Drukhari Codex Incoming

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.

**Yarium**

Yeah, we've been down this road. The first are reasonable, but it's literally just half a year until you see something on the level of "Don't take any Flyers in your Space Marine force, but you get free Transports instead."

**Tyel**

kodos wrote:
Tyel wrote:
Don't think its 7th level overpowered given those are some real limitations.

the first ones in 7th were not overpowered either, as well as the first ones in 3rd

but GW need to start somewhere

True enough I guess.
I tend to forget about the ones before Necrons.

From memory DE could take a fairly extensive grab bag of units and.... I forget what bonus they got. More fast attack slots maybe?

**Jidmah**

Voss wrote:
Yep, really, really.
No. Obviously 'no one was ever taking those' isn't the point. But if you present a system where you can trade off optional things that are merely average to make other things better, you aren't presenting a meaningful choice. Just a buff.
If you're already considering an infantry heavy DG list, you might as well go all out and commit, and get the free bonuses. If you're not considering it (and don't play any of the other armies that get $pecial DLC rule$ in this book), I guess you save $60

Um, I agree with you in general, but in this specific case, you're just wrong. Death Guard ditching their vehicles automatically means ditching their ability to bring big guns to the table, the biggest guns infantry can carry are plasma guns, blight launchers and reaper autocannons. You also ~~can't bring Mortarion and~~ are locked into a mediocre plague fleet.
They literally expect you to kill vehicles with psychic powers and pox walkers.

To me, this limitation makes the whole thing just a joke army you run for fun. And that's actually good news - I have no reason to spend even a single cent on a book that turns my death guard into orks

edit: I was wrong, you can have Mortarion.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:
From memory DE could take a fairly extensive grab bag of units and.... I forget what bonus they got. More fast attack slots maybe?

Orks "gained" being more susceptible to morale, squad leaders killing themselves and hammer of wrath if you charged 10" or more.

**Sasori**

Not a fan of this development at all. They've done a decent job so far in 9th, and I feel like this is one way to flush it all down the toilet.

I was hoping they would tackle the rules bloat a little bit. Just really not happy about this right now.

**Kanluwen**

Yarium wrote:
Yeah, we've been down this road. The first are reasonable, but it's literally just half a year until you see something on the level of "Don't take any Flyers in your Space Marine force, but you get free Transports instead."

We've gotten three books worth of this specific concept for Lord of the Rings and none have been anywhere like that.

These aren't formations.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:
Don't think its 7th level overpowered given those are some real limitations.

But... its not something that should be coming out in the first year of a new edition. If GW wanted Terminus Est Assault Force to be a viable, alternative way to play DG - why not put it in the DG codex? Why do you need alternate ways to play a book that came out a few weeks ago?

Basically its a cool idea, just don't think it should have been done this way.

Death Guard was supposed to be out awhile ago.

As for why not put it in the DG codex? To avoid other people asking why their books didn't include these things.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
Also, seems like the only drukhari preview we're getting is gonna be the one from yesterday, rip. I expect the remainder of this week will be 2 regiments of renown per day...though I suppose the RoR for wych cults is a drukhari preview, let us know what our day 1 dlc will be.

How are they gonna further restrict wych cults, I wonder? we have like 6 units total. No vehicles probably.

You don't get an Army of Renown for Drukhari.

as a "oh no we need to sell more books" rule system goes, I like these a lot better than 7th ed formations, and also better than the vigilus..thingies from 8th that just costed a CP and then gave you a couple relics and strats.

I'm not going to buy the book - these sorts of rules have the lifespan of soft cheese, and I've got no interest in playing the campaign mode. But I definitely don't mind playing against these rules, the benefits are fairly slight and the restrictions fairly hefty.

How the heck do the Admech benefits work though? Isn't the whole 'set to defend, hold strong' thing just the exact rule for Defensible cover? Are they counted as being in Defensible Cover if they're in their DZ or near an objective, is that the deal?
If so that's kinda a boring playstyle I guess. "here's some rules so you can sit in your DZ and never move, how fun for you and your opponent."

It seems to be telling you that if you use "Set to Defend" or "Hold Strong" as in the Defensible Cover rules, you get an additional bonus if you've taken the Mechanicus Defence Force setup.

**Billicus**

Kanluwen wrote:

As for why not put it in the DG codex? To avoid other people asking why their books didn't include these things.

I mean, the reason why is quite clearly because why sell you 1 book when they can sell you 2, isn't it

**Yarium**

Kanluwen wrote:
We've gotten three books worth of this specific concept for Lord of the Rings and none have been anywhere like that.

These aren't formations.

Image too large for proper message board ettiquette.

Spoiler:

**Galas**

TBH Legendary Legions are done in a much more controlled way. They are basically their own army. You can't ally them, you lose all your base faction bonuses.

In this case for example you could ally other imperium detachments with the Metallica one. Is much more open to abuse compared with LOTR Legions, even if compared with old formations is more restrictive.

