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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Why would you want to attach him to a Tactical Squad, which is listed?

Because you like the special rules for tacs over assault and you filled the list with other stuff? I couldn't tell you atm.

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

Then someone attaches him and gets confused, because there's no rules supporting this interaction. So then GW needs to deal with all those edge cases. It doesn't seem very practical.

It's not practical to have the Deep Strike USR say "if every model in this unit has this Rule"?

Also your justification for Tactical Marines but not Sternguard is utterly hilarious. Seriously, how much does GW pay you to defend that schlock?

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
We've had the consolidation freak out a dozen times already, freaking out now on the last fething preview isn't going to add anything.

It seems a more prudent use of time to discuss the upcoming reveals of datalsates etc at the preview games and see what we think of the match ups?

Ah yes.
WaIt AnD sEe for the rules. No complaining in advance.
wAiT aNd SeE for more rules. You can't tell anything from the rules we've got.
WaIt AnD sEe for preview games. It's too late to see the stuff you waited for.
wAiT aNd SeE for the codex, FAQ, mid-edition design shift etc.
WaIt AnD sEe for 11th edition!

Plenty of room to complain, but until we have the whole 10th release in our hands, you always have to consider how what we haven't seen could change things. Like a model could go from underwhelming to a must-take simply from its point cost. So caution is warranted.

tneva82 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ProfSrlojohn wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
We've had the consolidation freak out a dozen times already, freaking out now on the last fething preview isn't going to add anything.

It seems a more prudent use of time to discuss the upcoming reveals of datalsates etc at the preview games and see what we think of the match ups?

This site seems to think deathguard are a waste of brainpower with their current rules, we'll see how that pans out vs daemons which people consider one of the top dogs.

I think it's worth complaining about since the point of deathwatch was making highly specialized, customizable killteams, and they gutted nearly all of that. They basically killed the point of deathwatch as a faction and generalized them into a frigging generic combi-weapon statline.

It's one thing to be annoyed about the consilidation of certain weapons, but when you consolidate *everything* or in a stupid way like the GSC "Leader Pistols" like they couldn't have just figured out stats for a web pistol is worth complaining about.

Thing is boat sailed long time ago.

At least now you can model more freely so can make more varied looks. And no need to hunt down bits for 10 best combos. And hunt more when op combo changes.

And? Follow that line of logic why not just play with paper disks? Or lines on a chalkboard? Why not have everything be an amorphous identical stat-line?

I get consilidating some things, especially when there is very little variance between them. Primaris bolt Rifles, power weapons, force weapons, etc. but the combi bolters, stalker bolter, and the shotgun are all, vastly different weapons with vastly different roles. You Don't snipe people with a shotgun, you don't fight in close quarters with a sniper rifle. There is a balance to strike, and this is far too far consolidated. Imagine if they consilidated all of the SOB heavy weapons with "Sisters Heavy Weapon" and just made it a heavy flamer with an extra pip of AP, but doesn't auto-hit. It would be bad at both roles.

 Insularum wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Never mind combi- attachments - the veterans' special weapons are also straight up gone too.

Guess what, special weapons are not in the box (neither are missile launchers but we cannot expect consistency can we).

I wonder how long it is until we find out for real how much influence competitive players have on GW's rules output. The complete lack of consistency on what weapons actually are is going to be a nightmare for WYSIWYG, and is potentially going to interfere with the flow of the game.

I can see it now. Ok, your Deathwatch squad fires. The guy with the stormbolter, so he’s got a regular bolter now. Yep.
What about that dude, a regular bolter too? Nah, his stormbolter is a long vigil ranged weapon.
Huh? Yes.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

Then someone attaches him and gets confused, because there's no rules supporting this interaction.

The Deep Strike rule already addresses that interaction because it specifies a requirement on per-model basis (During the Declare Battle Formations step, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can set it up in Reserves instead of setting it up on the battlefield.) rather than for the unit, so no Deep Striking if the attached Leader doesn't have DS.

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Thank God Gabriel Seth can't join Terminator or Sternguard squads. Can you imagine what unintended balance consequences could've happened?

What happens when you attach him to terminators and they deepstrike? Why would you want to attach him to Sternguard?`

Why would you want to attach him to a Tactical Squad, which is listed?

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

The unit has deepstrike, he joins the unit, so he gains deepstrike.

I'm guessing you had LOTS of trouble playing any edition from 3rd to 7th?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

Then someone attaches him and gets confused, because there's no rules supporting this interaction.

The Deep Strike rule already addresses that interaction because it specifies a requirement on per-model basis (During the Declare Battle Formations step, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can set it up in Reserves instead of setting it up on the battlefield.) rather than for the unit, so no Deep Striking if the attached Leader doesn't have DS.

LMAO they already had that written out? That's great.

Dudeface wrote:
We've had the consolidation freak out a dozen times already, freaking out now on the last fething preview isn't going to add anything.

It seems a more prudent use of time to discuss the upcoming reveals of datalsates etc at the preview games and see what we think of the match ups?

This site seems to think deathguard are a waste of brainpower with their current rules, we'll see how that pans out vs daemons which people consider one of the top dogs.

Good thing you're not king of the forum and people can talk about what they want to discuss. I've accepted some level of streamlining and obviously the combi-change was accepted. But the magnitude of it in the DW preview is kind of breathtaking. Seems like a worthwhile thing to point out, and many others obviously agree.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
We've had the consolidation freak out a dozen times already, freaking out now on the last fething preview isn't going to add anything.

It seems a more prudent use of time to discuss the upcoming reveals of datalsates etc at the preview games and see what we think of the match ups?

Ah yes.
WaIt AnD sEe for the rules. No complaining in advance.
wAiT aNd SeE for more rules. You can't tell anything from the rules we've got.
WaIt AnD sEe for preview games. It's too late to see the stuff you waited for.
wAiT aNd SeE for the codex, FAQ, mid-edition design shift etc.
WaIt AnD sEe for 11th edition!

Plenty of room to complain, but until we have the whole 10th release in our hands, you always have to consider how what we haven't seen could change things. Like a model could go from underwhelming to a must-take simply from its point cost. So caution is warranted.

How do you think that having the whole 10th edition release is going to make shotguns or Blackshields or plasma pistols reappear on the Deathwatch Veteran datacard which we've already seen?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Thank God Gabriel Seth can't join Terminator or Sternguard squads. Can you imagine what unintended balance consequences could've happened?

What happens when you attach him to terminators and they deepstrike? Why would you want to attach him to Sternguard?`

Why would you want to attach him to a Tactical Squad, which is listed?

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

The unit has deepstrike, he joins the unit, so he gains deepstrike.

I'm guessing you had LOTS of trouble playing any edition from 3rd to 7th?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

Then someone attaches him and gets confused, because there's no rules supporting this interaction.

The Deep Strike rule already addresses that interaction because it specifies a requirement on per-model basis (During the Declare Battle Formations step, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can set it up in Reserves instead of setting it up on the battlefield.) rather than for the unit, so no Deep Striking if the attached Leader doesn't have DS.

LMAO they already had that written out? That's great.

No issues 3rd onwards, but clearly you struggle reading 10th.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
How do you think that having the whole 10th edition release is going to make shotguns or Blackshields or plasma pistols reappear on the Deathwatch Veteran datacard which we've already seen?

I did say plenty of room to complain. Some people jump to final conclusions a bit fast though, when future information could change things.

The article mentions the Precision ability being able to target the apothecary in the dark angels command squad, but the datasheet doesn’t seem to have a character keyword or differentiate the apothecary from the other models.

I thought the Precision ability only allowed you to target Characters attached to units, or am I missing something?

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
We've had the consolidation freak out a dozen times already, freaking out now on the last fething preview isn't going to add anything.

It seems a more prudent use of time to discuss the upcoming reveals of datalsates etc at the preview games and see what we think of the match ups?

Ah yes.
WaIt AnD sEe for the rules. No complaining in advance.
wAiT aNd SeE for more rules. You can't tell anything from the rules we've got.
WaIt AnD sEe for preview games. It's too late to see the stuff you waited for.
wAiT aNd SeE for the codex, FAQ, mid-edition design shift etc.
WaIt AnD sEe for 11th edition!

Plenty of room to complain, but until we have the whole 10th release in our hands, you always have to consider how what we haven't seen could change things. Like a model could go from underwhelming to a must-take simply from its point cost. So caution is warranted.

How do you think that having the whole 10th edition release is going to make shotguns or Blackshields or plasma pistols reappear on the Deathwatch Veteran datacard which we've already seen?

Do you thinking aggressively complaining on Dakka is going to make them appear too?

Aash wrote:
The article mentions the Precision ability being able to target the apothecary in the dark angels command squad, but the datasheet doesn’t seem to have a character keyword or differentiate the apothecary from the other models.

I thought the Precision ability only allowed you to target Characters attached to units, or am I missing something?

It is only characters, but I can't find anything about precision and the apothecary in the article.

IIRC the Horus Heresy team said they’d look into making rules for Daemon Engines to be playable at some point. If that’s true, it’s a hell of a mindset difference between the two teams.

Further, I think many could use a quick look at some rules for Horus Heresy. While extremely… rule heavy, they can manage making options that would be very minute in 40k distinctive.

Such as a tactical squad mulling over one of three melee options; bayonets, chain bayonets or chainswords! Rather than being pure statline, the differences are often in abilities.

As a brief example, parsing heresy speak using Battlescribe to the best of my ability, the difference between a power fist and a thunder hammer is that the hammer costs more points but generates two wound rolls for every successful hit. They otherwise have the same stats.

If it were me though, for 40k I would make the hammer have less damage and/or AP while having that ability, making the power fist having more reliable damage potential whereas the hammer has the chance to do more overall.

Further, too many here seem to forget that HH has solved the issue of not enough weapons or gear by making upgrade packs. While HH still have more to go, all they would have to do for 40k is the same thing for factions that need them.

Voss wrote:

Aash wrote:
The article mentions the Precision ability being able to target the apothecary in the dark angels command squad, but the datasheet doesn’t seem to have a character keyword or differentiate the apothecary from the other models.

I thought the Precision ability only allowed you to target Characters attached to units, or am I missing something?

It is only characters, but I can't find anything about precision and the apothecary in the article.

At the end of the article, the asterisk-

* We hope you xenos and heretics have brought a few Precision weapons to single the Apothecary out.

Aash wrote:

Voss wrote:

Aash wrote:
The article mentions the Precision ability being able to target the apothecary in the dark angels command squad, but the datasheet doesn’t seem to have a character keyword or differentiate the apothecary from the other models.

I thought the Precision ability only allowed you to target Characters attached to units, or am I missing something?

It is only characters, but I can't find anything about precision and the apothecary in the article.

At the end of the article, the asterisk-

* We hope you xenos and heretics have brought a few Precision weapons to single the Apothecary out.

Refresh, I think. That isn't there anymore.

Voss wrote:

Aash wrote:

Voss wrote:

Aash wrote:
The article mentions the Precision ability being able to target the apothecary in the dark angels command squad, but the datasheet doesn’t seem to have a character keyword or differentiate the apothecary from the other models.

I thought the Precision ability only allowed you to target Characters attached to units, or am I missing something?

It is only characters, but I can't find anything about precision and the apothecary in the article.

At the end of the article, the asterisk-

* We hope you xenos and heretics have brought a few Precision weapons to single the Apothecary out.

Refresh, I think. That isn't there anymore.

Aha! Thanks. So just the usual WarCom not understanding their own rules interactions.

Aash wrote:

Voss wrote:

Aash wrote:
The article mentions the Precision ability being able to target the apothecary in the dark angels command squad, but the datasheet doesn’t seem to have a character keyword or differentiate the apothecary from the other models.

I thought the Precision ability only allowed you to target Characters attached to units, or am I missing something?

It is only characters, but I can't find anything about precision and the apothecary in the article.

At the end of the article, the asterisk-

* We hope you xenos and heretics have brought a few Precision weapons to single the Apothecary out.

I don't have an asterisk at the end of the article?

EviscerationPlague wrote:
It's not practical to have the Deep Strike USR say "if every model in this unit has this Rule"?

Also your justification for Tactical Marines but not Sternguard is utterly hilarious. Seriously, how much does GW pay you to defend that schlock?

So now these models that don't normally deepstrike should instead be allowed to deepstrike? You're not going to see any problems with that at all?

If putting a melee character in a shooting unit upsets you then knock yourself out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

Then someone attaches him and gets confused, because there's no rules supporting this interaction.

The Deep Strike rule already addresses that interaction because it specifies a requirement on per-model basis (During the Declare Battle Formations step, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can set it up in Reserves instead of setting it up on the battlefield.) rather than for the unit, so no Deep Striking if the attached Leader doesn't have DS.

Ok, fair. Now let's address Ahriman. When will you ever put him in Rubrics if he can join Scarabs?

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Thank God Gabriel Seth can't join Terminator or Sternguard squads. Can you imagine what unintended balance consequences could've happened?

What happens when you attach him to terminators and they deepstrike? Why would you want to attach him to Sternguard?`

Why would you want to attach him to a Tactical Squad, which is listed?

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

The unit has deepstrike, he joins the unit, so he gains deepstrike.

I'm guessing you had LOTS of trouble playing any edition from 3rd to 7th?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

Then someone attaches him and gets confused, because there's no rules supporting this interaction.

The Deep Strike rule already addresses that interaction because it specifies a requirement on per-model basis (During the Declare Battle Formations step, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can set it up in Reserves instead of setting it up on the battlefield.) rather than for the unit, so no Deep Striking if the attached Leader doesn't have DS.

LMAO they already had that written out? That's great.

No issues 3rd onwards, but clearly you struggle reading 10th.

Clearly not since it was pointed out the Deep Strike rule written for 10th makes the clarification already. Got anything else to add to defend?

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Ok, fair. Now let's address Ahriman. When will you ever put him in Rubrics if he can join Scarabs?

did i miss part of the argument? Because ahriman in a squad of flamer rubrics seems mighty strong IMO

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Ok, fair. Now let's address Ahriman. When will you ever put him in Rubrics if he can join Scarabs?

did i miss part of the argument? Because ahriman in a squad of flamer rubrics seems mighty strong IMO

So, Rubrics get bolters without RF, which means Scarabs will get the same. That gives them 4 shots at 24" to 3.5 autohits at 12" ( then throw on soulreaper and HMR ). Tack on that Scarabs are actually decent in melee and I don't see a good reason to put him in with the relatively soft Rubrics who will most certainly need a rhino to not be immediately targeted.

It's good, but I'm not sure it's worth the investment.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Ok, fair. Now let's address Ahriman. When will you ever put him in Rubrics if he can join Scarabs?

did i miss part of the argument? Because ahriman in a squad of flamer rubrics seems mighty strong IMO

So, Rubrics get bolters without RF, which means Scarabs will get the same. That gives them 4 shots at 24" to 3.5 autohits at 12". Tack on that Scarabs are actually decent in melee and I don't see a good reason to put him in with the relatively soft Rubrics who will most certainly need a rhino to not be immediately targeted.

all of that is assumptions tho, we havnt seen the scarabs datasheet have we?

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
all of that is assumptions tho, we havnt seen the scarabs datasheet have we?

Yes, but I think they're reasonable assumptions. Add in that Rubrics can already pick up wound rerolls so the +1 is slightly less relevant. If Scarabs have something that doesn't collide it will be even better.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
It's not practical to have the Deep Strike USR say "if every model in this unit has this Rule"?

Also your justification for Tactical Marines but not Sternguard is utterly hilarious. Seriously, how much does GW pay you to defend that schlock?

So now these models that don't normally deepstrike should instead be allowed to deepstrike? You're not going to see any problems with that at all?

