Switch Theme:

Why were the Necrons far more popular than the Tomb Kings ever were?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




The fact for the last few years they are the default race included alongside Space Marines not just in the 40K noob kit equivalent Recruit Edition but even have far more set release of two factions in one Box (with the Space Marines always being included alongside) simply explains it all.

Where as the Tomb Kings were not only consistent low tier and struggled in sales.

Why Necrons surpass Tomb Kings so much in popularity despite simply being the 40K version?
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba




The Great State of New Jersey

The Necrons were already popular before any of those box sets you are referring to came out, so to credit that would be to put the cart before the horse.

Nobody really has an answer for you, maybe people thought Schwarzenegger and the Terminator franchise was better than Brendan Fraser and The Mummy franchise.

CoALabaer wrote:
Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
 
   
Made in ca
Deadshot Weapon Moderati




Because of a film called Terminator that established chromed metal kill-bots are awesome. Incidentally why the later Terminator films didn't do quite as well as the second, due to lack of gratuitous shiny and chrome.
   
Made in ca
Fresh-Faced New User




chaos0xomega wrote:
maybe people thought Schwarzenegger and the Terminator franchise was better than Brendan Fraser and The Mummy franchise.


Heresy!
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

A little movie called Terminator + the fact that 40k is (and was) more popular than WHFB.
Oh, and within WHFB? TK, while cool looking, were not overly powerful. Power always sells more than coolness factor.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Necrons languished for the better part of a decade with little support from GW.

Tomb Kings were also overlapping heavily with Vampire Counts.
   
Made in gb
Mad Gyrocopter Pilot





Northumberland

ccs wrote:
A little movie called Terminator + the fact that 40k is (and was) more popular than WHFB.
Oh, and within WHFB? TK, while cool looking, were not overly powerful. Power always sells more than coolness factor.


I mean, in 7th edition the Tomb Kings army list was pretty powerful so I don't know about that.



Necrons were barely touched for years, I'm glad they are getting some more recent limelight because they're pretty cool. I think their big change was actually giving them personalities, which has massively benefitted them as a faction.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/24 22:45:21


One and a half feet in the hobby


My Painting Log of various minis:
# Olthannon's Oscillating Orchard of Opportunity #

 
   
Made in us
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain






A Protoss colony world

Tomb Kings were possibly the coolest of the old WHFB armies. If I had played that game, that would have been an army I would play for sure, and that's part of why every time I consider starting Kings of War I'm drawn to the Empire of Dust (it's basically TK).

My armies (re-counted and updated on 11/1/23, including modeled wargear options):
Dark Angels: ~15000 Astra Militarum: ~1200 | Adeptus Custodes: ~1900 | Imperial Knights: ~2000 | Sisters of Battle: ~3500 | Leagues of Votann: ~1200 | Tyranids: ~2600 | Stormcast Eternals: ~5000
Check out my P&M Blogs: ZergSmasher's P&M Blog | Imperial Knights blog | Board Games blog | Total models painted in 2023: 40 | Total models painted in 2024: 7 | Current main painting project: Dark Angels
 Mr_Rose wrote:
Who doesn’t love crazy mutant squawk-puppies? Eh? Nobody, that’s who.
 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





SlamDunkerista wrote:
The fact for the last few years they are the default race included alongside Space Marines not just in the 40K noob kit equivalent Recruit Edition but even have far more set release of two factions in one Box (with the Space Marines always being included alongside) simply explains it all.

Where as the Tomb Kings were not only consistent low tier and struggled in sales.

Why Necrons surpass Tomb Kings so much in popularity despite simply being the 40K version?


Pre-9th necrons were more or less abandoned in support. And in another year some other faction replacing them in starter sets.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle





I'd say if GW restarted Tomb Kings today they'd sell, too. There are several Patreons out there doing Tomb Kings, Mantic has their Dust empire designs, there's a demand for sure. They're certainly much cooler than the ugly replacement they got in AoS.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

 Olthannon wrote:
ccs wrote:
A little movie called Terminator + the fact that 40k is (and was) more popular than WHFB.
Oh, and within WHFB? TK, while cool looking, were not overly powerful. Power always sells more than coolness factor.


I mean, in 7th edition the Tomb Kings army list was pretty powerful so I don't know about that.


"Pretty powerful" - for 1 out of the 4 editions of WHFB they existed in. Meanwhile there were things more powerful. And plenty of things were just plain more popular than Egyptian themed skeleton hordes - elves, dwarves, rat-men with crazy science weapons, dinosaur-men (riding dinosaurs!).... All in a game with an ever shrinking player base.



