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.

Big bundle of stuff going up for preorder next week. Pretty much all the AoS and a bunch of Necromunda stuff that was pre-ordered.

They're really running out of things that they've revealed that they can stuff in front of the Chaos Marines coming out, so here's hoping it's the following week.

As for Daemon Weapons... interesting stuff. The idea that you have a character that benefits from a Warlord Trait, Relic, Legion Trait, and then a Daemon Weapon could be really nasty indeed.

A Terminator Lord with dual Lightning Claws and the Slaanesh Daemon Weapon and Mark of Slaanesh... Then throw them in Night Lords and give them the Warlord Trait that's +d3 attacks and always in slaughter phase and then the Relic that gives him a once-per-battle regain 3 wounds, +d3 attacks, +3" to aura abilities...

You get a Terminator Lord that likely gets something like 6+4d3 attacks with +1 to wound, +1 to advances/charges, fights first, ap-2, 1 damage, re-rolling wounds.

I think you'll have to settle for a little less power as daemon weapons are relics.

Not sure that's issue. If you can't have relic and daemon weapon there wouldn't have need to specfically exclude relic weapons as candinate for daemon weapon upgrade?

You can't have two relics, can you? So they have to specify that daemon weapons are relics so you can't have both because they don't want you to have both.

They may have to specify that you can't upgrade a relic to daemon weapon to avoid circumventing that restriction by turning a relic into a relic, thereby only having one relic but with unintended power boost.

The article specifically calls them out as Relics, capital R, and even directly contrasts them to other weapon Relics in that Daemon Weapons aren't tied to a specific weapon type.

Hmm, even without the relic, you're still at 6+d3 attacks.

It's a bit clumsily worded. If you look at it from an order-of-operations perspective, then the weapon only becomes a relic after you assign it a 'daemon weapon'. If you give a character a relic beforehand, and then assign a daemon weapon, it's not giving the character an extra relic. The weapon -then becomes- a relic for rules purposes.

idk, probably bupkis, but it's all clumsily worded anyway.

I have a very very low opinion of the GW rules writers, but even I think they might have managed to word their rules so you can't double up on a relic and daemon weapon. I do think they will just be a fluffy relic type for CSM.

Although the strange wording in the previewed rules did make me wonder if maybe you buy them using points rather than CP/strategem.

It also might be connected to either a generic master crafted upgrade (that can't go on relics/daemon weapons) or something to do with relics on champion models within units.

I've hit one of the later stages of grief now, and I'm just hoping WarCom have done the traditional preview of a couple of below average new rules and the really good stuff is still to come.

EightFoldPath wrote:
I have a very very low opinion of the GW rules writers, but even I think they might have managed to word their rules so you can't double up on a relic and daemon weapon. I do think they will just be a fluffy relic type for CSM.

Although the strange wording in the previewed rules did make me wonder if maybe you buy them using points rather than CP/strategem.

It also might be connected to either a generic master crafted upgrade (that can't go on relics/daemon weapons) or something to do with relics on champion models within units.

I've hit one of the later stages of grief now, and I'm just hoping WarCom have done the traditional preview of a couple of below average new rules and the really good stuff is still to come.

All downhill from here.

A big thing that could be coming, especially with the new tournament pack, is that warlord traits and relics may be limited to 1 each per army. Daemon Weapons could get around that by not technically being a relic purchase, giving Chaos something that helps them stand out in the new missions.

I just need to know one thing, and I don't care if it's from a Warcom article or a verifiable leak (as in an actual codex picture): Can our characters take jump packs. I can deal with whatever else they hit us with, but that will make or break the codex for me.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I just need to know one thing, and I don't care if it's from a Warcom article or a verifiable leak (as in an actual codex picture): Can our characters take jump packs. I can deal with whatever else they hit us with, but that will make or break the codex for me.

I hear you. Seems like such a small thing but I feel exactly the same.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I just need to know one thing, and I don't care if it's from a Warcom article or a verifiable leak (as in an actual codex picture): Can our characters take jump packs. I can deal with whatever else they hit us with, but that will make or break the codex for me.

I'm in the same boat wanting to see actual unit champion options.

I know some people don't think it matters but I'm double dipping with my HH legion so the more I know I can transfer between the two the easier it makes my life.

Working solidly on my iron warriors backlog and very much want to paint my chosen but have no idea how to equip them. Is the malefic weapons thing legit or not ? Everything else is basically painted but just those dudes are waiting for some attention.

Rogerio134134 wrote:
Working solidly on my iron warriors backlog and very much want to paint my chosen but have no idea how to equip them. Is the malefic weapons thing legit or not ? Everything else is basically painted but just those dudes are waiting for some attention.

No picture confirmation yet, just some playtester leaks that don't really tell us what the final version has.

Rogerio134134 wrote:
Working solidly on my iron warriors backlog and very much want to paint my chosen but have no idea how to equip them. Is the malefic weapons thing legit or not ? Everything else is basically painted but just those dudes are waiting for some attention.

If it is likely to be important to the way you play then I would wait. Keep in mind that whatever is good (or reasonable) in the 9th edition codex, will completely unsuspiciously be bad (or unreasonable) in the 10th edition codex. So you'll get 1~3 years of a good loadout then might need more Chosen.

I think that you're being overly optimistic. If we get something real good then it will be FAQ'd/Errata'd within a couple of months. Chaos isn't allowed to have nice things, only spikey things.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I think that you're being overly optimistic. If we get something real good then it will be FAQ'd/Errata'd within a couple of months. Chaos isn't allowed to have nice things, only spikey things.

