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.

Ok so I'm just trying to catch up with a ton of stuff I've missed between 6th-10th editions. I see vehicles now have toughness wounds and armor saves, and I think I understand detachments, but I was wondering, does everyone play using "detachments" these days? Or are there people who still just build up an army list using units and don't really choose/pick a detachment? Is it required to use a detachment, or just optional?

I guess I'm not really asking to debate the merits of going one way or another, but trying to understand if its required, or just seen as good practice.

Technically required, but there's zero reason NOT to - unless you really want to tie one hand behind your back.

No, it's not really required.
But I don't know of anyone who doesn't.

Generally it's required, however it's much better to learn the game without them. Focus on the basics of turn structure and basic terrain rules. Using detachments will often restrict what you should use in your army, making small collections gimped.

I can’t think of an “up-side” in terms of power to play without a Detachment. So I doubt anyone would object to your playing without one. You would be giving up on the Detachment ability, Enhancements and Stratagems.

It all can be intimidating if you’ve been away for a few editions, but the Detachment concept is fairly simple once you play with it. For an intro game I might suggest that we play without Detachments and focus on the core rules, but once you get a few games in it should be fine.

detachments are just the second half of your army rules that you get to swap around

Detachments are simple system.

Play with this stuff... get these rules.

Pick a detachment. But as others have said, you can kind of ignore their rules/strats for your first few games while you get the hang of things.

 BorderCountess wrote:
Technically required, but there's zero reason NOT to - unless you really want to tie one hand behind your back.

So like, you and your friends could just play something that feels a little more like what fans of older editions would call 'real 40k" by just not doing detachments and building armies around what you'd like instead of whatever is required for detachments? Like a game of 10th edition would be fine with neither side doing detachments?

I have played a lot of boarding action games without detachments. Just the limited roster and 500 points. Was great to learn a lot of the basics.
The game is balanced in a way that if both players don't use detachments, it should be mostly fine. Some units are pointed with their potential abilities from detachments in mind, but that shouldn't matter too much in an introductory game.

Detachments are an extra layer of rules that are not required to play the game and sometimes remove choices for yourself. Enjoy a simpler version of the game until you have a large enough collection to make use of a detachment and the tons of extra stuff that comes with it. Personally I've enjoyed ignoring stratagems.

BanjoJohn wrote:

 BorderCountess wrote:
Technically required, but there's zero reason NOT to - unless you really want to tie one hand behind your back.

So like, you and your friends could just play something that feels a little more like what fans of older editions would call 'real 40k" by just not doing detachments and building armies around what you'd like instead of whatever is required for detachments? Like a game of 10th edition would be fine with neither side doing detachments?

You certainly could - play your way, you know? Very few detachments actually restrict what you can take (the biggest example being Codex-divergent Chapters); rather, they tend to encourage certain units with their play style (a Crusher Stampede favoring monsters, or a Blood Angels detachment that favors Death Company).

Imperial Knights main detachment is literally show up with any Imperial Knight models you own.

BanjoJohn wrote:

 BorderCountess wrote:
Technically required, but there's zero reason NOT to - unless you really want to tie one hand behind your back.

So like, you and your friends could just play something that feels a little more like what fans of older editions would call 'real 40k" by just not doing detachments and building armies around what you'd like instead of whatever is required for detachments? Like a game of 10th edition would be fine with neither side doing detachments?

Yes.
And 2/3 of each detachment are 101% optional anyways - nothing forces you to ever use a strat & you're under no obligation to choose any enhancement.

When you do start using detachments? Start small. Just use the Detachments rule. Then, after a few games or so, add in the enhancements (this is really just like choosing Wargear for a character in the old days - just from a very restricted list).
And then finally the strats. From these you'll probably find that only about 4 will be of use to you.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
Imperial Knights main detachment is literally show up with any Imperial Knight models you own.

Pretty much all the index detachments are general purpose, take what you want styles. That's part of the reason they've often remained the competitive staple even after codices add additional options.

The only thing the detachment system really prevents in souping in allies. So if you were coming back from an edition where that was normal (and what your army was) there might be more issues.
But for people playing mono-codex, it’s one of the least restrictive ways to put together an army ever.

Detachments are pretty much a core part of the game, however as LunarSol notes every codex has an "index detachment" that is intended as the "vanilla" detachment for the army, and those detachments have rules that are broadly applicable to anything you might take (whereas others are more specialized). If you aren't too hyped about detachments I'd recommend just playing your index detachment and don't worry about the others.

Most of the index detachments are pretty strong too so it isn't even like you're gimping yourself by only picking them.

BanjoJohn wrote:
Ok so I'm just trying to catch up with a ton of stuff I've missed between 6th-10th editions. I see vehicles now have toughness wounds and armor saves, and I think I understand detachments, but I was wondering, does everyone play using "detachments" these days? Or are there people who still just build up an army list using units and don't really choose/pick a detachment? Is it required to use a detachment, or just optional?

I guess I'm not really asking to debate the merits of going one way or another, but trying to understand if its required, or just seen as good practice.

Detachments (currently) have next to zero restrictions. You can take anything you want within broad rules like (Mostly)-Just-The-One faction/subfaction. i.e. you can't mix and match Ultramarines and Dark Angels. There are a couple few rules for mixing in one Knight, or the "auxiliary" factions like Imperial Agents, etc and there will probably be something for the Eldar/Dark/Harlequins and so on. Detachments provide your six "strategems" and a usually mild to mid-range army wide rule.