   
Made in in
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche






Hyderabad, India

It's a good question, and it might come back to why 40k and AoS are more popular than Fantasy was.

Both games offer a lot more bat-$%^& insane options than Fantasy which was always rooted in historical games and had a historical texture.

Freed from a strict world, in brought into the madness of AoS the Tomb Kings might do quite well indeed.

 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Tomb Kings got a book in 6th edition WHFB, didn't get another book or any models until 8th WHFB, more or less sucked for the entirety of WHFB last and presumably least popular edition, then got cut entirely. Their core units were ancient, derpy skeleton sculpts that where necessary to utilize the cool stuff people actually liked. The new hero models they got in 8th were in Finecast during its era where the quality control was absolute crap.

Really, it is impossible to compare them to Necrons because Tomb Kings were never given a chance to do well as an army. They were always handicapped by the nature of how their releases played out. A lot of people wanted to like the army, but GW's management of them made that rather difficult.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/25 07:46:04


Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Necrons haven't always been popular. The recent starter set has definitely helped make it easier to start them. Necrons also got some pretty cool development when they first appeared and have the "cool, shiny robot" thing going for them.

TK were rarely a powerful army in WH. They were also directly competing with Vampire Counts, who had a longer history as an army and were often more powerful. As a result they didn't fill their own distinct niche in the same way Necrons do. Finally, I think TK suffered a bit from leaning too heavily into the Egyptian theme, which meant they often lacked personaility of their own, IMO.
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

This:

ccs wrote:
A little movie called Terminator


And don't forget Stargate, for the sci-fi egyptian theme, and Matrix, for the insect machines, as well. But also this:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Lord Damocles wrote:


Tomb Kings were also overlapping heavily with Vampire Counts.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/05/25 08:11:15


 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Very simply?

Tomb Kings were a botched release.

The core models of your force were Skellington Infantry - using a very old kit, Skellington Cavalry - using a very old kit and happened to hit like a wet flannel, Skellington Chariots, which had some new bits, but were in the old design and also hit like a wet flannel.

They just never quite played as the should’ve.

See, Undead didn’t take break tests. Instead, for every point they lost a combat by, the unit lost a wound.

For massive hordes of Skellington and Zombies, that’s not so bad. Especially for Vampire Counts who had useful ways to maintain those units, and even raise entirely new ones. Bog down your enemy’s best unit or units with Zombies, and with a bit of luck and a fair wind, the board was yours.

Tomb Kings? Same basic mechanic. But inherently smaller units which struggled to get combat wounds in, and far fewer ways to replace losses.

Yes, you could use them for flanking whilst things like Ushabti and Tomb Guard did the heavy lifting. That’s true. But you were also slow, as being Undead you couldn’t March - and again you had fewer magical options to address that than Vampires.

They relied too much on luck, or at least not having a duff round of combat to be much fun.

Now, their last book did a lot to address that. Chariots in particular started hitting properly with regular Impact Hits in particular. And they got some gorgeous new models.

Except…your core units were still old, fiddly and honestly pretty ugly kits.

Necrons had none of those disadvantages. Sure they originally lacked variety of units, and had too few plastic options. But what they did have (excluding perhaps Tomb Spyrers?) looked great and did a job on the battlefield.

Wraiths were sometimes maligned as they weren’t that hard hitting, and their background screamed for them to ignore armour. But their 3+ Inv and multiple wounds made them very well suited to bother stuff like Terminators and similar high value, low count models that relied on steamrollering enemy units.

But the rest was pretty good fun, especially with their strong revamp which brought more vehicles, Cryptek and special characters. Fun fact for those who weren’t around? That version of Codex Necrons (I forget which edition. Maybe 6th?) was the first Codex of its era to have every single unit entry available to buy as a model.

That makes a difference in appeal.

   
Made in gb
Mad Gyrocopter Pilot





Northumberland

ccs wrote:
 Olthannon wrote:
ccs wrote:
A little movie called Terminator + the fact that 40k is (and was) more popular than WHFB.
Oh, and within WHFB? TK, while cool looking, were not overly powerful. Power always sells more than coolness factor.


I mean, in 7th edition the Tomb Kings army list was pretty powerful so I don't know about that.


"Pretty powerful" - for 1 out of the 4 editions of WHFB they existed in. Meanwhile there were things more powerful. And plenty of things were just plain more popular than Egyptian themed skeleton hordes - elves, dwarves, rat-men with crazy science weapons, dinosaur-men (riding dinosaurs!).... All in a game with an ever shrinking player base.





Very true. A shame really because I thought they were awesome. Funny really because the two armies I really found cool and interesting were Tomb Kings and Bretonnians and I never collected either.

