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.

Sooo is the death company dread capable of an infinite (assuming you're in engagement range of infinite units) fight phase in theory?

Frenzied Reprisal: Each time an enemy unit targets this model, after that unit has finished making its attacks, this model can either shoot as if it were your Shooting phase or fight as if it were the Fight phase.

So you charge say 3 units, fight first from the charge, unit A hits back, dread fights again, unit B hits back, dread fights again, unit C hits back, dread fights again etc?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

What I want to know is why DG pays 2 for the same strat.

because the DG one isnt phase-restricted.

Hmmm.

Like the ability to attach characters if that character can be attached to [standard unit]. That's a decent solution to a potential spiraling mess.

Not a fan of the Unforgiven detachment. You're not as bad or have benefits when battleshocked is a narrow niche.

Confused by the BT versions of Primaris tanks. Is there some overlap between vows and the base versions of those tanks?


A fair amount of overlap is happening with stratagems already. At least there aren't 5 variants of Armor of Contempt, though some of the others are similar but do different things. Overlap is largely good though, as its less random crap to remember.

 tauist wrote:

Dreyf wrote:
Wings of Sanguinius is nice: turn 1 deep strike for one infantry unit.
Agressors with flamers, terminators or maybe an big foot melee unit.
Perfect to hurt an ennemy unit or take an objectif.

I'm not seeing that Strat - do I have a wrong version of the Index pdf?

No, it's the psychic power of the librarian dreadnought.
Take one infantry unit at 12" of the dreadnought and put it anywhere at more than 9" of an ennemy.

 tauist wrote:

Dreyf wrote:
Wings of Sanguinius is nice: turn 1 deep strike for one infantry unit.
Agressors with flamers, terminators or maybe an big foot melee unit.
Perfect to hurt an ennemy unit or take an objectif.

I'm not seeing that Strat - do I have a wrong version of the Index pdf?

It's not a Stratagem, it's a Psychic power on the Libnaught.

I was hoping they would change the Deathwing standard bearer to allow him to be equipped with close combat weapons like in every edition so far, but no.

So instead of just doing what they did in 9th and say "these vehicles can take a multi-melta, you captains are called Marshals and can take X, your Leiutenants are called Castellans and can take Y"... GW made unique datasheets for all of them

Why? Just why... it could have been 1 page instead of several useless ones...

Dudeface wrote:
Sooo is the death company dread capable of an infinite (assuming you're in engagement range of infinite units) fight phase in theory?

Frenzied Reprisal: Each time an enemy unit targets this model, after that unit has finished making its attacks, this model can either shoot as if it were your Shooting phase or fight as if it were the Fight phase.

So you charge say 3 units, fight first from the charge, unit A hits back, dread fights again, unit B hits back, dread fights again, unit C hits back, dread fights again etc?

Until it croaks, yes. If you manage to get one into base contact with an enemy one, or e.g. Murderfang (who has the same ability with another name) you can have them fight it out until one of them dies

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

What I want to know is why DG pays 2 for the same strat.

because the DG one isnt phase-restricted.

I could have sworn theirs was melee only? Can't find it now. Bleh.

 tauist wrote:
BA Index looking bland AF

Let me guess, if I want to field my JP Death Company unit, I must use the Sons Of Sanguinius detachment rules? But I can still use datasheets from Index SM, correct?

No. You use any unit you want but can use gladius det. What you can't do is take ba units in say dark angel det.

Voss wrote:
Confused by the BT versions of Primaris tanks. Is there some overlap between vows and the base versions of those tanks?

The BT version can replace the stubber with a MM.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
So instead of just doing what they did in 9th and say "these vehicles can take a multi-melta, you captains are called Marshals and can take X, your Leiutenants are called Castellans and can take Y"... GW made unique datasheets for all of them

Why? Just why... it could have been 1 page instead of several useless ones...

to reduce bloat and keep it simple
so you just need the datasheets from your factions and not the datasheets from another faction +1 page of rules

much more simple and less rules bloat

After going through my DW, I have 5 invalid models, 4 invalid units, and nothing to show for it but less customization options. Thanks a fething bunch.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 tauist wrote:
BA Index looking bland AF

Let me guess, if I want to field my JP Death Company unit, I must use the Sons Of Sanguinius detachment rules? But I can still use datasheets from Index SM, correct?

It gives the restrictions at the top.

I'm not sure I'm understanding the detachment restrictions correctly tbh. From looking at both Index SM & Index BA, I get the feeling that I can take a Gladius Task Force Detachment, and still get to keep my DC & Co, but cannot mix in units from other Marine Chapters? Whereas if I take the Sons of Sang detachment, I am not allowed to take generic marines??

