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.

On the subject of the Chaos Space Marine Faction Rule of Dark Pacts, I'm of two minds.

On one hand, it is a perfect example of a faction rule that depicts a core facet of the faction's background that is normally rarely seen in fiction. Chaos Space Marines make dark pacts with the agents of the Chaos Gods in a bid to gain power. Those pacts always come at a cost.

Similarly, Sisters of Battle are known for their miracles, but you actually rarely see them in an obvious way in Warhammer Fiction. It's not special if it happens all the time in a book. On the other side, you lose sight of it if it doesn't happen on the tabletop. Hence Sisters of Battle have always had some sort of Faith mechanic on the tabletop.

Now Chaos is getting a Dark Pact rule where they gain power and hope the cost isn't too high. Unfortunately, that cost is a very simplistic 1d3 Mortal Wounds if you fail your Leadership test

Which leads me to the parts I don't like. Chaos has to choose to use their Faction Trait. It has a negative cost associated with it and it requires additional dice rolling. Not, fun rerolling Hit and Wound Rolls, but unfun Leadership and Mortal Wound rolls.

On the bright side, it's Mortal Wounds and not "remove models".

As a chaos player I am pretty not-amped about the chaos special rules. It's going to feel a bit sucky going from having specific rules to generic and I guess god-focused rules? My Iron Warriors try to err on the anti-theistic side but I guess the only thing that can make them not worse than a loyalist marine is to use the gods.

 ph34r wrote:
As a chaos player I am pretty not-amped about the chaos special rules. It's going to feel a bit sucky going from having specific rules to generic and I guess god-focused rules? My Iron Warriors try to err on the anti-theistic side but I guess the only thing that can make them not worse than a loyalist marine is to use the gods.

Your Chaos army makes Dark Pacts now, and always has done. Just like Marines, known for the supreme flexibility of their doctrine-based combat from the Codex Astartes... all make Oaths of Moment rather than fighting with Codex Doctrines.

And always have done.

"Stupid, not simple."

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ph34r wrote:
As a chaos player I am pretty not-amped about the chaos special rules. It's going to feel a bit sucky going from having specific rules to generic and I guess god-focused rules? My Iron Warriors try to err on the anti-theistic side but I guess the only thing that can make them not worse than a loyalist marine is to use the gods.

Your Chaos army makes Dark Pacts now, and always has done. Just like Marines, known for the supreme flexibility of their doctrine-based combat from the Codex Astartes... all make Oaths of Moment rather than fighting with Codex Doctrines.

And always have done.

"Stupid, not simple."

Too much flavour ruins things. Think of it as adding every herb, spice, and condiment to a wall balanced dish. It would be unpalatable... which is oddly enough what happened to 40k.

There needs to be restraint. If that isn't your thing, and you prefer the garbled mess that was 9th, stick to playing that edition.

Or, wait a few months... I'm sure the Codexes will steadily turn 10th into a yet another mess. Remember what we are seeing now, are the free get you by rules. They will be invalid quite quickly one can imagine.

Edit.

Regards the Iron Warriors suffering Mortal Wounds. Could be seen as malfunctioning tech due to experimental, age, or a combination of the two.

According to the crusade rosters on https://warhammer40000.com/ infiltrators are 240 pts and the primaris techmarine is 80 pts. Shout out to the fine people over on B&C for doing the detective work. Also looks like crusade hasn't changed much beyond to switching to points.

Dudeface wrote:
According to the crusade rosters on https://warhammer40000.com/ infiltrators are 240 pts and the primaris techmarine is 80 pts. Shout out to the fine people over on B&C for doing the detective work. Also looks like crusade hasn't changed much beyond to switching to points.

Which begs the question: How much have points devolved into de-facto Power Level, where upgrades are free and everything just has a set unit cost.

 stonehorse wrote:
Too much flavour ruins things. Think of it as adding every herb, spice, and condiment to a wall balanced dish. It would be unpalatable... which is oddly enough what happened to 40k.

An no flavour is just as bad.

There is a middle ground. 10th hasn't found it. It's cooking pasta in salt and nothing else.

 stonehorse wrote:
... and you prefer the garbled mess that was 9th, stick to playing that edition.

Never said it was...

It's odd they can't seem to grasp if the rule has a negative element especially if it kills your own models it should be noticeably stronger than the "always works with no downside" equivalents.

 Eldarain wrote:
It's odd they can't seem to grasp if the rule has a negative element especially if it kills your own models it should be noticeably stronger than the "always works with no downside" equivalents.