One and a half feet in the hobby


My Painting Log of various minis:
# Olthannon's Oscillating Orchard of Opportunity #

 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






I think you also need to understand how popular Vampires were in WHFB.

Not only were they just popular because Vampires are cool, but the army pretty much looked the part.

And with the aforementioned option to raise up new units, they could do proper enveloping tactics. It doesn’t matter how crap Zombies and Skellingtons are in a punch up. When I’ve mobbed both your flanks, whether or not I’ve engaged you into the front, WHFB gave me a solid advantage.

Even more in slightly earlier editions, where losing combat to a Fear causing enemy which outnumbered your unit lead to auto-failed Break Tests.

Tomb Kings had all the disadvantage of Vampires (kill the general, kill the army, slow moving, below average basic units), but sorely lacked the magic mitigation and other perks Vampires had.

   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Necrons weren't "simply" the 40k version of Tomb Kings. That is a gross oversimplication of their themes.
They had a lot more going for them than "lol, space Egypt".

They took inspiration from Terminator (killer skeleton robots) and various death-related myths and customs.

Flayed Ones were based on the practices of the Priests of Xipe Totec, an Aztec death god.

The Nightbringer was based on the Grim Reaper, a European personification of death.

Wraiths were named after, well, Wraiths.

The whole "Egyptian" motif was centered around Scarabs and Pyramids, which were part of the Egyptian funerary cult.

Their very tag line in 3rd ed was "Their Number is Legion, their Name is Death".

Necrons weren't Egyptians in Space. They were (Robot) Undead in Space.
But everyone saw the Monolith and thought "lol, Egyptians", which is why we have flanderized nonsense now.

Oh, and Necrons are only really popular now. For about a decade they were pretty much forgotten. So your initial premise is already inaccurate.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/05/25 09:37:33


What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

I recall Necrons spending absolutely ages with one of the smallest model ranges; where the only plastic model they had was the Obelisk. Everything else was full metal from scarabs to immortals to lords.

They were an army that was very slowly updated and it took a long while for them to gain traction.



So they've never always been super popular. However over the years GW has updated them with new rules, new models and new lore. They've had a steady series of fairly chunky updates and that generates a lot more interest and thus popularity. OVer the last few years GW made them the second front-runner army for a new edition and GW seems to pair that now with a lot of big chunky updates so that alone means that a LOT more people take notice of the army.



Tomb Kings, it should be said, were also dropped because GW when they launched AoS weren't doing a wargame. They were doing a boutique line of models that happened to have some joke rules. We don't actually know the sales numbers for Tomb Kings and I'd wager they were likely higher than Sisters of Battle who languished without an update to plastic for an insane length of time.

However GW at the time of AoS starting, was in a process of cutting huge swathes out of the game. Their choices were almost at random, likely reflecting internal sales data and not much more. So instead of investing into a model line that they'd updated fairly recently ish with new models; they removed them. GW at that time wasn't interested in armies or player feedback, but instead purely sales. They cut anything that wasn't selling over X value and kept the rest.

It was a bad time marketing and model wise for customers and I think that whilst we know low sales were an element, it wasn't the whole story. Nor was it a time where GW was acting normally. Normally their attitude to a flagging force is to give them some meaty rules; give them some new and updated models and push them out in front marketing wise for a few months.

Almost all of Old World was flagging with reducing and reducing sales. AoS right now is on the flipside with increasing and, lets be honest, almost all the model designs we have now would have fit into the Old World setting. Heck many of the AoS armies are still majority Old World models.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Yeah, Necrons had a really limited range prior to 5th ed.
The models were expensive points wise too, so you couldn't even field that many of them, even though the stats weren't great. They did not handle power creep well at all.

What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
But everyone saw the Monolith and thought "lol, Egyptians", which is why we have flanderized nonsense now

That's not entirely accurate.

The pre-3rd edition Necron material was a lot more Egyptian/Tomb Kings in aesthetics - ankhs (including spacecraft shaped like ankhs), stories about archaeologists digging up sarcophagi from beneath pyramids on desert planets, scarabs, big decorative neck collars, the studio colour scheme suggesting faience...



I suspect that a lot of the reason for the poor state of post-5th Necron background (besides the quality of the authors) is that a lot of it was written by people who simply weren't very familiar with the bulk of more obscure Necron background material - for example Necrons with personalities, female Necrons, Necrons who spoke, Necrons who interacted with non-Necrons beyond killing, Necron subfactions, non-silver Necrons all existed long prior to 5th edition, but most people had/have no idea because they only ever skim read the codex.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/25 09:57:45


 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

 Lord Damocles wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
But everyone saw the Monolith and thought "lol, Egyptians", which is why we have flanderized nonsense now

That's not entirely accurate.

