to Death Rays.
Previous versions allowed it to deepstrike only w/i 12".

So the Monolith got some significant upgrades, but it went from 300 to 380 (w/ death rays) and Heavy to LoW.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
...I remember. Surprised that they didn't bring that rule back.

What would it do now? Weapons don't have keywords/special anti-armour abilities anymore. Melta still has "bonus damage at short range", sure, but Bright/Dark Lances are just lascannons with lower S/better AP now.

The same way that stratagems affect gauss or bolt weapons (for bolter discipline). Or you could just make a rule like - a single attack can only deal 3 damage max or something. Lots of things could have been done to bring back the spirit of the rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Quantum Shielding used to block melta really well. In fact so well that it probably would have been busted against the new melta. Now it is basically transhuman and a 5++.

Monolith never had that. As far bar as I recall it was just living metal. But it was also 14/14/14.

The latest monolith is +2M (lost FLY), +4W, 2+ up from 3+ armor.
Portal used to do D6 MW on a 4+ (at best) only if something ( not VEHICLE or MONSTER ) charged it. Now it does 6 auto-hit S8 AP3 D3.
Particle Whip used to be 24" 6 S8 AP2 DD3. Now it is 36" D6 S12 AP3 D3 Blast.
It didn't have access to Death Rays.
Previous versions allowed it to deepstrike only w/i 12".

So the Monolith got some significant upgrades, but it went from 300 to 380 (w/ death rays) and Heavy to LoW.

It's melee power alone justifies it's cost. + 60 points to have extremely strong melee compared to having no melee before...huge. Also being titanic - can fall back shoot and charge...also massive. 2+ from 3+...also huge. Better range on main gun with more reliable shot count. PLus from 8th to 9th most things got a 5-10% points hike anyways. It is a flat buff across the table. People are just afraid it's gonna get 1 shot.

These same players probably think repulsor executioners are "fine"
whilst being 3+ save with only 16 wounds and comparable firepower. Truth is the monolith is MUCH MUCH better than mr repuslor executioner.

The monolith can just deep strike to ensure it gets action (which admitably I do most the time) unless I am against a pure melee list - in which case having a monolith might as well be an IWIN button.

The CP requirement is a legit gripe but crons strats are mostly 1CP. Starting the game with 8 or 9 CP is enough to get the job done.

Daedalus81 wrote:Quantum Shielding used to block melta really well. In fact so well that it probably would have been busted against the new melta. Now it is basically transhuman and a 5++.

Monolith never had that. As far bar as I recall it was just living metal. But it was also 14/14/14.

How so? Improving Armor did nothing to block Melta (barely affected Melta, really), or are you talking about since 8th Edition?

Living Metal was the rule that blocked Melta and Lance in 3rd Edition, and was the only model in the codex to have it was the Monolith. It was changed in 5th Edition to a chance to ignore secondary Vehicle Damage effects of Shaken or Stunned.

Xenomancers wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
...I remember. Surprised that they didn't bring that rule back.

What would it do now? Weapons don't have keywords/special anti-armour abilities anymore. Melta still has "bonus damage at short range", sure, but Bright/Dark Lances are just lascannons with lower S/better AP now.

The same way that stratagems affect gauss or bolt weapons (for bolter discipline). Or you could just make a rule like - a single attack can only deal 3 damage max or something. Lots of things could have been done to bring back the spirit of the rule.

For all intents and purposes Living Metal just used make being effective at "Wounding" Vehicles beyond the basics pointless.

I think minimizing the damage to an absolute maximum (like 3) would be the only real way to do match it and still be close to balanced. Alternative would be to reduce To Wound Chance to being no better than a 5+, but that still doesn't quite work.

It was a really powerful ability for a Vehicle which had the best armor available in the game at the time (without going in to Forgeworld like Titans).

 Charistoph wrote:

How so? Improving Armor did nothing to block Melta (barely affected Melta, really), or are you talking about since 8th Edition?

Living Metal was the rule that blocked Melta and Lance in 3rd Edition, and was the only model in the codex to have it was the Monolith. It was changed in 5th Edition to a chance to ignore secondary Vehicle Damage effects of Shaken or Stunned.

Oh, right. Now I'm remembering a bit more. Similar to Ceramite upgrades.

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone remember when Monoliths were scary tough because rules like Lance and Melta meant literally nothing to them, so only Broadside squads carried any significant threat?

You'd think that. But on our table it always worked out to be that 1 lone lascannon shot from waaay across the board.
You know, the one that'd invariably roll a 6 to hit, a 6 vs Armor pen (for that magic # of 15) & then another 6 on the damage table....
Sometimes on the 1st turn. :(

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone remember when Monoliths were scary tough because rules like Lance and Melta meant literally nothing to them, so only Broadside squads carried any significant threat?

I'm sure Pepperidge Farms remembers, but I'm not sure how that rule would propagate in to the current system.

Those were good days, to be sure.

You could impose a rule like:

Undying Metal "If a weapon that strikes the Monolith has a damage characteristic greater than a D6, reduce it to D6. If a weapon has any special rules that modify damage to the target (such as the Melta rule or a minimum damage amount) ignore them. In addition, no weapon may have a better save modifier than -3 against the Monolith. Mortal Wounds are unaffected."

ccs wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone remember when Monoliths were scary tough because rules like Lance and Melta meant literally nothing to them, so only Broadside squads carried any significant threat?

You'd think that. But on our table it always worked out to be that 1 lone lascannon shot from waaay across the board.
You know, the one that'd invariably roll a 6 to hit, a 6 vs Armor pen (for that magic # of 15) & then another 6 on the damage table....
Sometimes on the 1st turn. :(

Well, yeah, that could possibly happen, but when compared to re-roll To Hit, Pen on a 5+, and got the damage table modifier, and up to 3 in the unit, vs the up to 4 Lascannons in a unit or 3 with one Reroll To Hit, requiring consistent 6s to do all that...

 Charistoph wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone remember when Monoliths were scary tough because rules like Lance and Melta meant literally nothing to them, so only Broadside squads carried any significant threat?

You'd think that. But on our table it always worked out to be that 1 lone lascannon shot from waaay across the board.
You know, the one that'd invariably roll a 6 to hit, a 6 vs Armor pen (for that magic # of 15) & then another 6 on the damage table....
Sometimes on the 1st turn. :(

Well, yeah, that could possibly happen, but when compared to re-roll To Hit, Pen on a 5+, and got the damage table modifier, and up to 3 in the unit, vs the up to 4 Lascannons in a unit or 3 with one Reroll To Hit, requiring consistent 6s to do all that...

On our tables of the time getting sniped off by someones lone LC dude happened so often it was a running joke.

ccs wrote:
On our tables of the time getting sniped off by someones lone LC dude happened so often it was a running joke.

Sounds like someone needed to be checking dice

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

On a side note, I think further speculation on how to restore the 3rd Ed Living Metal rule, or other improvements, would go in to the Proposed Rules board. This thread is mostly just how the Monolith really isn't living up to it's hype any more.

 Charistoph wrote:

ccs wrote:
On our tables of the time getting sniped off by someones lone LC dude happened so often it was a running joke.

Sounds like someone needed to be checking dice

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

On a side note, I think further speculation on how to restore the 3rd Ed Living Metal rule, or other improvements, would go in to the Proposed Rules board. This thread is mostly just how the Monolith really isn't living up to it's hype any more.

It wasn't one player, one set of dice, or even one manufacturer of dice.