Oath of Moment: Pros - point and click a unit for rerolls. Cons - generally one unit per turn targeted, after that no bonus.
Shadow in the warp: Pros - army wide battleshock might cripple someones objective game, especially if modifiers are in play, no criteria for using it and whole table. Cons - One use only, arguably not very interesting and unpredictable in value
Dark Pacts: Pros - selection of a buff for every unit in the army, all the time if desired. Cons - Units may take some mortal wounds

Seems ok to me?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
According to the crusade rosters on https://warhammer40000.com/ infiltrators are 240 pts and the primaris techmarine is 80 pts. Shout out to the fine people over on B&C for doing the detective work. Also looks like crusade hasn't changed much beyond to switching to points.

Which begs the question: How much have points devolved into de-facto Power Level, where upgrades are free and everything just has a set unit cost.

The unit has a comms array apparently, but this is a valid question at this point, I'm also assuming that's a cost for 10 models.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
According to the crusade rosters on https://warhammer40000.com/ infiltrators are 240 pts and the primaris techmarine is 80 pts. Shout out to the fine people over on B&C for doing the detective work. Also looks like crusade hasn't changed much beyond to switching to points.

Which begs the question: How much have points devolved into de-facto Power Level, where upgrades are free and everything just has a set unit cost.

 stonehorse wrote:
Too much flavour ruins things. Think of it as adding every herb, spice, and condiment to a wall balanced dish. It would be unpalatable... which is oddly enough what happened to 40k.

An no flavour is just as bad.

There is a middle ground. 10th hasn't found it. It's cooking pasta in salt and nothing else.

 stonehorse wrote:
... and you prefer the garbled mess that was 9th, stick to playing that edition.

Never said it was...

10th isn't even out yet, and you are saying it is bland. We haven't seen the full picture yet. What we are seeing seems to suggest that GW are showing restraint and not going full hog... that'll no doubt come later with the Codexes.

Also, you didn't quote my full comment... so you've taken it out of context. Not cool.

Hi, is there roadmap for faction focus leaked? I swear I've seen one in Facebook, but I currently cant find one...

Edit; found it from Facebook, but the dates are wrong so it could be possibly fake

https://www.facebook.com/groups/193330554495910/permalink/1631504634011821/

Doesn't it match the codex roadmap so far?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Tell me - what marketing did GW use here that I "fell for"?

Well for one, you just defended, within the same post, the cards that are going to be outdated via "just don't buy them", so I'd argue you fall for a lot of it just to defend them.

You know they won't send you free kits, right?

If you weren't so zealously trying to scream at people for having an opinion different to your own, you may have realised that Daedalus was pointing out that nobody has to buy the initial index cards because they're totally free. In this case they literally will give you free stuff. I'm sure you'll somehow manage to spin that to white knighting for GW somehow though.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Do we know they don't? I know the Terminator Librarian makes it likely, but it is not definite just yet.

Given that power fists just got removed as a separate item for the first time in the game's history, I can't have much hope that Combi-Weapons aren't getting Jervis'd this edition as well.

Yet the Terminators have separate power fist and chain fist entries. Clearly in some cases the option will remain as-is while in others it will be combined where appropriate, such as in a unit that has two near-identical weapons. So far, with the exception of the weird combi-weapon they showed for the Librarian, the approach looks reasonable in what its combined. It looks to me that GW are trying to give distinct roles to each option and only have 1 option in that role, which we can also see in the changes to the Autocannon compared to the Chaincannon.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Corporate needs you to find the difference between [bloat] and [flavour].

They're the same picture.

They absolutely are not.

A Dominion Squad can have three different special weapons, plus Bolters, Bolt Pistols, a close combat weapon of some variety, a Simulacrum and a Cherub... yet the Sister Superior having a Combi-Weapons having different profiles is somehow a bridge too far?

For there to be a simplification There will inevitably be a bridge that is too far.

And being subjective not everyone is going to agree where that is. It would be impossible to make the simplification acceptable to everyone. Looks like your in the outgroup.

 Spreelock wrote:
Hi, is there roadmap for faction focus leaked? I swear I've seen one in Facebook, but I currently cant find one...

Edit; found it from Facebook, but the dates are wrong so it could be possibly fake

https://www.facebook.com/groups/193330554495910/permalink/1631504634011821/

The purported 'roadmap' for faction focuses is just the order the faction card sets were arranged in on a slide during the Warhammerfest presentation that showed all the covers. We do already know that this has likely no relation to the order of the previews. By the slide, today's preview would have been Blood Angels, but it's Necrons, which the slide would have put in week four of the focuses.

Ok, thanks for clearing that.

For completeness and the people that can't access Facebook, it was based on this slide:

27 factions (loyal and chaos Knights in one faction for some reason).

