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.

tneva82 wrote:
You want guillimann striking with 21 attacks annihilating multiple squads?

Yep. That's exactly what I meant. I want Guilliman to have 21 attacks. Hell, I want him to have 50 attacks. With each weapon. Twice per turn. We full re-rolls.

Yes, it was easier when a unit had a finite amount of attacks to divide between weapons, but I don't see what's so wrong with allowing two weapons to be used if it reduces attacks.

 Shadow Walker wrote:
I wonder how they will separate cc weapons options for the Warriors? My bet would be that Swords and Claws will be cc Warriors only, and Talons for both. I also think that Spinefists and Hooks will be cc only. If I am right, the most popular build - Swords and Deathspitters - will be turned illegal.

Or they'll be "Warrior close combat weapon" and "warrior bio weapon" and neither exist.

In seriousness I expect having a gun renders the melee weapon irrelevant via generic filler weapon with only the gun mattering, I'm also expecting the melee variant is always scything talons + something.

Another question is - will Rippers on non pushfit Gaunts have Spinemaws models or is it just non visible upgrade?

Dudeface wrote:

 Shadow Walker wrote:
I wonder how they will separate cc weapons options for the Warriors? My bet would be that Swords and Claws will be cc Warriors only, and Talons for both. I also think that Spinefists and Hooks will be cc only. If I am right, the most popular build - Swords and Deathspitters - will be turned illegal.

Or they'll be "Warrior close combat weapon" and "warrior bio weapon" and neither exist.

In seriousness I expect having a gun renders the melee weapon irrelevant via generic filler weapon with only the gun mattering, I'm also expecting the melee variant is always scything talons + something.

My bet is:
Scytals & rending claws become "warrior claws and talons" with a single D1 profile
Boneswords are a separate D2 weapon profile. Lashwhips act as a wargear upgrade again, probably triggering desparate escape tests for enemy units in engagement range.

Ranged warriors get deathspitters / devourers / spinefists with different profiles, like termagants. They're also equipped with 'warrior claws and talons' by default but can upgrade to the other melee options.

Melee warriors get 'warrior claws and talons' with more base attacks, and can take boneswords / lash whips as an upgrade.

Historically Scything Talons on Warriors just gave them +1 close combat attack.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
You want guillimann striking with 21 attacks annihilating multiple squads?

Yep. That's exactly what I meant. I want Guilliman to have 21 attacks. Hell, I want him to have 50 attacks. With each weapon. Twice per turn. We full re-rolls.

Yes, it was easier when a unit had a finite amount of attacks to divide between weapons, but I don't see what's so wrong with allowing two weapons to be used if it reduces attacks.

Oh think it’s more about how melee attacks have always been more about the user than the weapon while shooting attacks are the opposite (in Warhammer at least) and they’re just continuing that conceit.
I certainly prefer “pick one set of attacks with attached profile” to “pick a profile, check how many attacks you have, now check if the profile modifies that somehow, now get your strength and modify that as appropriate to determine the final attack profile” which is what we had before.
Could it be even better? Maybe yes. Is it better than it was? Definitely yes.

Semi-related; is there anything actually stopping you selecting an “[Extra Attacks]” weapon as your primary profile when in close combat?

On the data cards? Remember these are pre-Codex release data cards. Something to get us gaming until each Codex rolls out, at which point the cards will be replaced.

As such, I wouldn’t worry to much about what’s what, as the Codex a promised, I revealed wave of entirely new kits, are yet to come.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
On the data cards? Remember these are pre-Codex release data cards. Something to get us gaming until each Codex rolls out, at which point the cards will be replaced.

As such, I wouldn’t worry to much about what’s what, as the Codex a promised, I revealed wave of entirely new kits, are yet to come.

Yeah I mean fundamentally the bloat will start here and now. Pre-codex data cards then the codex cards then fixed of errors cards to be replaced with yearly updated cards. Thats just the cards.

Valrak just did a video about the Norn Emissary where he describes how it looks and probably just a slip of the tongue on his side but he said its build of the new Hive Tyrant frame.
So maybe we are getting a new Hive Tyrant model?

Otherwise what he describes sounds like the picture with custodes we saw before:
Looks similar to a hive tyrant with genestealer style hands, braingrowth with tentacles on the back

 Matrindur wrote:
Valrak just did a video about the Norn Emissary where he describes how it looks and probably just a slip of the tongue on his side but he said its build of the new Hive Tyrant frame.
So maybe we are getting a new Hive Tyrant model?

Otherwise what he describes sounds like the picture with custodes we saw before:
Looks similar to a hive tyrant with genestealer style hands, braingrowth with tentacles on the back

Apparently everything now has brain-growths on their back - the Neurogaunts, the Bettygaunts, the Neurotyrant and the Emissary all sport them, seems to be the Autumn '23 fashion must-have for otherworldly horrors.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:
Valrak just did a video about the Norn Emissary where he describes how it looks and probably just a slip of the tongue on his side but he said its build of the new Hive Tyrant frame.
So maybe we are getting a new Hive Tyrant model?

Otherwise what he describes sounds like the picture with custodes we saw before:
Looks similar to a hive tyrant with genestealer style hands, braingrowth with tentacles on the back

Apparently everything now has brain-growths on their back - the Neurogaunts, the Bettygaunts, the Neurotyrant and the Emissary all sport them, seems to be the Autumn '23 fashion must-have for otherworldly horrors.

