Codex Leaked - Deathwing Nerfed

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.

**Dudeface**

Karol wrote:
There are no GK librarians that don't wear terminator armour. I every codex that has lone operatives, because of how broken the rule is, it is an auto take. Giving more options to have stuff like that, especialy the cheaper/horde armies would be just insane.

The GK character stuff is unfair, because some bozo that copy pasted/wrote the GK index rule "forgot" that A GK version of Lt is called a cpt, so there is exactly 0 apothecary/Lt style models in the GK index. At the same time with the 0 offensive ability the GK codex has, not running Librarians just doesn't work. Also mechanicaly the GK terminator/paladin units are designed to be joined by characters to use stratagems, in the more limited (once per game) way GK are allowed to do that. But again the state of the GK index is not the argument here. It is lone operative being a bad rule. Do people really want every character to turn in to a nurgle rhino+ ? And again I say this as someone whose army would greatly benefit from it. Especialy if the rule spread to all characters. Because while not personaly good for me, there are a LOT of GK players who own 4-6 NDKs and they would love to start using at least 1-2 of them. They maybe even okey with the bad damage and stats they have, if they just could be lone operatives.

Lone operative bad, please give lone operative to my deepstriking monster characters. There really isn't that much lone operative and those that do exist aren't often winning games by themselves, GK do have one in the form of the tech marine. Not every army needs a reroll wounds character and often fights first from the GK beotherhood champion should be worth more.

**vipoid**

If it makes a difference, I don't support lone-operative on monster/vehicle characters.

**ccs**

Karol wrote:
There are no GK librarians that don't wear terminator armour. I every codex that has lone operatives, because of how broken the rule is, it is an auto take. Giving more options to have stuff like that, especialy the cheaper/horde armies would be just insane.

The GK character stuff is unfair, because some bozo that copy pasted/wrote the GK index rule "forgot" that A GK version of Lt is called a cpt, so there is exactly 0 apothecary/Lt style models in the GK index. At the same time with the 0 offensive ability the GK codex has, not running Librarians just doesn't work. Also mechanicaly the GK terminator/paladin units are designed to be joined by characters to use stratagems, in the more limited (once per game) way GK are allowed to do that. But again the state of the GK index is not the argument here. It is lone operative being a bad rule. Do people really want every character to turn in to a nurgle rhino+ ? And again I say this as someone whose army would greatly benefit from it. Especialy if the rule spread to all characters. Because while not personaly good for me, there are a LOT of GK players who own 4-6 NDKs and they would love to start using at least 1-2 of them. They maybe even okey with the bad damage and stats they have, if they just could be lone operatives.

Such hyperbole....

Looking at the GK index:
•I see offensive power. (It looks closely tied to movement shenanigans & melee to get the most out of it)
•I see heavy weapons support (mostly lascannon, but some other shooty) on dreads, landraiders, razorbacks, & the storm raven.
•I also see the ability to take a fair # of psi-cannon. (These might not have the greatest AP, but at 3x s8/d2 shots each they'll take a toll on most non-vehichle units.)
Just because YOU'RE particular collection of GKs lack these options, & it might require a different playstyle, =/= it not being present in the list.

And no, every character does not need Lone Op to be effective. Not in GK lists or any other.

**Breton**

ccs wrote:
Karol wrote:
There are no GK librarians that don't wear terminator armour. I every codex that has lone operatives, because of how broken the rule is, it is an auto take. Giving more options to have stuff like that, especialy the cheaper/horde armies would be just insane.

The GK character stuff is unfair, because some bozo that copy pasted/wrote the GK index rule "forgot" that A GK version of Lt is called a cpt, so there is exactly 0 apothecary/Lt style models in the GK index. At the same time with the 0 offensive ability the GK codex has, not running Librarians just doesn't work. Also mechanicaly the GK terminator/paladin units are designed to be joined by characters to use stratagems, in the more limited (once per game) way GK are allowed to do that. But again the state of the GK index is not the argument here. It is lone operative being a bad rule. Do people really want every character to turn in to a nurgle rhino+ ? And again I say this as someone whose army would greatly benefit from it. Especialy if the rule spread to all characters. Because while not personaly good for me, there are a LOT of GK players who own 4-6 NDKs and they would love to start using at least 1-2 of them. They maybe even okey with the bad damage and stats they have, if they just could be lone operatives.

Such hyperbole....

Looking at the GK index:
•I see offensive power. (It looks closely tied to movement shenanigans & melee to get the most out of it)
•I see heavy weapons support (mostly lascannon, but some other shooty) on dreads, landraiders, razorbacks, & the storm raven.
•I also see the ability to take a fair # of psi-cannon. (These might not have the greatest AP, but at 3x s8/d2 shots each they'll take a toll on most non-vehichle units.)
Just because YOU'RE particular collection of GKs lack these options, & it might require a different playstyle, =/= it not being present in the list.

And no, every character does not need Lone Op to be effective. Not in GK lists or any other.

Not sure how we got on GK in a Deathwing thread, but I'd point out GK are one of the factions most in need of more datasheets.

**Dudeface**

Breton wrote:
ccs wrote:
Karol wrote:
There are no GK librarians that don't wear terminator armour. I every codex that has lone operatives, because of how broken the rule is, it is an auto take. Giving more options to have stuff like that, especialy the cheaper/horde armies would be just insane.

The GK character stuff is unfair, because some bozo that copy pasted/wrote the GK index rule "forgot" that A GK version of Lt is called a cpt, so there is exactly 0 apothecary/Lt style models in the GK index. At the same time with the 0 offensive ability the GK codex has, not running Librarians just doesn't work. Also mechanicaly the GK terminator/paladin units are designed to be joined by characters to use stratagems, in the more limited (once per game) way GK are allowed to do that. But again the state of the GK index is not the argument here. It is lone operative being a bad rule. Do people really want every character to turn in to a nurgle rhino+ ? And again I say this as someone whose army would greatly benefit from it. Especialy if the rule spread to all characters. Because while not personaly good for me, there are a LOT of GK players who own 4-6 NDKs and they would love to start using at least 1-2 of them. They maybe even okey with the bad damage and stats they have, if they just could be lone operatives.

Such hyperbole....

Looking at the GK index:
•I see offensive power. (It looks closely tied to movement shenanigans & melee to get the most out of it)
•I see heavy weapons support (mostly lascannon, but some other shooty) on dreads, landraiders, razorbacks, & the storm raven.
•I also see the ability to take a fair # of psi-cannon. (These might not have the greatest AP, but at 3x s8/d2 shots each they'll take a toll on most non-vehichle units.)
Just because YOU'RE particular collection of GKs lack these options, & it might require a different playstyle, =/= it not being present in the list.

And no, every character does not need Lone Op to be effective. Not in GK lists or any other.

Not sure how we got on GK in a Deathwing thread, but I'd point out GK are one of the factions most in need of more datasheets.

Characters and their relative ability/inability to join units is how we got here.

**Breton**

Dudeface wrote:

Characters and their relative ability/inability to join units is how we got here.

There are a number of reasons how we got here, and each (sub)/faction has their own unique issues and those issues are rarely in the Core rules. Custodes for example have their biggest issue likely being their lack of datasheets. Imperial Knights - being somewhat anomalous when compared to other factions that have an infantry with OC - have trouble playing the Objective Game. Most of the recent ones getting split off like the Chaos Legions, the Votann etc join Custodes in just not having enough datasheets. Drukhari - have just been neglected. Orks don't need more datasheets but I'd guess they need better ones. So do Dark Angels.