11 marine factions, split between loyal and chaos.

13 imperial factions.

13 factions built around power armour or better.

Hilarious really.

Nice to see Imperial Agents there.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
According to the crusade rosters on https://warhammer40000.com/ infiltrators are 240 pts and the primaris techmarine is 80 pts. Shout out to the fine people over on B&C for doing the detective work. Also looks like crusade hasn't changed much beyond to switching to points.

Which begs the question: How much have points devolved into de-facto Power Level, where upgrades are free and everything just has a set unit cost.

 stonehorse wrote:
Too much flavour ruins things. Think of it as adding every herb, spice, and condiment to a wall balanced dish. It would be unpalatable... which is oddly enough what happened to 40k.

An no flavour is just as bad.

There is a middle ground. 10th hasn't found it. It's cooking pasta in salt and nothing else.

 stonehorse wrote:
... and you prefer the garbled mess that was 9th, stick to playing that edition.

Never said it was...

I'm pretty sure Codizes and campaign books will be all about throwing more and more detachments to choose from at the game. In these you'll see the piecemeal return of every subfaction rule and every formation rule that you had in 7th and 9th . Typically 1 of 10 will have over the top rules, 3 of 10 will be solid, 6 of 10 will be forgotten by the tournament crowd and therefor never be touched again by GW. We already know Nightlords and all Orks but Goofs will be among the 6/10.

Did we have a presumed price for Leviathan?
I’m sure there was mention of it in a contest offering etc, and that can be transferred into a UK price if so or whatever?

Danny76 wrote:
Did we have a presumed price for Leviathan?
I’m sure there was mention of it in a contest offering etc, and that can be transferred into a UK price if so or whatever?

£150 seems to be the rumoured price based on the terms and conditions of the competition to win one at the recent Warhammer Fest.

Slipspace wrote:

Danny76 wrote:
Did we have a presumed price for Leviathan?
I’m sure there was mention of it in a contest offering etc, and that can be transferred into a UK price if so or whatever?

£150 seems to be the rumoured price based on the terms and conditions of the competition to win one at the recent Warhammer Fest.

Is that with or without VAT?

 Hellebore wrote:
(loyal and chaos Knights in one faction for some reason)

Occasionally GW stumbles blindly onto the right path.

Imperial and Chaos Knights use the same three units, just with different arbitrary weapon restrictions. They should be the same faction.

Tsagualsa wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Danny76 wrote:
Did we have a presumed price for Leviathan?
I’m sure there was mention of it in a contest offering etc, and that can be transferred into a UK price if so or whatever?

£150 seems to be the rumoured price based on the terms and conditions of the competition to win one at the recent Warhammer Fest.

Is that with or without VAT?

from what we know? With VAT, given that its standard to quote fixed item prices in the UK with VAT. Certainly, a RRP of £150 is in the right ballpark in terms of cash to contents, in comparison to other big boxsets they've done.

xerxeskingofking wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Danny76 wrote:
Did we have a presumed price for Leviathan?
I’m sure there was mention of it in a contest offering etc, and that can be transferred into a UK price if so or whatever?

£150 seems to be the rumoured price based on the terms and conditions of the competition to win one at the recent Warhammer Fest.

Is that with or without VAT?

from what we know? With VAT, given that its standard to quote fixed item prices in the UK with VAT. Certainly, a RRP of £150 is in the right ballpark in terms of cash to contents, in comparison to other big boxsets they've done.

Okay. I tried to look up the relevant regulations but could not find anything specific. I'm just asking because ~£180 would also be a believable price point for GW

Tsagualsa wrote:

Okay. I tried to look up the relevant regulations but could not find anything specific. I'm just asking because ~£180 would also be a believable price point for GW

They specifically said it would cost less than the AOD box, which was £180.

I believe previous competitions have also given the VAT-inclusive pricing too.

I think someone mentioned that the price mentioned for previous competitions had included VAT

 xttz wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

Okay. I tried to look up the relevant regulations but could not find anything specific. I'm just asking because ~£180 would also be a believable price point for GW

They specifically said it would cost less than the AOD box, which was £180.

I believe previous competitions have also given the VAT-inclusive pricing too.

That's enough evidence for me that £150 is their RRP; thanks everyone!

 xttz wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

Okay. I tried to look up the relevant regulations but could not find anything specific. I'm just asking because ~£180 would also be a believable price point for GW

They specifically said it would cost less than the AOD box, which was £180.

I believe previous competitions have also given the VAT-inclusive pricing too.

They do always include it yeah in the other competitions.
So should be that. Good to hear £150. Nice price point for me.

What’s was AOD?