Because they want to show off their weakest spot to everyone. Exposed brain on the backs. Its the equivalent of a terminator with no helmet!

It’s like when Nintendo remastered Majoras mask and changed every boss so that it would have a giant eyeball as a weak point. Because reasons

 NAVARRO wrote:
Because they want to show off their weakest spot to everyone. Exposed brain on the backs. Its the equivalent of a terminator with no helmet!

 GaroRobe wrote:
It’s like when Nintendo remastered Majoras mask and changed every boss so that it would have a giant eyeball as a weak point. Because reasons

This is just forward planning for Space Marine 2!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
On the data cards? Remember these are pre-Codex release data cards. Something to get us gaming until each Codex rolls out, at which point the cards will be replaced.

As such, I wouldn’t worry to much about what’s what, as the Codex a promised, I revealed wave of entirely new kits, are yet to come.

Seems dubious. The idea that they revised all the datasheets and then for a book just months later (already finished, by the way), they revised the cards again, but 'for real this time' is more than a little absurd and wasteful. What data would they be using to revise them? What changed in the months before the edition release to change the cards for the first two army books?

Some revisions to cards for armies later in the cycle may well happen, but I think people expecting revisions between thursday/friday's cards and September/October (ish) are straight up tricking themselves.

We already know that Combat Patrol has different rules than 40k proper.

Nothing wrong with suggesting that Leviathan units might have different rules from the main index units.

I've got a recollection of GW using altered stats/rules for some of their duel army packs and such. They've done it in the past so that they can release two armies in the same box and have them "work". GW is really hot right now on easy entry - push fit, simpler rules, smaller game formats getting marketing and so-forth.

That they've also built this boxed set with a marketing campaign in mind; it would not surprise me if they altered stats a bit on models so that everything was super simple. Push your models together, slap them on the table and play - no list building options; no optional upgrades (or very limited); and just throw them out for battle.

Granted the fact that gaunts have 3 weapons listed and the pushfit only come with 1 option; would defeat this line of argument. Unless, of course, GW just make a few errors or weren't too stringent on what got taken out and such.

Don't know, we'll have to wait and see. Thankfully it won't be long before we find out.

Tsagualsa wrote:
the Bettygaunts

It is Barbara!!!

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Semi-related; is there anything actually stopping you selecting an “[Extra Attacks]” weapon as your primary profile when in close combat?

Ummm. I guess you can technically do that. I'm unsure if it'd be worth it though. Likely to be FAQ'd.

I think it's very likely that the Leviathan sheets won't exactly match the sheets we're about to get and the eventual Codex sheets.

I mean, do we really think that they just forgot to give rules to the Nodebeast?

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Semi-related; is there anything actually stopping you selecting an “[Extra Attacks]” weapon as your primary profile when in close combat?

I don't think so. I know in 9th they got rid of the ability to avoid using your melee weapons so people couldn't do the default CCW attack and kill as few enemies as possible, but I'm not sure if a similar sort of thing exists in 10th.

You know what's more likely? It's just not part of the rules because no one writing the rules thought about it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


I mean, do we really think that they just forgot to give rules to the Nodebeast?

It is GW, so yeah

 Shadow Walker wrote:
It is GW, so yeah

Even I want to give them more credit than that.

I'm guessing the nodebeast is just the sarge, right? It's weird though, because these aren't the CP sheets so if these aren't final sheets what the hell is even the point?

They are the "final" sheets.

In quotation marks because we might get new ones with the codex later this year.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'm guessing the nodebeast is just the sarge, right? It's weird though, because these aren't the CP sheets so if these aren't final sheets what the hell is even the point?

On one hand what would be the incentive to buy the codex if they were identical - on the other side of that coin, why wouldn't they be identical if they're only 2-5 months apart?

Could be something to use with other detachments. Or to hang a bonus on for crusade play.

Right now it’s an empty hook. But something could be attached to it later.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Shadow Walker wrote:
It is GW, so yeah

Even I want to give them more credit than that.

Man, I truly want to believe, but then I remember all those day/week one/week before release etc. Codex corrections, and my faith in them is frozing quickly like death body in Asaheim.

 Tyran wrote:
They are the "final" sheets.

In quotation marks because we might get new ones with the codex later this year.

No "might", we ARE getting new cards with each Codex.

Dudeface wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'm guessing the nodebeast is just the sarge, right? It's weird though, because these aren't the CP sheets so if these aren't final sheets what the hell is even the point?

On one hand what would be the incentive to buy the codex if they were identical - on the other side of that coin, why wouldn't they be identical if they're only 2-5 months apart?

Codexes are for detachments, really. Don't need updated datasheets for that to matter even if there will be some.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
They are the "final" sheets.

In quotation marks because we might get new ones with the codex later this year.

No "might", we ARE getting new cards with each Codex.

Wonder if the cards will have a"version number" printed somewhere or maybe a different colour to help out differentiate between old and new.

Anyone who buys these upcoming "Index" cards - well, let's be honest, anyone who buys any cards for 40k deserves everything they get - will be mightily disappointed when they're all invalidated upon a new Codex release.