The pre-3rd edition Necron material was a lot more Egyptian/Tomb Kings in aesthetics - ankhs (including spacecraft shaped like ankhs), stories about archaeologists digging up sarcophagi from beneath pyramids on desert planets, scarabs, big decorative neck collars, the studio colour scheme suggesting faience...

True, but a lot of that is still based on the Funerary Cult, so there is still a death motif going on. Remember that the Ankh is the symbol for life, which was a part of the Funerary Cult and ties in with the Necron theme of Death and Rebirth (the Necrontyr died and were reborn as Necrons, and Necrons don't stay dead).
Its just that the Egyptians are the most well known when it comes to Funerary Cults, so if you're making an entire army which is obsessed with death and rebirth you're probably going to take some level of inspiration from Egypt.
As I wrote, simply calling the Necrons "Egyptian" is an oversimplification, as they only really took one aspect of Egypt and most of the focus was on death.

It was only until 5th ed that they started to go real hard on the Egyptian motif, with Arks designed after Egyptian boats, Khopeshes as a melee weapon, silly chin enlargements that are supposed to ape that Egyptian beard thing, vaguely Egyptian sounding names that are also terrible robot puns...you get the idea.

As an aside, I did find it odd that of all the design elements they copied from the 2nd ed lord when they revamped the necron range, they chose not to copy the head dress and instead went for that stupid crest thing. The head dress looked a lot better, imo.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2022/05/25 10:11:47


What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in in
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche






Hyderabad, India

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I think you also need to understand how popular Vampires were in WHFB.



That's a really good point. If you cut Necrons in two and gave all the cool stuff to one faction and left another with nothing up variations of skeleton bots it would languish too

 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Yeah, Vampires and Tomb Kings used to be one army, and then GW divided them into two.

What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in de
Huge Bone Giant






 Overread wrote:
I recall Necrons spending absolutely ages with one of the smallest model ranges; where the only plastic model they had was the Obelisk. Everything else was full metal from scarabs to immortals to lords.


Just for the record, Necrons spent the time between their introduction in 2nd ed and their first codex in 3rd ed with that tiny, all metal range (and without the Monolith). That worked somewhat as a raider force in the smaller 2nd ed games but got very repetitive when 3rd ed increased army size by slashing points in half, basically. With the codex they got plastic Warriors with Scarabs on the sprues, plastic Destroyers (just the basic ones, Heavies and Lords used metal upgrade parts) and the Monolith. Everything else was metal.

Still a very limited selection, of course, so the army didn't have much variety to pull people in. If you wanted to go vehicle heavy, you had multiple Monoliths and not much else. If you wanted speed, you had Destroyers and not much else. Infantry offered more variety, but in addition to Warriors being your only plastic option, the rules for phase out made a lot of infantry a burden on your army and you were better off playing a silver tide of Warriors, so there went the last holdout for variety. Phase out also dictated how you had to use your models, so the army was mostly playing itself and the player was just there to push models around. At a time when 40k still provided meaningful tactical choices during the game, that was a turnoff.

 Overread wrote:
It was a bad time marketing and model wise for customers and I think that whilst we know low sales were an element, it wasn't the whole story. Nor was it a time where GW was acting normally. Normally their attitude to a flagging force is to give them some meaty rules; give them some new and updated models and push them out in front marketing wise for a few months.


Normality after the failure of AoS became what you describe with GW putting in the effort and resources to make an army that doesn't sell well more attractive. They can still be pretty slow about it, but it's a vast improvement and very welcome. That wasn't the case before AoS, though. Kirby's GW was all about cutting costs over investing in better product to increase profitability, in spite of how poorly that kept working out for them year after year. While nuking the old setting and introducing AoS was unprecedented in its scale and implications, it was very much in line with how GW tried to solve problems. Just massively, massively escalated.

Before that GW didn't really do sweeping range renewals to try and improve army sales. The only two examples that I'd cite here are Dark Eldar and Necrons shortly after, although in the case of Necrons that went hand in hand with a retcon that changed the army beyond recognition. Otherwise GW was happy to leave a line that wasn't selling to rot. They'd keep the models and army books around for those customers that were interested in them, since the cost for these things is frontloaded and any sale is almost pure profit at that point, but they decidedly refused to improve things for the weaker lines and instead doubled down on the stronger ones.