Anyways, as long as taking a Gladius detachment with DC is a legal build, I'll take it. It suits my headcanoned BA army much better than Sons Of Sang det, all I want from my BA is to be able to include DC due to lore reasons, can just as well be a codex chapter for all other purposes

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
So instead of just doing what they did in 9th and say "these vehicles can take a multi-melta, you captains are called Marshals and can take X, your Leiutenants are called Castellans and can take Y"... GW made unique datasheets for all of them

Why? Just why... it could have been 1 page instead of several useless ones...

because now they can make BT- flavored Captains/Lieutenants with abilities that fit better with the faction than the generic SM ones (don't know if thats the case, can't be assed to actually read marines rules in detail)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
So instead of just doing what they did in 9th and say "these vehicles can take a multi-melta, you captains are called Marshals and can take X, your Leiutenants are called Castellans and can take Y"... GW made unique datasheets for all of them

Why? Just why... it could have been 1 page instead of several useless ones...

because now they can make BT- flavored Captains/Lieutenants with abilities that fit better with the faction than the generic SM ones (don't know if thats the case, can't be assed to actually read marines rules in detail)

They're literally the same as the Primaris Captain and Primaris Lieutenant aside from the differing weapons.

 tauist wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 tauist wrote:
BA Index looking bland AF

Let me guess, if I want to field my JP Death Company unit, I must use the Sons Of Sanguinius detachment rules? But I can still use datasheets from Index SM, correct?

It gives the restrictions at the top.

I'm not sure I'm understanding the detachment restrictions correctly tbh. From looking at both Index SM & Index BA, I get the feeling that I can take a Gladius Task Force Detachment, and still get to keep my DC & Co, but cannot mix in units from other Marine Chapters? Whereas if I take the Sons of Sang detachment, I am not allowed to take generic marines??

Anyways, as long as taking a Gladius detachment with DC is a legal build, I'll take it. It suits my headcanoned BA army much better than Sons Of Sang det, all I want from my BA is to be able to include DC due to lore reasons, can just as well be a codex chapter for all other purposes

Any SM list can be a Gladius detachment
A sons of sang detachment cannot include units from other chapters but are free to bring "vanilla" marine units

So a sons of sang detachment can include tacticals/devastators/intercessors but not Agrax agatone or thunderwolf cavalry for example

 tauist wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 tauist wrote:
BA Index looking bland AF

Let me guess, if I want to field my JP Death Company unit, I must use the Sons Of Sanguinius detachment rules? But I can still use datasheets from Index SM, correct?

It gives the restrictions at the top.

I'm not sure I'm understanding the detachment restrictions correctly tbh. From looking at both Index SM & Index BA, I get the feeling that I can take a Gladius Task Force Detachment, and still get to keep my DC & Co, but cannot mix in units from other Marine Chapters? Whereas if I take the Sons of Sang detachment, I am not allowed to take generic marines??

You can always take generic marines. If you take one of the specialist detachments you just can't take other chapter keywords. In this case, non-BA.
Chapter keywords are 'only one, ever,' whether its coming from the detachment or a single unit. Though having none at all is also an option.

You can have an entirely painted SW force, but if you only use generic units, you can use the Sons of Sang detachment.

Anyways, as long as taking a Gladius detachment with DC is a legal build, I'll take it. It suits my headcanoned BA army much better than Sons Of Sang det, all I want from my BA is to be able to include DC due to lore reasons, can just as well be a codex chapter for all other purposes

Sons of Sanguinus also represents a 'codex chapter.' They all do, technically. Though you have to stretch a bit for why they care about the relevant detachment rule in a few cases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
So instead of just doing what they did in 9th and say "these vehicles can take a multi-melta, you captains are called Marshals and can take X, your Leiutenants are called Castellans and can take Y"... GW made unique datasheets for all of them

Why? Just why... it could have been 1 page instead of several useless ones...

because now they can make BT- flavored Captains/Lieutenants with abilities that fit better with the faction than the generic SM ones (don't know if thats the case, can't be assed to actually read marines rules in detail)

They're literally the same as the Primaris Captain and Primaris Lieutenant aside from the differing weapons.

The differing weapons is, in fact, the point.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

They're literally the same as the Primaris Captain and Primaris Lieutenant aside from the differing weapons.

well there you have it, they have different loadouts, so instead of adding a block of text to the generic version that say "if your army is a black templar army, you may instead take bla bla bla"

And lets not forget that a "black templar army" isnt a thing anymore too ....

