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.

 alextroy wrote:

Sotahullu wrote:
I just wonder what do they mean about Drukhari becoming more "friendly" in that article. Are they going to change Raiding Force or something else?

Although I don't think they will add extra warning page like in 5ed Codex...

My bet is on something like:

In a Drukhari detachment:

If all <<Kabal>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Kabal>>, they gain their Kabal Obsession.

If all <<Coven>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Coven>>, they gain their Coven Obsession.

If all <<Cult>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Cult>>, they gain their Cult Obsession.

It would be simple, clean, and not prone to too much abuse. You'd still need multiple detachments to benefit from multiples of a Kabal, Coven, or Cult obsession while allowing all three in one detachment.

Thats how I'd do it.

 Imateria wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

Sotahullu wrote:
I just wonder what do they mean about Drukhari becoming more "friendly" in that article. Are they going to change Raiding Force or something else?

Although I don't think they will add extra warning page like in 5ed Codex...

My bet is on something like:

In a Drukhari detachment:

If all <<Kabal>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Kabal>>, they gain their Kabal Obsession.

If all <<Coven>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Coven>>, they gain their Coven Obsession.

If all <<Cult>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Cult>>, they gain their Cult Obsession.

It would be simple, clean, and not prone to too much abuse. You'd still need multiple detachments to benefit from multiples of a Kabal, Coven, or Cult obsession while allowing all three in one detachment.

Thats how I'd do it.

Or a bit more limiting- Choose a (Kabal) for your detachment. All (Kabal) Units gain the specified Kabal Obsession even if the detachment includes (Cult) or (Coven) units.
Same for Cult and Coven versions.

So cult of strife players need to buy 2 books

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/03/12/get-a-first-look-inside-the-book-of-rust/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=40K&utm_content=40kcharadon12032021&fbclid=IwAR3B_QjhcBHb9QWGwRbCOss2NJlcTjBJS5ZahS1GmRIU6t8OiaKako1VJXo

 warmaster21 wrote:
So cult of strife players need to buy 2 books

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/03/12/get-a-first-look-inside-the-book-of-rust/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=40K&utm_content=40kcharadon12032021&fbclid=IwAR3B_QjhcBHb9QWGwRbCOss2NJlcTjBJS5ZahS1GmRIU6t8OiaKako1VJXo

Could try reading it instead of just linking.

Army Rules
Have you ever wanted to field an entire Knight lance of Freeblades or a legion of the Cult Mechanicus’ unfeeling automatons? New rules for Armies of Renown allow you to create a themed force based on several key players of the Charadon campaign, each with its own benefits and restrictions. This offers a whole new way to build flavourful armies and score yourself some extra Relics, Warlord Traits, and Stratagems.

In addition to those rules, you’ll also find no less than three codex supplements for Forge World Metalica, House Raven, and the Cult of Strife, giving you expanded and updated options that can be used with their regular codexes.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

Sotahullu wrote:
I just wonder what do they mean about Drukhari becoming more "friendly" in that article. Are they going to change Raiding Force or something else?

Although I don't think they will add extra warning page like in 5ed Codex...

My bet is on something like:

In a Drukhari detachment:

If all <<Kabal>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Kabal>>, they gain their Kabal Obsession.

If all <<Coven>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Coven>>, they gain their Coven Obsession.

If all <<Cult>> units in this detachment are from the same <<Cult>>, they gain their Cult Obsession.

It would be simple, clean, and not prone to too much abuse. You'd still need multiple detachments to benefit from multiples of a Kabal, Coven, or Cult obsession while allowing all three in one detachment.

Thats how I'd do it.

Or a bit more limiting- Choose a (Kabal) for your detachment. All (Kabal) Units gain the specified Kabal Obsession even if the detachment includes (Cult) or (Coven) units.
Same for Cult and Coven versions.

If that means that Cult and Coven units in the detachment don't get a trait then the idea is mind numbingly stupid. We want to get away from having to take multiple detachments just so our army can get it's basic traits, not enforce it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 warmaster21 wrote:
So cult of strife players need to buy 2 books

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/03/12/get-a-first-look-inside-the-book-of-rust/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=40K&utm_content=40kcharadon12032021&fbclid=IwAR3B_QjhcBHb9QWGwRbCOss2NJlcTjBJS5ZahS1GmRIU6t8OiaKako1VJXo

Could try reading it instead of just linking.

Army Rules
Have you ever wanted to field an entire Knight lance of Freeblades or a legion of the Cult Mechanicus’ unfeeling automatons? New rules for Armies of Renown allow you to create a themed force based on several key players of the Charadon campaign, each with its own benefits and restrictions. This offers a whole new way to build flavourful armies and score yourself some extra Relics, Warlord Traits, and Stratagems.

In addition to those rules, you’ll also find no less than three codex supplements for Forge World Metalica, House Raven, and the Cult of Strife, giving you expanded and updated options that can be used with their regular codexes.

Well the blurb makes me say the same thing as Warmaster21....So cult of strife players need to buy 2 books?! Well I suppose that isn't a "need" but c'mon, if you really want to play the cult of strife with all the options, then yes you would also want to have this book.

Much like how Necron players “have” to buy two books (codex and the other war zone book everyone immediately forgot), right?

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Much like how Necron players “have” to buy two books (codex and the other war zone book everyone immediately forgot), right?

That's different, because that didn't offer anything for people who play real 40k, the way it was meant to be. 2000 points, Grand Tournament 2020. Whereas this one will, as far as we know, offer that but also dreck like "Crusade rules" and "lore".
/s

I don’t own any Space Marine supplements, but how close does 4 pages of supplemental rules compare to the rules part of the C:SM supplements? Is this the parity some have been asking for?

 alextroy wrote:
I don’t own any Space Marine supplements, but how close does 4 pages of supplemental rules compare to the rules part of the C:SM supplements? Is this the parity some have been asking for?

I guess that breaks down into a page of detachment rules (mostly rehashed), a page of relics and warlord traits, a page of stratagems and a page of objectives? It's probably not complete parity, but considering the gulf in popularity between Space Wolves (for example) and Cult of Strife, I'll take it.

 alextroy wrote:
I don’t own any Space Marine supplements, but how close does 4 pages of supplemental rules compare to the rules part of the C:SM supplements? Is this the parity some have been asking for?

Pretty close really and joy to see this being finally done for non Marines!

Most of the printed Marine supplements is lore.

Hopefuly this will be enjoyable as a read like Broken Realms has been thus far, though knowing GW will the rules get updated in the new Codexes....

More magic for Death Guard could be interesting.

the_scotsman wrote:

One drug-addled lightning fast berserker riding a flying green goblin hoverbike swinging a darth maul double bladed giant cleaver now has equal to the number of attacks of a space marine holding a gigantic heavy ranged cannon instead of 1 less.

Be still my heart!

This got me good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leggy wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I don’t own any Space Marine supplements, but how close does 4 pages of supplemental rules compare to the rules part of the C:SM supplements? Is this the parity some have been asking for?

I guess that breaks down into a page of detachment rules (mostly rehashed), a page of relics and warlord traits, a page of stratagems and a page of objectives? It's probably not complete parity, but considering the gulf in popularity between Space Wolves (for example) and Cult of Strife, I'll take it.

Excluding data sheets it has been traits, relics, special issue wargear, psychic, strats, and objectives -- about 7 pages so it is about the same considering no spells and probably no objectives.

Hey, we are getting a Combat Patrol!

Quite a good selection.

Are these new deathworld trees in the background? They look like injection-molded plastic.

If its the same price as other Combat Patrol boxes, its basically the raider and archon free.

The dice are pretty decent. Sadly, I think that's the most positive thing for DE this time around.

Little surprised at the warzone book, but I guess they've been sitting on it too long. Really don't like the 'Armies of Renown: forces which trade off restrictions in unit choices for additional benefits.' Reminds me too much of Warmachine theme forces (and past GW attempts at chapter/regiment traits), where you lose access to things you weren't going to take anyway to gain benefits to the things you did want. The balance point is always off somewhere in the ether.

Now that is a combat patrol worth buying. Pity about the lack of new models, hope the book is good

That’s the first Combat Patrol box I’ve had any kind of inclination to get.

£135 value combat patrol...

The marine ones are great value still but they don't look anywhere near as good as this considering £16 of them are upgrade sprues.

Actually makes you hopeful for future combat patrols also.

Thats actually a really good Combat Patrol box, it makes for a sensible starting point to an army. I'm surprised how many people are complaining about the dice beeing dull, given how aweful GW's dice end up being whenever they try to make them exciting I'd say that was blessing, these genuinly look good and usable (unlike the Necron dice).

I like the older style over the top decorative dice personally, not so much for gaming, but for collecting. XD

The last few sets of army dice haven't been worth looking at IMO, solid color dice, and a symbol on the six side. Not even a skull on the one side. Meh, boring.

That combat patrol is great though, its everything I hoped it would be, will definitely be picking up a pair of them.

That’s an excellent combat patrol. Whoever picked the selection of minis did awesome. It’s a good value and it gives you a little bit of everything and a good core to an army. You get a shooty core troop, a transport, an anti-armor unit, and a heavy hitting melee unit. Also nice that it includes the newest minis from the range as not every existing player may have them. If I was to play Drukhari I would be stoked at this.

That patrol box looks really good, gotta grab one or two.
Dice are nice but I'd prefer darker color scheme.

Surprised to see two Raider chassis in there.

Here I was expecting yet another Venom and perhaps some jetbikes.

One other thing, the datacards said there were 41 stratagems including the 7 from the BRB, so thast 34 strats in the new codex, the old one had 33.

 Imateria wrote:
One other thing, the datacards said there were 41 stratagems including the 7 from the BRB, so thast 34 strats in the new codex, the old one had 33.

Wow! You mean GW went to the trouble of writing a whole new Stratagem for Dark Eldar?

Truly this is a high-effort codex.

And don't forget - we even get to keep all the stratagems Blood of the Phoenix gave us!

Edit: eh. Nevermind

 Imateria wrote:
One other thing, the datacards said there were 41 stratagems including the 7 from the BRB, so thast 34 strats in the new codex, the old one had 33.

34 seems to be the standard count for stratagem in 9th edition codices, unless you have a supplement, of course.
I also wouldn't be surprised if you have a full revamp of stratagems. For DG only a hand full of stratagems from codex and PA made it to the new codex, everything else was new or greatly changed.

yeah, it's not like they're just adding 1 strategem. You'll lose some, gain new ones, and most will see some form of change. Definitely a weird stance to think that 34 strats means zero effort.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Surprised to see two Raider chassis in there.

Here I was expecting yet another Venom and perhaps some jetbikes.

Theyve been stuffing venoms and reavers in so many boxes I was beginning to think they might be Primaris Lieutenants in disguise. I've ended up with 10 of the things, and not a single one of them is actually a model I intentionally sought out, they've all been packaged with something else. I'm hoping (but not expecting) the new codex comes with a "Vyper" equivalent that trades the transport capacity for a bigger weapon, since I doubt I'll ever use all of them otherwise. Probably end up selling a few or using some for conversion fodder, etc.