And even then you have legendary legions that are "superior" ways of playing an army like Theoden's Riders vs Rohan basic list.

**Kanluwen**

We don't know yet if you can still ally with these. That might be a rule they didn't show off.

It is worth mentioning that the Mechanicus one was specifically called out as being more "generic" than the Death Guard one. Any Forge World could field a Mechanicus Defence Force but not every <Plague Company> might operate like The Harbingers.

**Sunny Side Up**

In before "If your Space Marines army only includes units with the <PRIMARIS> keyword, .... "

**Yarium**

Looks like these ARE for Matched Play...

There's a response from Warhammer 40k's Facebook Page on their announcement that says;

"These can be used in matched play as well as narrative games."

That is the entirety of their response to another person's question on it.

**Kanluwen**

That makes sense. The Legendary Legions are a-okay for that too in LOTR.

**Rihgu**

No Open Play?

terrible news for that one player.

**Kanluwen**

Do you really need to be told that the "do whatever you want as long as your opponent is okay with it" game mode can use whatever you want as long as your opponent is okay with it?

**alextroy**

the_scotsman wrote:
Also, seems like the only drukhari preview we're getting is gonna be the one from yesterday, rip. I expect the remainder of this week will be 2 regiments of renown per day...though I suppose the RoR for wych cults is a drukhari preview, let us know what our day 1 dlc will be.

No need to be so cynical. There will certainly be an article on Drukhari Crusade rules. The didn’t touch on that in the 7 things article.

**the_scotsman**

Oh. So the drukhari stuff is literally just going to be 'we dun sliced 10% of the codex off in hopes you'd buy another book' then. We dont get to play with the new toy at all.

....

Oh fast talking monotone british maaaaan, it's time for you to read me another entire book in one take again!

**Slayer-Fan123**

LOL what a garbage trade off. Don't take any vehicles on your army in order to Deep Strike Plague Marines instead of the much better Terminators, OH and you get access to a S×3 Power Fist which is rarely relevant!

**yukishiro1**

It's honestly insulting to be releasing this crap for some of the same armies you just released codexes for...in a separate, 60 dollar book. This is scraping the bottom of the barrel, even by GW's normally shameless standards.

The mechanic is also terrible and will lead to just the same terrible places it led last time they tried it.

At least we know why they removed specialist detachments with 9th: because they want to sell people a whole new set of tack-on-top-of-your-codex rules, this time with only 3 per book at $60 per book. Vigilus was too cheap and gave too much value, who knew?

**vipoid**

the_scotsman wrote:
Oh fast talking monotone british maaaaan, it's time for you to read me another entire book in one take again!

*Deep breath . . .*

**Voss**

Jidmah wrote:
Voss wrote:
Yep, really, really.
No. Obviously 'no one was ever taking those' isn't the point. But if you present a system where you can trade off optional things that are merely average to make other things better, you aren't presenting a meaningful choice. Just a buff.
If you're already considering an infantry heavy DG list, you might as well go all out and commit, and get the free bonuses. If you're not considering it (and don't play any of the other armies that get $pecial DLC rule$ in this book), I guess you save $60

Um, I agree with you in general, but in this specific case, you're just wrong. Death Guard ditching their vehicles automatically means ditching their ability to bring big guns to the table, the biggest guns infantry can carry are plasma guns, blight launchers and reaper autocannons. You also ~~can't bring Mortarion and~~ are locked into a mediocre plague fleet.
They literally expect you to kill vehicles with psychic powers and pox walkers.

To me, this limitation makes the whole thing just a joke army you run for fun. And that's actually good news - I have no reason to spend even a single cent on a book that turns my death guard into orks

edit: I was wrong, you can have Mortarion..

'It's fine because this specific one sucks' is most definitely missing the point. Sooner or later one isn't going to suck, and then the snowball starts rolling as they start writing new ones to that standard. Meanwhile they're wasting development time on joke books when they could be getting entire factions up to the bare minimum 9th edition standard. You know, rather than keeping them a wound down or with substandard non-imperial guns.

There's no good news here, just rules bloat for sake of bloat.

**yukishiro1**

Yeah, it's absolutely terrible in terms of what it says about the future of the game and GW's priorities. Especially that they are pushing this junk out at higher priority than 9th edition codexes.

**kodos**

Kanluwen wrote:
Yarium wrote:
Yeah, we've been down this road. The first are reasonable, but it's literally just half a year until you see something on the level of "Don't take any Flyers in your Space Marine force, but you get free Transports instead."

We've gotten three books worth of this specific concept for Lord of the Rings and none have been anywhere like that.

well, the LotR rules writers usually finish the stuff for everything at once and stay on the same level instead of putting the afford into 2-3 factions because they had a crazy idea that sounds really cool than get bored make some low afford rules for the next 5 without ever testing it and write something new because they had another crazy idea that sounds really cool

knowing one thing for 40k, those writing the rules just don't want to have everything in the same level but want to get as many crazy ideas into print as possible

**yukishiro1**

LOTR has a far better rules development system than 40k, judging by the output. They wouldn't be putting out supplemental $60 books full of stuff that should have been in the codexes they haven't released because they prioritized said $60 junk.

If this junk was coming out after all the 9th codexes it would still be a shameless money grab, but at least it'd feel like they had done their basic job before they started skimming off the top.

**Red Corsair**

Eldarsif wrote:
I think people are opening themselves for a letdown if they expect Covens to keep their 5++(or 4++ if you are Prophets). It made the choice of Drukhari Detachment very lopsided as 4++ was such a strong trait and even with 5++ Covens were out-surviving everything else in the codex.

So I fully expect the 4++ and 5++ will go.

I am betting the Haeonculus aura changed to be in line with an apothecary. So they will hand out the 6+++ now as well as be able to heal/res models. I also think that coven units stock will have +1 to the inured to suffering for the 5++

Whether or not PoF still add a further +1 is in the air. I am actually inclined to think it is still a further +1 and the other two creeds will be much stronger. Evidence being the poisoned tongue revamp.

**Imateria**

Red Corsair wrote:
Eldarsif wrote:
I think people are opening themselves for a letdown if they expect Covens to keep their 5++(or 4++ if you are Prophets). It made the choice of Drukhari Detachment very lopsided as 4++ was such a strong trait and even with 5++ Covens were out-surviving everything else in the codex.

So I fully expect the 4++ and 5++ will go.

I am betting the Haeonculus aura changed to be in line with an apothecary. So they will hand out the 6+++ now as well as be able to heal/res models. I also think that coven units stock will have +1 to the inured to suffering for the 5++

Whether or not PoF still add a further +1 is in the air. I am actually inclined to think it is still a further +1 and the other two creeds will be much stronger. Evidence being the poisoned tongue revamp.

That could work, though I do wonder where Eldarsif got the weird idea that Covens shouldn't be tanky, thats their whole bloody point.

**vipoid**

Imateria wrote:
Red Corsair wrote:
Eldarsif wrote:
I think people are opening themselves for a letdown if they expect Covens to keep their 5++(or 4++ if you are Prophets). It made the choice of Drukhari Detachment very lopsided as 4++ was such a strong trait and even with 5++ Covens were out-surviving everything else in the codex.

So I fully expect the 4++ and 5++ will go.

I am betting the Haeonculus aura changed to be in line with an apothecary. So they will hand out the 6+++ now as well as be able to heal/res models. I also think that coven units stock will have +1 to the inured to suffering for the 5++

Whether or not PoF still add a further +1 is in the air. I am actually inclined to think it is still a further +1 and the other two creeds will be much stronger. Evidence being the poisoned tongue revamp.

That could work, though I do wonder where Eldarsif got the weird idea that Covens shouldn't be tanky, thats their whole bloody point.

I also really hope Haemonculi aren't still limited to only affecting Coven stuff with their aura.

Incidentally, if Haemonculi no longer grant +1T, I wonder if Talos will be allowed their T7 back?

**the_scotsman**

God I HOPE they rework the haemonculus aura of that. I can count on...no fingers the number of times my haemonculus buffing my pain engines from T6 to the heady heights of T7 ever mattered even one time in a game.

Because nobody has S8 and S9 antitank weapons that just make that buff totally pointless....

**Spoletta**

Quite pessimist about this.

It cannot end well. We have been there many many times already.

**Eldarsif**

Imateria wrote:
Red Corsair wrote:
Eldarsif wrote:
I think people are opening themselves for a letdown if they expect Covens to keep their 5++(or 4++ if you are Prophets). It made the choice of Drukhari Detachment very lopsided as 4++ was such a strong trait and even with 5++ Covens were out-surviving everything else in the codex.

So I fully expect the 4++ and 5++ will go.

I am betting the Haeonculus aura changed to be in line with an apothecary. So they will hand out the 6+++ now as well as be able to heal/res models. I also think that coven units stock will have +1 to the inured to suffering for the 5++

Whether or not PoF still add a further +1 is in the air. I am actually inclined to think it is still a further +1 and the other two creeds will be much stronger. Evidence being the poisoned tongue revamp.

That could work, though I do wonder where Eldarsif got the weird idea that Covens shouldn't be tanky, thats their whole bloody point.

Units can be tanky without having invuln saves. At best I imagine Covens in general getting a +1 to their invuln saves(bringing them to the old 5++) but the 4++ I imagine is out as it was leagues above all other obsessions. GW has already burned themselves once on giving a subfaction better saves(Ossiarch Bonereapers) and they ended up with FAQ-ing it to something different.

**Tyel**

Things can be tanky because they are cheap.

But I'm not sure a Wrack with say T4 and a 6++ is *that* cheap. I assume the view is that if they get 3 poison attacks, they are quasi-Orks. But we wait and see.

(Also £22 for a unit that potentially costs 40 points is quite awful. Not uniquely so perhaps, but awful all the same. I've always wanted the ability to run a mono-Covens army, and maybe now's the time, but I thought this was a con 6 years ago.)