DW Knights have -1 damage. Unless GW hasn't shown us something, they are immune to 1 damage weapons as there is no clause indicating damage reduced to minimum of 1.

 tauist wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 tauist wrote:
BA Index looking bland AF

Let me guess, if I want to field my JP Death Company unit, I must use the Sons Of Sanguinius detachment rules? But I can still use datasheets from Index SM, correct?

It gives the restrictions at the top.

I'm not sure I'm understanding the detachment restrictions correctly tbh. From looking at both Index SM & Index BA, I get the feeling that I can take a Gladius Task Force Detachment, and still get to keep my DC & Co, but cannot mix in units from other Marine Chapters? Whereas if I take the Sons of Sang detachment, I am not allowed to take generic marines??

Anyways, as long as taking a Gladius detachment with DC is a legal build, I'll take it. It suits my headcanoned BA army much better than Sons Of Sang det, all I want from my BA is to be able to include DC due to lore reasons, can just as well be a codex chapter for all other purposes

Generic marines you can take freely. And you can take ba in gladius. You just can't take multiple chapters in army(see marine index)

I'll be playing ba with gladius myself probably.

I really hope Baal Predators make an appearance. The rules seem decent this time around.

 Sarigar wrote:
DW Knights have -1 damage. Unless GW hasn't shown us something, they are immune to 1 damage weapons as there is no clause indicating damage reduced to minimum of 1.

Yes this been note for about a week or two now.

It's not a Stratagem, it's a Psychic power on the Libnaught.

That is way better than the gakky lightning Njal got.

Both Wulfen and Thunderwolves got the Vanguard Vet treatment. So they are pretty garbage now. No loss where Wulfen are concerned. I don't like them.

In general I think SW are not going to see much play until the new 'dex in 2025.



I missed that they nerfed how fast Boxnaughts move.

Is there a misprint or anything regarding SM Command Squads? They can take almost any gun, except plasma guns. Plasma pistols, yes. Plasma cannons, yes. Plasma guns... eh... nope.

Woof Scouts have 1 wound, Codex marines get 2. Hahaha.

For some reason space wolf scouts are w1...

Tsagualsa wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Sooo is the death company dread capable of an infinite (assuming you're in engagement range of infinite units) fight phase in theory?

Frenzied Reprisal: Each time an enemy unit targets this model, after that unit has finished making its attacks, this model can either shoot as if it were your Shooting phase or fight as if it were the Fight phase.

So you charge say 3 units, fight first from the charge, unit A hits back, dread fights again, unit B hits back, dread fights again, unit C hits back, dread fights again etc?

Until it croaks, yes. If you manage to get one into base contact with an enemy one, or e.g. Murderfang (who has the same ability with another name) you can have them fight it out until one of them dies

Daayyyuummmm that's one of the few things so far to strike me as a bit too much whilst being totally accidental. Maybe needs limiting to once per phase or something? Otherwise it's the absolute msu blender bar none.

I like how brother Fattussquattus (aka Castellan, aka snowflake LT) has primaris only loadout, can join only primaris units, but the model is clearly in spine/pelvis deficient custom Mk VI with liposuction apparatus bolted on. To make it even funnier, the only pistol option it has is heavy bolt pistol, something that I noted before is missing from regular primaris LT sheet. And he can take chainsword (something no other primaris LT in the game can) despite having no bit on sprue. This has to be some record in inconsistent writing bingo

And the best part is, I struggle to understand why he is even an option because regular LT does everything better unless this dude has huge point discount or you really need either of two niche wargear options. Which you really don't because thanks to imbecile treatment of primaris melee, this dude won't be taking chainsword thanks to BT being melee army and characters being very rare source of not-wet-noodle attacks...

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Voss wrote:
Confused by the BT versions of Primaris tanks. Is there some overlap between vows and the base versions of those tanks?

The BT version can replace the stubber with a MM.

Which is idiotic, dozens of snowflake options were rolled into base SM gear in the index so this one really should have been added too. Especially seeing this plugs a big hole in primaris vehicle range (and would sell a ton of BT upgrade sprues). Though said options were mostly for squats, and clown writer sabotaging primaris rules really doesn't miss any opportunity...

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Woof Scouts have 1 wound, Codex marines get 2. Hahaha.

How many repetitions of 'GW forgets that SW scouts are grizzled Veterans, contrary to all the other chapters' is that now? It's definitely not the first, and i'm pretty sure it's not the second or third time either.