If putting a melee character in a shooting unit upsets you then knock yourself out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Also he doesn't have the Deep Strike rule, so he doesn't get to. It's not rocket science.

Then someone attaches him and gets confused, because there's no rules supporting this interaction.

The Deep Strike rule already addresses that interaction because it specifies a requirement on per-model basis (During the Declare Battle Formations step, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can set it up in Reserves instead of setting it up on the battlefield.) rather than for the unit, so no Deep Striking if the attached Leader doesn't have DS.

Ok, fair. Now let's address Ahriman. When will you ever put him in Rubrics if he can join Scarabs?

This was literally already addressed. Deep Strike requires all models in the unit to have it. You don't magically gain it. This is NOT some complex interaction.

You still have yet to actually present some good reason Tactical Marines and Command Squads are included for Gabriel Seth but not Sternguard, even though the former two are both shooting squads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Ok, fair. Now let's address Ahriman. When will you ever put him in Rubrics if he can join Scarabs?

did i miss part of the argument? Because ahriman in a squad of flamer rubrics seems mighty strong IMO

So, Rubrics get bolters without RF, which means Scarabs will get the same. That gives them 4 shots at 24" to 3.5 autohits at 12" ( then throw on soulreaper and HMR ). Tack on that Scarabs are actually decent in melee and I don't see a good reason to put him in with the relatively soft Rubrics who will most certainly need a rhino to not be immediately targeted.

It's good, but I'm not sure it's worth the investment.

Is your argument really hinging on "why would you put your HQ in the softer squad when the more durable option is available" as though that's NEVER been the case of how people played the game?

Voss wrote:

Aash wrote:
The article mentions the Precision ability being able to target the apothecary in the dark angels command squad, but the datasheet doesn’t seem to have a character keyword or differentiate the apothecary from the other models.

I thought the Precision ability only allowed you to target Characters attached to units, or am I missing something?

It is only characters, but I can't find anything about precision and the apothecary in the article.

Precision targets any character in a unit. I'm guessing this means that the apothecary is a character.

The precision thing is the * at the end btw.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh if they removed it, good chance it was a mistake and the apothecary isnt a character after all.

 Trickstick wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/06/01/watch-the-first-broadcast-games-of-new40k-live-from-the-kansas-city-open/

Lot's of reveals coming they say. 44 datasheets, rules, enhancements, strategems...

Are demons a great match up for deathguard? Seems like they are with little shooting and low armor saves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also this forge world announcement rings hallow becuse aren't imperal agents basically the same as forgeworld from a balance perspective?

EviscerationPlague wrote:
This was literally already addressed. Deep Strike requires all models in the unit to have it. You don't magically gain it. This is NOT some complex interaction.

You still have yet to actually present some good reason Tactical Marines and Command Squads are included for Gabriel Seth but not Sternguard, even though the former two are both shooting squads.

Could he have been allowed to join sternguard? Absolutely. Does it matter? Not that I can see. Joining tacs is a nod to someone who takes them as their battleline so he still has a unit to join.

Is your argument really hinging on "why would you put your HQ in the softer squad when the more durable option is available" as though that's NEVER been the case of how people played the game?

Nope. That isn't my argument. If Seth could join Assault Termies would you not put him in there instead?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Clearly not since it was pointed out the Deep Strike rule written for 10th makes the clarification already. Got anything else to add to defend?

"While a Bodyguard unit contains a Leader, it is known as an Attached unit and, with the exception of rules that are triggered when units are destroyed (pg 12), it is treated as a single unit for all rules purposes. "

So as Gabriel would be attached it's treated as a single unit for all rules purposes, a unit of terminators has the deepstrike rule. As a result Gabriel, as a part of a unit of terminators, gains the deepstrike rule. That might be a situation for a FAQ, apart from the fact they avoided the conflict by not allowing it in the first place.

What makes you think I want to "defend" anything, you said something incorrect and you're being corrected. Does that mean you're "attacking" the rules? If so who pays you do that all the time?

Haven't they been pretty consistent with keeping same armour types when joining though? Doesn't explain the Sternguard bit though, unless they have a 2+ save or something.