I'm not expecting good things. I'm just expecting *something* to exist and I'm just waiting to see what that is.

One way or another, we'll end up being more Codex-adherent than many of the Loyalist Chapters.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
One way or another, we'll end up being more Codex-adherent than many of the Loyalist Chapters.

From the sounds of things Guilliman is moving back to the Legion organization, so it'll make us less codex compliant, but instead we'll get to be less legion compliant instead. Yay?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
One way or another, we'll end up being more Codex-adherent than many of the Loyalist Chapters.

From the sounds of things Guilliman is moving back to the Legion organization, so it'll make us less codex compliant, but instead we'll get to be less legion compliant instead. Yay?

Yeah! Because no CSM player wants to play a Legion. I mean, gw has been telling us that for *checks current year* fifteen years now! /s

(I know you're not advocating for that Zion. Just making the point .)

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
One way or another, we'll end up being more Codex-adherent than many of the Loyalist Chapters.

From the sounds of things Guilliman is moving back to the Legion organization, so it'll make us less codex compliant, but instead we'll get to be less legion compliant instead. Yay?

Yeah! Because no CSM player wants to play a Legion. I mean, gw has been telling us that for *checks current year* fifteen years now! /s

(I know you're not advocating for that Zion. Just making the point .)

As someone who is building a HH Legion and using them in 40k....yes I clearly want to play a codex compliant chapter of Night Lords.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
One way or another, we'll end up being more Codex-adherent than many of the Loyalist Chapters.

From the sounds of things Guilliman is moving back to the Legion organization, so it'll make us less codex compliant, but instead we'll get to be less legion compliant instead. Yay?

Yeah! Because no CSM player wants to play a Legion. I mean, gw has been telling us that for *checks current year* fifteen years now! /s

(I know you're not advocating for that Zion. Just making the point .)

Word Bearers have been espousing the Chaotic Truth of codex compliance for a while now, so it's only fitting that they'd make everyone else follow suit like with the Heresy.
That's the real reason Black Legion are losing Cult Troops, Erebus stabbed Abaddon with a magic dagger then read the Codex Astartes to him word for word.
It's not a coincidence that the Word Bearers' home world shares its name with a certain Ultramarines captain *tinfoil hat*

If they went straight down the legion organisation route we'd just have more complaining that people couldn't do what they wanted.

Imagine legionnaires being 5-20 all bolters or nothing. All specials and heavies in 5-10 man units but must have uniform loadouts etc.

Not really sure what the answer is at this point, they've always been nearer codex than legion compliant since I started in 3rd.

I think the answer is "be less restrictive".

And my comments about following the Codex were not about deviating form Legion organisation, more that it's weird how our squads have to act like Tactical Squads. Why can't we take 2 special weapons or even 2 heavy weapons in larger squads? We used to be able to...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think the answer is "be less restrictive".

And my comments about following the Codex were not about deviating form Legion organisation, more that it's weird how our squads have to act like Tactical Squads. Why can't we take 2 special weapons or even 2 heavy weapons in larger squads? We used to be able to...

But this would then mean you could easily represent BOTH Renegade and Legion style squads! This is a terrible idea./s

 blood reaper wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think the answer is "be less restrictive".

And my comments about following the Codex were not about deviating form Legion organisation, more that it's weird how our squads have to act like Tactical Squads. Why can't we take 2 special weapons or even 2 heavy weapons in larger squads? We used to be able to...

But this would then mean you could easily represent BOTH Renegade and Legion style squads! This is a terrible idea./s

Whilst I agree with you guys because I'll no doubt get impacted by all this too, 10 marines with 2 heavy weapons isn't legion nor codex doctrine, it's just randomly something they permitted. Even going back I'm fairly sure the special/heavy weapon guys were there just to make your chaos troop units feel like effective all comers rather than anything else.

I don't see why chaos tactical troops couldn't just take 2 heavy or special weapons per 10 models. That way you could have 2 special weapons if you wanted or 2 heavy weapons or the old one of each per full 10 man squad.

Originally I was thinking that it wouldn't be terrible to merge Tacticals with Havocs. Meaning up to 4 heavy/special weapons per 10 man squad but then I remembered that, in the old days, you could take 10 man Havoc squads but the extra 5 guys were just ablative wounds and chosen could have 4 special weapons in their squads.

Guess GW finally plugged that leak seeing as CSM is the only book this year we know is comong but can't get images from.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Guess GW finally plugged that leak seeing as CSM is the only book this year we know is comong but can't get images from.

Yes, so if seems. To echo your previous post: "Yay".

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Guess GW finally plugged that leak seeing as CSM is the only book this year we know is comong but can't get images from.

F for the poor guy that got shot in the head by corporate assassins and stuffed into a dumpster in a shoddy motel in Nottingham

EightFoldPath wrote:

Rogerio134134 wrote:
Working solidly on my iron warriors backlog and very much want to paint my chosen but have no idea how to equip them. Is the malefic weapons thing legit or not ? Everything else is basically painted but just those dudes are waiting for some attention.

If it is likely to be important to the way you play then I would wait. Keep in mind that whatever is good (or reasonable) in the 9th edition codex, will completely unsuspiciously be bad (or unreasonable) in the 10th edition codex. So you'll get 1~3 years of a good loadout then might need more Chosen.

No, that is not how things go. It is possible for such a result to occur, but not particularly more so than the best loadout remaining the best (or even getting better) or there being no change at all. Players should not be fearing a nonexistant trend when assembling their models.