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.
Just a question but IIRC the DE codex has a specific detachment (raiders of deep space or some such). The detachment has its own layout and as such wouldn't be effected by a change in the general format for a patrol. There would have to be a specific statement saying that the general change effects that specific chart since, at least to me, that chart is outside the normal rules/bounds of army building.
It's the same thing as all marines get 2 wounds except chaos marines. They have to wait for their own codex to update. Or, all melta weapons get D d6+2 at half range except eldar melta weapons which need their own special rule. My point being that GW makes tons of rules that only effect specific things until they get around to changing all the aspects of that thing.
Personally, I think that "armies" like Custodes and Harlequins should NOT be stand alone forces, ever, not even close, and the same really for SoB. IMHO, these should be subfactions which need help from e.g. Imp Guard or CWE in order to wage war i.e. fill out 2000pt full armies. Custodes IMHO should not be anywhere near a tyranid, for example, unless there is some scenario whereby GSC infiltrates a holy reliquery too closely associated with Terra to ignore the possible invasion threat, something like that maybe, but otherwise, such factions whould be relegated to sub-faction status whereby they might fill in some unit selections for affiliated main forces without necessary penalty depending on the scenario. For instance, Harlies discover that Crons are getting too close to a webway entrance that is critical for resources used also by a CW, so they alert the CWE of the threat and accompany them to the battlefield, again without penalty.
Well Jeff, to put it succinctly, you're wrong.
First: The 9th edition of the game provides support for games at 500 and 1k points. Whether or not you can make a 2k army out of it is no longer a factor in determining whether or not a faction should get its own book and be a real force.
Second: The detachment system already does allow exactly what you're talking about in the last two lines of your post. Outside of the new GT 2022 Mission Pack, the draw backs were: pay CP for the additional detachment and lose faction purity bonus. No need to re-invent the wheel.
Third: Some fluff has been updated now that 40k is not taking place in a static setting. The Indomitus Crusade is cannon now, so whether or not Custodes make sense as an army is a decision that must be made within that context. Morven Vahl is now the Abbess of BOTH Sororitas convents AND a High Lord of Terra, and she is actively involved in promotion wars of faith across the galaxy. And Harlequins, like all Eldar, have had to reconsider the old ways in like of the Ynarri.
Now sure, you can argue that the new fluff doesn't meet with your standards; you can speculate that the fluff ONLY exists to justify the models/ dexes and revenue; you can argue that YOU think 40k should have continued to exist frozen in a static setting forever. Those are valid opinions.
Fourth: I don't want to go backwards and lose things that some players want because people who preferred other editions of the game, or who prefer balance at any cost think it should be so. Quite frankly, it was the return of the GSC at the tag end of 7th that brought me back to this game, and the revamp of the sisters range that kept me. The new factions, which you don't think deserve to be here, might be one of the reasons 8th outsold all previous versions of the game and 9th outsold 8th.
If YOU don't like Harlies, or Custodes, or GSC or SOB don't f*&^ing play them. Proposing that they should be taken away from those who DO play them is pretty offensive- though I acknowledge that likely wasn't your intention.
Did you even read my post? Not well, apparently. Dude, I own a growing SoB collection partly of metals that I have carted to four different countries over the course of almost thirty years, and harlies were amongst my first models also metal along with CWE same story, not cheap to ship from the States to Korea to Holland and now to Portugal… GSC is in my shopping cart, so to speak, but I put my time into orks and now chaos marines… oh, and I have been collecting inquisition for as long and have built an imp guard collection to support both SoB and Inqu and eventually chaos and much later gsc… that is the long term plan.
Dude, srsly, you are wrong. And more than factually, I mean you are offensively morally wrong. Next time read the post before you start smacking people around maybe?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunarSol wrote: I would MUCH rather see Guard/Marines mix than mixing chapters.
Me too.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/01/21 22:02:59
Leo_the_Rat wrote: Just a question but IIRC the DE codex has a specific detachment (raiders of deep space or some such). The detachment has its own layout and as such wouldn't be effected by a change in the general format for a patrol. There would have to be a specific statement saying that the general change effects that specific chart since, at least to me, that chart is outside the normal rules/bounds of army building.
You are correct- the Realspace Raid detachment can actually be ANY type of detachment. It must include:
- An archon warlord
- One unit of Kabalites
- A succubus
- One Wych unit
- A Haemonculus
- One unit of Wracks
If it has all of those things, it's a Realspace Raid, regardless of what type of detachment it is. All the Kabbals in it get the Kabal Obsession; all the Cults get the Cult Obsession, and all the Covens get the Coven Obsession. It is unaffected by any rules changes, whether to Patrol composition or subfaction Soup.
The OTHER way to play DE is Raiding Force:
Here, you take as many patrols as game size allows. Each Patrol is either Kabal, Cult, or Coven at your discretion, and they all get the appropriate Obsession.
This WILL be affected by rules changes:
- you can still do this, but you may only bring detachments belonging to a single Kabal, a single Cult and a single Coven.
- each of these detachments will also be affected by any changes to the composition of Patrols
Personally, I think that "armies" like Custodes and Harlequins should NOT be stand alone forces, ever, not even close, and the same really for SoB. IMHO, these should be subfactions which need help from e.g. Imp Guard or CWE in order to wage war i.e. fill out 2000pt full armies.
It is nice that you like Harlies, have played them forever. I'm surprised you're of the opinion that they shouldn't be playable as a standalone 2k force, but according to the quote, you are.
I am surprised that you are considering buying GSC; who are you planning to ally them with (as the quote above CLEARLY indicates that you don't think they should be a stand alone army)?
You and I both like mixed Inquisition/ guard/ sisters... But I believe Sisters SHOULD be able to be played on their own if a player chooses; according to the quoted text, you're not sure about that... Though it does seem like they might come closer to that standard for you than Harlies or GSC.
Now, I'm gonna walk my post back a bit, because you're right- it didn't live up to my usual standards of diplomacy, and you seem like a decent enough dude, so leading with "you're wrong" and dropping the F-bomb was probably a bit much.
And clearly what I should have closed with is:
If you believe these eccentric and awesome little armies that we both love should only be playable if they have helpers from another list- I totally support that, and you SHOULD be able to do that, because it is fluffy AND cool. However, I feel it's equally cool and fluffy to play them as stand alone armies, and I find it odd that there are people who think I should not be able to do that. I think all the other players who play these factions as stand-alone armies probably feel the same way.
Again, sorry to be rude in my original response- uncalled for.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/01/21 22:39:05
Leo_the_Rat wrote: Just a question but IIRC the DE codex has a specific detachment (raiders of deep space or some such). The detachment has its own layout and as such wouldn't be effected by a change in the general format for a patrol. There would have to be a specific statement saying that the general change effects that specific chart since, at least to me, that chart is outside the normal rules/bounds of army building.
You are correct- the Realspace Raid detachment can actually be ANY type of detachment. It must include:
- An archon warlord
- One unit of Kabalites
- A succubus
- One Wych unit
- A Haemonculus
- One unit of Wracks
If it has all of those things, it's a Realspace Raid, regardless of what type of detachment it is. All the Kabbals in it get the Kabal Obsession; all the Cults get the Cult Obsession, and all the Covens get the Coven Obsession. It is unaffected by any rules changes, whether to Patrol composition or subfaction Soup.
The OTHER way to play DE is Raiding Force:
Here, you take as many patrols as game size allows. Each Patrol is either Kabal, Cult, or Coven at your discretion, and they all get the appropriate Obsession.
This WILL be affected by rules changes:
- you can still do this, but you may only bring detachments belonging to a single Kabal, a single Cult and a single Coven.
- each of these detachments will also be affected by any changes to the composition of Patrols
To get this clear, all Drukhari detachments are equally impacted by the Keyword Replacement rule. All Drukhari detachments have the Raiding Forces rule. All Drukhari armies will be limited to having 1 Kabal, 1 Cult, and 1 Coven units within them.
Note that while a Realspace Raid Detachment can technically be any detachment, only a Battalion or Brigade has the 3 HQ Slots needed to meet the qualifications.
Also, you can use any detachment via Raiding Forces, you just don't get the changed Command Cost of 0 CP unless all the detachments are Patrols.
So it is perfectly legal to field a Realspace Raid Battalion and a Haemonculus Coven Battalion in the same army. Just know that all the Coven units in both detachments will be from the same Coven under the WZN:GTMP.
This change is fine for armies like Grey Knights where all of the subfactions look the same, but really sucks for Space Marines...I have over 3000 points of Space Marines, but because I chose for artistic reasons to paint up different chapters, I now have an illegal army. I'm not going to say "those models that are clearly Space Wolves are pretending to be Salamanders". I'm sure some folks would though - if that works for you and your opponents then great.
Verthane wrote: This change is fine for armies like Grey Knights where all of the subfactions look the same, but really sucks for Space Marines...I have over 3000 points of Space Marines, but because I chose for artistic reasons to paint up different chapters, I now have an illegal army. I'm not going to say "those models that are clearly Space Wolves are pretending to be Salamanders". I'm sure some folks would though - if that works for you and your opponents then great.
In fairness Space Marines are somewhat the exception because their "subfactions" are fully fledged armies with subfactions of their own and unique models produced by GW. Sure they do share a lot of the same common core models, but almost no other army has the sub-faction diversity in model range that Space Marines have.
Overread wrote: It might also start to stop the creep of "paint influences gameplay" rules which have been slipping into some event packs. Ergo the "if you painted using X Subfaction scheme you must use only that subfaction.
Except that is good rules. An army that is painted to exactly match a subfaction should only be allowed to play as that subfaction, or at the generic Codex version, but never as a different subfaction. A fully-modeled, fully-painted 13th Space Wolf army should never be allowed to play as Blood Angels, much less Dark Angels; however, playing as generic Space Marines should be acceptable. Players should not be able to visually confuse their opponent at the metagame level.
In the case of a SM army painted as several different subfactions for variety's sake, they could be fielded en masse as generic Space Marines. Same with an IG remnants army consisting of units from several subfactions fighting as generic Imperial Guard. And so forth. IOW an army with a squad of Salamanders, a squad of Dark Angels, and a squad of Blood Angels fights at the lowest common denominator as generic Space Marines. Similarly a mixed IG Regiment of Tallarn, Vostroyans, Krieg, Catachan, Tanith, Mordians and Praetorians fighting as generic Guard.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 01:54:25
In fairness Space Marines are somewhat the exception because their "subfactions" are fully fledged armies with subfactions of their own and unique models produced by GW. Sure they do share a lot of the same common core models, but almost no other army has the sub-faction diversity in model range that Space Marines have.
No disagreement there. It sucks to have an entire army made illegal overnight, though. Feels like overreaction on my part. Now I have a set of bad choices -- never play that army again, play it as a "counts as/proxy" army, or go out and buy and paint a whole bunch more models to make one of the chapters up to size for games, or repaint existing models that I've painted and that I like.
Grey Knights or Sisters of Battle players have no such problems (unless I'm just blissfully unaware of some minor armor markings that designate what subfaction they belong to, but it certainly isn't as major as "repaint the model").
Overread wrote: It might also start to stop the creep of "paint influences gameplay" rules which have been slipping into some event packs. Ergo the "if you painted using X Subfaction scheme you must use only that subfaction.
Except that is good rules. An army that is painted to exactly match a subfaction should only be allowed to play as that subfaction, or at the generic Codex version, but never as a different subfaction. A fully-modeled, fully-painted 13th Space Wolf army should never be allowed to play as Blood Angels, much less Dark Angels; however, playing as generic Space Marines should be acceptable. Players should not be able to visually confuse their opponent at the metagame level.
In the case of a SM army painted as several different subfactions for variety's sake, they could be fielded en masse as generic Space Marines. Same with an IG remnants army consisting of units from several subfactions fighting as generic Imperial Guard. And so forth. IOW an army with a squad of Salamanders, a squad of Dark Angels, and a squad of Blood Angels fights at the lowest common denominator as generic Space Marines. Similarly a mixed IG Regiment of Tallarn, Vostroyans, Krieg, Catachan, Tanith, Mordians and Praetorians fighting as generic Guard.
There are no "generic Space Marines". They always have a chapter trait.
Overread wrote: It might also start to stop the creep of "paint influences gameplay" rules which have been slipping into some event packs. Ergo the "if you painted using X Subfaction scheme you must use only that subfaction.
Except that is good rules. An army that is painted to exactly match a subfaction should only be allowed to play as that subfaction, or at the generic Codex version, but never as a different subfaction. A fully-modeled, fully-painted 13th Space Wolf army should never be allowed to play as Blood Angels, much less Dark Angels; however, playing as generic Space Marines should be acceptable. Players should not be able to visually confuse their opponent at the metagame level.
Space Marines are the exception because their sub-factions are basically akin to full armies because of unique models. Most Space Wolves armies won't just have core space marines, but unique wolves models and perhaps shoulder guards and more. So its a lot more than just the paint on the armour.
That said I do 100% think that paint should not matter. Outside of Space Marines almost every other subfaction is little more than half a paragraph of rules variation; with no unique models (a few exceptions eg when the new Eldar codex drops Harliquins will be one such example, though that's more likely going to be them limited ot just Harly models instead of models that can only be taken in a Harly unit). And I'd wager that, again, outside of Marines, most people haven't got a clue about official paint schemes. Even Marines are a basic "White Scars are white; Ultramarines are Blue; Space Wolves are light blue" kind of understanding. Heck jump over to Age of Sigmar and the Daughters of Khaine have several subfactions where the only difference is a slightly different shade of red paint. That's it - that's the only real difference in the schemes.
Again I don't think its fair nor valid that if a person wants to build a close combat army and picks the close combat focused subfaction; that they should then be forced to rebuild and repaint an entire army just to then build a ranged army using the ranged subfaction rules.
Again Marines are different because their subfactions are fully fledged armies with subfaction forces within them; with unique models and upgrades and more. Bit again if their Spacewolves army is all bright red should that really matter one bit? It's only bad if they've clearly got space wovles only models (eg a wolf riders or the sledge) that they are using as proxies - and even then that comes under the proxy aspect of if your opponent is fine with it you're fine; but not in a competitive tournament.
Overread wrote: It might also start to stop the creep of "paint influences gameplay" rules which have been slipping into some event packs. Ergo the "if you painted using X Subfaction scheme you must use only that subfaction.
Except that is good rules. An army that is painted to exactly match a subfaction should only be allowed to play as that subfaction, or at the generic Codex version, but never as a different subfaction. A fully-modeled, fully-painted 13th Space Wolf army should never be allowed to play as Blood Angels, much less Dark Angels; however, playing as generic Space Marines should be acceptable. Players should not be able to visually confuse their opponent at the metagame level.
In the case of a SM army painted as several different subfactions for variety's sake, they could be fielded en masse as generic Space Marines. Same with an IG remnants army consisting of units from several subfactions fighting as generic Imperial Guard. And so forth. IOW an army with a squad of Salamanders, a squad of Dark Angels, and a squad of Blood Angels fights at the lowest common denominator as generic Space Marines. Similarly a mixed IG Regiment of Tallarn, Vostroyans, Krieg, Catachan, Tanith, Mordians and Praetorians fighting as generic Guard.
There are no "generic Space Marines". They always have a chapter trait.
True true, though I tend to think of Ultra Marines as the "generic" as they are the ones that GW uses as the bog-standard marines.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 02:06:03
Overread wrote: It might also start to stop the creep of "paint influences gameplay" rules which have been slipping into some event packs. Ergo the "if you painted using X Subfaction scheme you must use only that subfaction.
Except that is good rules. An army that is painted to exactly match a subfaction should only be allowed to play as that subfaction, or at the generic Codex version, but never as a different subfaction. A fully-modeled, fully-painted 13th Space Wolf army should never be allowed to play as Blood Angels, much less Dark Angels; however, playing as generic Space Marines should be acceptable. Players should not be able to visually confuse their opponent at the metagame level.
In the case of a SM army painted as several different subfactions for variety's sake, they could be fielded en masse as generic Space Marines. Same with an IG remnants army consisting of units from several subfactions fighting as generic Imperial Guard. And so forth. IOW an army with a squad of Salamanders, a squad of Dark Angels, and a squad of Blood Angels fights at the lowest common denominator as generic Space Marines. Similarly a mixed IG Regiment of Tallarn, Vostroyans, Krieg, Catachan, Tanith, Mordians and Praetorians fighting as generic Guard.
My one issue with this is that it punishes people who paint. I like my ultramarines. Why should a member of the Grey Legions be able to pick and choose, while I am locked into my chapter tactics? Even if my specific list would benefit from another? And if you enforce it for marines, you should do the same for other armies. Even if most people could not tell the difference between most sub-factions.
I get that WYSWYG is not just wargear options. You see blue, you expect them to fall back and shoot and a Ld bonus. You see red, you expect choppy. But if you pick one CT for your whole army, and don’t need to point out specific units using different rules, that’s not an unreasonable counts-as IMHO.
Verthane wrote: This change is fine for armies like Grey Knights where all of the subfactions look the same, but really sucks for Space Marines...I have over 3000 points of Space Marines, but because I chose for artistic reasons to paint up different chapters, I now have an illegal army. I'm not going to say "those models that are clearly Space Wolves are pretending to be Salamanders". I'm sure some folks would though - if that works for you and your opponents then great.
No you don't.
The solution is simple: Just don't play in a "War Zone Nachmund: Grand Tournament" game.
That page is quite explicitly clear that that's the rules for how you play that particular type of game. It does not say "These are the rules for Matched Play". It says: "A War Zone Nachmund: Grand Tournament game is waged by following the sequence below:" Hell, your only options game size are either an Incursion or Strike Force game.
All WZ:N:GT games may be Matched Play, but not all Matched Play need be WZ:N:GT....
Verthane wrote: This change is fine for armies like Grey Knights where all of the subfactions look the same, but really sucks for Space Marines...I have over 3000 points of Space Marines, but because I chose for artistic reasons to paint up different chapters, I now have an illegal army. I'm not going to say "those models that are clearly Space Wolves are pretending to be Salamanders". I'm sure some folks would though - if that works for you and your opponents then great.
No you don't.
The solution is simple: Just don't play in a "War Zone Nachmund: Grand Tournament" game.
That page is quite explicitly clear that that's the rules for how you play that particular type of game. It does not say "These are the rules for Matched Play". It says: "A War Zone Nachmund: Grand Tournament game is waged by following the sequence below:" Hell, your only options game size are either an Incursion or Strike Force game.
All WZ:N:GT games may be Matched Play, but not all Matched Play need be WZ:N:GT....
Wonderful! I'll get right on convincing the tournament organizers in my state not to hold War Zone Nachmund tournaments!
You have to be naive not to see that these will be standard event rules within 3.7 nanoseconds of the book's release. It doesn't matter one whit that the book says "War Zone Nachmund tournaments".
I thought about the armies I play, and realised that I never mix types of armies because, generally speaking, all my armies have their own backstory and are usually just one thing (my Iron Paladins use the White Scar rules, my Ultramarines are Ultramarines, my Guard are Cadians, etc.).
Except... my Chaos.
I mix'n'match different Chaos Legions/Renegade Chapters because that's the background of my army - a Khorne-leaning army of Renegades that is backed up by smaller warbands of Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion as they all flocked towards the Daemon Prince that leads the overall army.
This change instantly makes my Chaos army illegal. GW Tzscrews over Chaos once again...
I also very much dislike the idea of mono-Clan Ork armies.
Personally, I think that "armies" like Custodes and Harlequins should NOT be stand alone forces, ever, not even close, and the same really for SoB. IMHO, these should be subfactions which need help from e.g. Imp Guard or CWE in order to wage war i.e. fill out 2000pt full armies.
So, presumably if you feel this way about SoB, a military force that numbers in the billions, and Harlequins, of which there are unspecified quantities, surely you feel that Space Marines which are an order of magnitude less numerous should be held to the same standard?
Or alternatively, maybe you should feth off and let people play with their armies, and you play with yours?
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
Glad to know that at least my personal subfaction mixing army (Daemons) don't appear to be affected by this but this is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 03:24:25
Overread wrote: It might not have much impact, but it stops the trickle down impact from the tournamnets
It might also start to stop the creep of "paint influences gameplay" rules which have been slipping into some event packs. Ergo the "if you painted using X Subfaction scheme you must use only that subfaction.
With multi-subfaction this gets confusing if they've all the same scheme; however if you have only one per army/player then the paint scheme no longer matters as you don't have to tell different units apart from each other at the army level.
That's coming from GW, so I doubt that's changing. In the past Marneus Calgar, Asmodai, Lemartes, and all the rest could come from their actual chapter or a successor chapter, but no more. GW hasn't come out and said that Blood Angels models must be painted Blood Red or close there-to but that's the next step and players/etc are just getting ahead of GW.
Void__Dragon wrote: Glad to know that at least my personal subfaction mixing army (Daemons) don't appear to be affected by this but this is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
IMO it was a problem because it added more book keeping. 40k has enough to keep track of without trying to remember multiple unique specific subfaction rules/strats/wargears/warlord traits and which units they applied to.
Verthane wrote: This change is fine for armies like Grey Knights where all of the subfactions look the same, but really sucks for Space Marines...I have over 3000 points of Space Marines, but because I chose for artistic reasons to paint up different chapters, I now have an illegal army. I'm not going to say "those models that are clearly Space Wolves are pretending to be Salamanders". I'm sure some folks would though - if that works for you and your opponents then great.
In almost 23 years of playing 40k I've never seen a SM army mixing two chapters.
And unless the units you have are really chapter locked ones like Wulfen or TWC no one would complain if you play a SM list with models painted in different colour but under the same chapter's rules. Playing SM painted in different colours is definitely not illegal.
Verthane wrote: Grey Knights or Sisters of Battle players have no such problems (unless I'm just blissfully unaware of some minor armor markings that designate what subfaction they belong to, but it certainly isn't as major as "repaint the model").
Just to quickly address this one - I'm not enough of a GK expert to be able to tell you how/if the Brotherhoods are distinguished from each other, but there are fairly distinctive colour schemes for the six major Orders of the Sisters of Battle.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
The problem with a ruling like this is it means that GW are now adding absolute tons of rules complexity to their Codices, the majority of which you can't even use.
Take Thousand Sons.
They have 9 - nine! - and now you can't use 8 of them in your games. 88.88... % of your faction-based rules are simply not applicable to any army you make. And it's not like Space Marines, where there is a distinct difference between a White Scar, an Iron Hand, and an Imperial Fist. Thousand Sons Cults are still Thousand Sons.
Why have these endless fething rules if you're going to make a change that prevents the majority of them from being used in every game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 12:03:40
Because they don't make options for you to use them all at the same time. Complaining that you can't use all the subfactions of an army in the same game is like complaining that you can't get all the flavors of ice cream in your cup at the same time.
I fail to see the problem - subfactions within a codex/supplement are typically pretty short modifiers that benefit specific tactical choices. They aren't entire new armies (mostly, there's a few exceptions and that's mostly cutting down options on what units they can take or which form the core of the army). It's bonuses to close combat or ranged or such so you just take one and the bulk of the codex is still used.
Verthane wrote: This change is fine for armies like Grey Knights where all of the subfactions look the same, but really sucks for Space Marines...I have over 3000 points of Space Marines, but because I chose for artistic reasons to paint up different chapters, I now have an illegal army. I'm not going to say "those models that are clearly Space Wolves are pretending to be Salamanders". I'm sure some folks would though - if that works for you and your opponents then great.
In almost 23 years of playing 40k I've never seen a SM army mixing two chapters.
And unless the units you have are really chapter locked ones like Wulfen or TWC no one would complain if you play a SM list with models painted in different colour but under the same chapter's rules. Playing SM painted in different colours is definitely not illegal.
I occasionally played Marine crusade forces instead of mono-chapter armies back in the day. The idea of a crusade force made up of units from a variety of chapters was encouraged in an article in one of my first White Dwarfs, back in 2nd ed. The idea appealed to me. I never collected a crusade army specifically, but made sure that the basing of my various chapters matched so that I could use them as such in addition to their normal role in their respective armies. I'll attach a (bad) picture of a crusade force I played in a 5th ed tournament.
Rules have always been a bit of an issue in this regard. Basically if you wanted to do that in 3rd ed to 5th, you either played vanilla Marines for simplicity or picked one of the other codices because you wanted to add a specific unit from that and then made the best of the choices you had. 6th ed onward, and before that 2nd ed, made it easier to include some chapter's special units (like say a combined Space Wolves and Dark Angels force with their respective units). It's never been a big deal keeping their rules sorted out until GW went bonkers with all those layered rules.
It's one of the bigger downsides of the recent focus on bespoke rules (with a side order of no model, no rules, but let's not get into that). If a Space Marine can't just be a Space Marine anymore, but has to have half a dozen layers of rules to tell you he's a White Consul in Phobos armor with slightly different bolter A and a spooky mask and not a Black Consul in Phobos armor with slightly different bolter B and a not very spooky helmet. You have to keep track of a lot more in a game that already has tons to keep track of without the help. Cutting down on extra rules is probably good for the game, but unfortunately also impacts some combined forces that have been in the background for ages, and that some players chose to play and now can't to the same extent as before.
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
I mix'n'match different Chaos Legions/Renegade Chapters because that's the background of my army - a Khorne-leaning army of Renegades that is backed up by smaller warbands of Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion as they all flocked towards the Daemon Prince that leads the overall army.
This change instantly makes my Chaos army illegal. GW Tzscrews over Chaos once again...
I think that the core of this idea is still workable, but say you take a detachment of say a Battalion of CSM, a Patrol of TSons, and a Patrol of Deathguard?
3 detachments is legal over 1k points (and how would you work this at less anyway?).
Personally, I have been building auxiliaries for my knights, which I only started as an OPFOR for my Tau. I have TSons for when I run them as Chaos, I have Deathwatch for when I want to run them as IK, and I am building a swarm army of cultists and scum that are built chaosy but will fit better in the TOE as AM.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 13:45:59
'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
alextroy wrote: Because they don't make options for you to use them all at the same time. Complaining that you can't use all the subfactions of an army in the same game is like complaining that you can't get all the flavors of ice cream in your cup at the same time.
That's a terrible analogy.
It's not even about not being able to use all of them. You can't even use two.
alextroy wrote: Because they don't make options for you to use them all at the same time. Complaining that you can't use all the subfactions of an army in the same game is like complaining that you can't get all the flavors of ice cream in your cup at the same time.
That's a terrible analogy.
It's not even about not being able to use all of them. You can't even use two.
H.B.M.C. wrote: You have to be naive not to see that these will be standard event rules within 3.7 nanoseconds of the book's release. It doesn't matter one whit that the book says "War Zone Nachmund tournaments".
I thought about the armies I play, and realised that I never mix types of armies because, generally speaking, all my armies have their own backstory and are usually just one thing (my Iron Paladins use the White Scar rules, my Ultramarines are Ultramarines, my Guard are Cadians, etc.).
Except... my Chaos.
I mix'n'match different Chaos Legions/Renegade Chapters because that's the background of my army - a Khorne-leaning army of Renegades that is backed up by smaller warbands of Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion as they all flocked towards the Daemon Prince that leads the overall army.
This change instantly makes my Chaos army illegal. GW Tzscrews over Chaos once again...
Its not illegal, it just has to settle for one set of special rules rather than... six. They're Renegades, so everything gets the charge bonus or whatever it is now.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/01/22 14:33:47
-- $k 
-- 9k 
-- 6k 
-- 4k 
-- 
Ultramarines, 3rd Co. and friends, 16k+ 
4k 
Competition Index