Let's not forget where we came from. GW is far from perfect, but between plastic Sisters, Genestealer Cults, Specialist Games and the many adventurous new AoS armies, and a lot of other stuff, to be honest, we're living in a plastic paradise right now. It actually took GW effort to get here. Let's not diminish the insight and change of approach it took.

Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone? 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

Ahh yeah I recall the Monolith appearing earlier, but it might well just be that when it appeared is when Necrons got "interesting" to pay attention too as before they were indeed a very mundane army in terms of diversity.



And in fairness to Kirby his cost-cutting approaches did GW good in the early days of his management. At least far as I recall he got their income and numbers far better balanced and in a much healthier position.
I think the issue was he didn't have any/many other tricks other than that. Couple that to a management team that avoided the internet marketing and were increasingly distant from their customer base - to the point where Kirby openly said to the shareholders that he didn't need consumer feedback at all.

All those things conspired ot make a firm that was good at looking at the budget, but bad at understanding the context of those numbers. Ergo why an army was selling poorly and thus what they could do to "fix" it.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba




The Great State of New Jersey

 Overread wrote:
I recall Necrons spending absolutely ages with one of the smallest model ranges; where the only plastic model they had was the Obelisk. Everything else was full metal from scarabs to immortals to lords.

They were an army that was very slowly updated and it took a long while for them to gain traction.




This isn't accurate, by the time the monolith (not obelisk) was released, they also had plastic warriors, scarabs, and destroyers (as well as the monolith). Metal units were Necron Lords, Immortals, Flayed Ones, Pariahs, Wraiths, Nightbringer, Deceiver, Tomb Spyder, and Heavy Destroyers had a metal weapon upgrade that went onto the plastic destroyer kit. As warriors were the only troops choice in the army at the time, and destroyers, monoliths, and scarabs were kind of OP, the majority of your army was plastic despite most of the supporting units available to you being metal kits.

I suspect that a lot of the reason for the poor state of post-5th Necron background (besides the quality of the authors) is that a lot of it was written by people who simply weren't very familiar with the bulk of more obscure Necron background material - for example Necrons with personalities, female Necrons, Necrons who spoke, Necrons who interacted with non-Necrons beyond killing, Necron subfactions, non-silver Necrons all existed long prior to 5th edition, but most people had/have no idea because they only ever skim read the codex.


Citation needed. I've been in this hobby for a long time and played Necrons in 4th edition and gobbled up every shred of Necron lore I could find, and almost none of what you just described existed prior to the 5th edition book.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/25 12:27:42


CoALabaer wrote:
Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






chaos0xomega wrote:
I suspect that a lot of the reason for the poor state of post-5th Necron background (besides the quality of the authors) is that a lot of it was written by people who simply weren't very familiar with the bulk of more obscure Necron background material - for example Necrons with personalities, female Necrons, Necrons who spoke, Necrons who interacted with non-Necrons beyond killing, Necron subfactions, non-silver Necrons all existed long prior to 5th edition, but most people had/have no idea because they only ever skim read the codex.


Citation needed. I've been in this hobby for a long time and played Necrons in 4th edition and gobbled up every shred of Necron lore I could find, and almost none of what you just described existed prior to the 5th edition book.

Personalities - Xenology, implied by the various unique and/or named Lord constructs (eg. Setekh, Undying One, Overlord, Storm Lord, etc.)
Females - Xenology
Speaking - Thomas Macabee from Dawn of War: Dark Crusade, the Kaurava Lord from Dawn of War: Soulstorm, The Overlord from Hellforged, The Herald of Dismay from Apocalypse Reloaded, the Lord from Xenology and unspecified other Necrons from the additional collectors' booklet, the Lord hologram from Dead Men Walking
Interacting with other races - the Silvae from the 3rd ed. codex, the sauropods from Forever Loyal, the Beigel-9 facility from Xenology and Darvus journey aboard the Necrons' ship in the collectors' booklet, the Renegade Techpriests from Medusa V (End Game), Pariahs, Digga Wreckers (Digganob), Necron-controlled Tyranids in Sybilla Mines during Medusa V campaign (Edathor), human slaves in Dead Men Walking
Subfactions - suggested by different colour schemes, C'tan-specific forces/agendas mentioned in 3rd ed. codex, The Cripple and the Dragon, and Eye of Terror campaign updates
Non-silver - literally the first ever White Dwar to include Necrons (UK 217) features a black/purple colour scheme, there's two full pages of variant schemes in the 3rd ed. codex

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/05/25 13:35:02


 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Yeah, the 3rd codex had an entire section about Necron paint schemes, and even stated that you can have ceramic crons.

Even in 3rd ed you could customize your crons, its just they didn't have loadout options or spare bits.

What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: