highwind

Jeah, its obvious that its meant that way Last edition was even more tricky when Sergeant Chronus could command a vehicle that "has one of the following keywords" [...] VINDICATOR [...] The Vindicator Laser Destroyer had "VINDICATOR LASER DESTROYER" so "VINDICATOR" technically was one of the keywords

Doubtful because the Command Squads three "free" characters cannot support any unit actually worth it, but only themselves +1 OC value on a 5-man OC1 squad => thats the same OC value as any naked Intercessor squad Return one model per turn of a 5-man T4 W3 3+ => any meaningfull shooting/melee will kill this unit outright in one turn +1 advance and charge => the Champions Blade has a halfway decent profile (but is still miles aways from the Primaris Champions profile, lacking 1A, 1WS and the martial superiorty rule), the Apothecary only has a Chainsword, the Bannerbearer not even that and the 2 veterans "best" options are 2A Powerfists or 4A Lightning Claws... but besides that rather lackluster offensive melee capabilties of this unit, the most important fact is, we are looking at basic power armored 6" footsloggers! If Deathwing Command Squad actually getting the same treatment, thats a different story, as Terminators got way more punch, way more staying power and can deep strike and would be worthy "self buff targets" But as the "Ancient in Terminator" already got its own datasheet (being a character), I wouldnt bet my money on Deathwing Commands Squads with Apo+Ancient+Champ+2 Vets being a single non-character unit...

If you take speech very serious and very literal "Redemptor Dreadnought" cannot be "a keyword" (singular) because it is two words (plural) so "Redemptor" is one keyword and "Dreadnought" another one... GW (again) missed defining that "a keyword" (or better "one single keyword") is actually all the words not seperated by a comma... A better term would be "key expression" anyways (because an expression can consist of more than one word) Indeed! Nice find :)

The really fun (and potentially "broken", depending on point costs) interaction here is, that with Hellblasters firing out of the Impulsor any failed "Hazardous" tests does NOT kill a Hellblaster model but instead does 3 MWs on the Impulsor (because, as of the "Firing Deck" rule, the transport counts as the model shooting). Devastators are sadly "unjoinable" by ANY character, including Librarians - but an otherwise nice combo which would prolly work without the Lib and which I hadnt thought of myself yet :) Bike Captain with Powefist and "The Honor Vehement" in maxed squad of Outrider/Invader with MM (or Bikes/Attack Bike with MM as cheap alternative). The Outriders/Bikes "Turbo Boost" gives the whole unit 6" advance, the Biker Captains "Swift Assault" lets them still shoot after advancing. "Rites of Battle" for 0CP "Adaptive Strategy" (=> Assault Doctrin) every round and they can also charge; 18"advance+shoot+charge and the Captains Powerfist has permant S10 7A ("The Honor Vehement" + Assault doctrin. Lovely idea (really!) but sadly cannot attach two "Leader" units (Uriel and Marneus) to the same unit of Aggressors without any special rules (which neither of them has).

That Bike Captain is probably one of the best units in the whole index... Equip him a Power Fist and "The Honor Vehement" enhancement and team him up with a full squad of Outriders (=6 Outriders and 1 ATV). As part of that unit he benefits from their "Turbo Boost" ability and his "Swift Assault" rule makes all their weapons assault, resulting in a permanent 18" advance move with shooting! Fun doesnt end there tough: use his "Rites of Battle" rule every turn and target his own unit with the "Adaptive Strategy" stratagem for being in "Assault Doctrin" all the time and now that unit has permanent 18"advance WITH shoot AND charge (20-30" threat range)! With "The Honor Vehement" his Powerfist is permanently pushed to S10 and 7A and his bodyguard-unit sports a whopping 32 wounds at T5 which enemys must punch through before being able to target him directly (without any special rules) or having him lose his special rule snowball. The same works with a unit of 6 Bikes and 1 Attack Bike... you lose 1AP on their Bolter shooting, (6x2=) 12A on their Chainswords and a total of 9W of meat-shield, but depending on point costs / game size that might still be more than enough while being far more efficent

I basically expected the ":cuss: you decade-long Firstborn players"-trend to continue and obviously GW didnt disappont! General: - Firstborne non-Vets units still only 2 melee attacks per model just after basically EVERYTHING else (including CSM Legionares, who are the exact damn thing) got atleast 3 melee attacks with basic "close combat weapon" - Bolt guns even more underwhelming in comparison to (unified) Bolt rifles than last edition, Firstborn special/heavy weapons only marginally better/more specialized in comparison to (buffed) Intercessors astartes grenade launchers and plain worse than plasma incinerators/super rocketlaunchers - Losing out on the exclusiveness of the two really stand out transport options (Drop Pod => deep strike and Land Raider => charge after disembark) while getting nothing in return (fire deck 6 Impulsor for Devastators? Dream on!) Tactical Squad: base/min size of 10 models, no combat squads... its not enough Primaris already got the better battleline unit(s), they also simply MUST have the (overall) cheapest! tacticals currently cant even ride a Razorback, can it get any more ridicolous? Assault Squad: option of using a Flamer/Melta/Plasmagun leaves models without ANY form of melee weapons (and consequently ZERO melee attacks)... because having any relevant advantage over the compareable Primaris unit (Assault Intercessors) is just not an option! Devastator Squad: basically the only infantry unit in the WHOLE index which CANNOT be lead by any character... no way a Firstborn unit might get the edge over their Primaris equivalent (Hellblasters/Desolators) with slightly better weapons/options and the same availabitly of lethal hits/substained hits/4+ invuls! Vanguard Vets: All weapon options got cramped into "Hierloom weapons" which is basically the only "power weapon" (=> S5 melee weapon) with less than -2 AP and also one of very few with only 1D... you expected a Firstborn unit to stay better than their Primaris equivalent (Bladequard)? Cute fool! (Dont get me wrong on this: I do like the simplification of one weapon profile for the whole unit... its just that this weapon profile is utterly bad in comparion to what was possible before) Sternguard Vets: yeah, good joke, I know... Command Squad: 3 psuedo-characters buffing 2 special weapon guys - must be the best concept in all 40K datasheet history!

Yes, I started 3rd/4th and quit after 7th My only reason was: My fully armored/mobilized Battle Company, lovingly collected and built together (mostly magnetized) over nearly a decade (and literaly "costing a fortune") got completly trashed by greedy GW and their decision to not update the current range to truescale but supersede everything with (incompatible) Primaris models/rules. 6 Tactical Squads, 2 Devastator Squads, 2 Assault Marine Sqauds, 1 Vanguard Veterans Squad, 1 Command Squad on Bikes, 1 Terminator/Assault Terminator Squad, 9 Rhinos/Razorbacks, 1 Landraider, 3 Whirlwinds, 3 Landspeeders and an accumulation of Characters (basically a full set of Captains, Librarians, Chaplains for each variant of Powerarmor, Terminator, on Bikes - all of them either "scratch built" from bits or "limited edition" models) collect dust in the cellar since that moment. I watched the release of 10th closely, infact got a bit hyped, just to get overly disappointed with the SM index because of the (rather expected) fact, that basically every power armored "Firstborn" unit either stayed bad or even got worse in comparison to "Primaris". I think I will follow the rest of the Index and Point release and perhaps I will come back - and if I do, I will buy 100% 3D-printed or china-recasted miniatures to make sure, this greedy b*sta*d company does not earn a single cent from my wallet

I think the reason why they went with the "active for your army" wording is because of Marines vs Marines battles... They probably want you to read "active for YOUR (and not the opponents) army" rather than "active for your (whole) ARMY" But I totally agree with you: The wording could have done much better in first place

So, if we follow that argumentation, what would the Blood Chalice actually do for the unit it is used upon? -1 AP for pistoles and melee weapons? Actually not, because: pg 125 SM codex: Combat Doctrines "If every unit from your army has the ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword (excluding AGENT OF THE I MPERIUM and UNALIGNED units), this unit gains a bonus (see below) depending on which combat doctrine is active for your army, as follows:" Assault Doctrine While this combat doctrine is active, improve the Armour Penetration characteristic of every Pistol and Melee weapon that models in this unit are equipped with by 1. So, the bonus seen below (-1AP for pistol and melee weapons) is, by the wording of the Combat Doctrines rule, (also) only gained if the doctrine is active for your army (and not for the attack). The REAL question we should ask ourselves is: Does "active for your army" equal "active for every model/unit of your army"?

Well, it is acutally (just) YOU not agreeing with me - and thankfully rules are not about you (or anyone else) agreeing with me or saying I am wrong without having a logical argument, so feel free to keep "not agreeing with me" all day So? It has the (key)word "Dreadnought" listed twice in its keyword column - how does that change the Scorpius having the word "Whirlwind" written in its keyword column? Dont argue with people who make up interpretations and take those for rules - instead of the actual rules. Just saying. As said: Its not my fault that GW is unable to write their own rule(s) to act like what they intend.

Honestly, there isnt really anything to "discuss"... If GW would like to have their keywords treated as "one / a single keyword is a term, that can potentially consist of more than one (physical) words. As long as two or more words in the keyword column are not seperated with a comma, they count as one keyword." then they should have written this as a rule in the keyword section of the rulebook - but they didnt (neither last edition nor this edition) so it is like it is: one keyword is one keyword Funny thing is, they did it correct with the chapter keywords, as they basically define a chapter keyword as anything that is written between < > They could have done this with normal keywords aswell: -WHIRLWIND- and -WHIRLWIND SCORPIUS- for example But jeah... as long as this isnt changed/erratad Chronus is legal to drive a Whirlwind Scorpius or a Vindicator Laser Destroyer (because both have the required keyword listed in their datasheets) and a Whirlwind Scorpius is a legal target for the Suppression Fire stratagem (because it has the required keyword listed in its datasheet aswell)

Right - and Chronus rule doesnt ask for "WHIRLWIND," - it asks for "WHIRLWIND" (no comma)

I didnt say it is the same - I said there is not a single rule interaction where it would make a difference Take Sgt Chronus for example: His rule says he can command a vehicle "that has one of the following keywords" • RHINO • RAZORBACK • PREDATOR • VINDICATOR • WHIRLWIND • HUNTER • STALKER • LAND RAIDER The Scorpius has one of those Keywords: "WHIRLWIND" - it is the fourth word in keywords-column of its datasheet Blame GW for sloppy rules writing... just saying one "keyword" and not clearly defining what that is (as one can assume they actually mean "key-expression" instead of "keyword") leads to one keyword being one (key)word. "Whirlwind" is one (key)word - "Whirlwind Scorpius" is not one (key)word... it is two (key)words.

Well, RAW there is no rule interaction that requires "WHIRLWIND" (alone, between commas) when it already has "WHIRLWIND SCORPIUS"

While the Venators neutron laser surely benefits from being UM, I think the Vindicator Laser Destroyer is overall a better choice for them (especially when you consider the current meta). Most successfull UM lists revolve around buffings characters (BobbyG, Tigurius, SotO Chaplain, etc.) and a castle of shooty units, walking up the field. While the Venator has a higher movement characteristic, the first round devastator doctrin forces it to either stand still (falling behind the buff bubble) or majorly gimping its damage output. The Laser Destroyer on the other hand can move along the castle and still shoot overcharged first turn (with only a small chance of receiving a MW). Offensive-wise the Venators S12 AP-3 (it is not -4 like you said) gun is better vs the (likely fewer) T6 4+/5+ vehicles, while the Laser Destroyers S10 AP-4 gun is better vs the (more prevalent) T7/8 2+/3+ vehicles. They are equal vs most other target profiles (mainly due to the fact that there are virtually no T10/11/12 units in the game) Defensive-wise the Venators T7 2+ should be roughly equal to the Laser Destroyers T8 3+ but considering that many UM lists feature a 5++ bubble (Psychic Fortress) and that the current meta is heavily leaning towards S8 weaponry like Melta (Eradicators, Trikes) and Fist/Hammer, the T8 Laser Destroyer feels a little tougher. But the by far most relevant quality of the Laser Destroyer is its Vindicator keyword, making it a legal ride for Chronus! With the benefit of a non-degeneration 2+ (which can be fully rerolled while within 12" of BobbyG) it is much more accurate than a Venator. With Chronus also transfering the Character keyword to its ride, the Laser Destroyer can even benefit from Tigurius Presience ability (-1 enemy to hit), adding much to its survivability. Granted, the Venator has the advantage of optional/additional weapons but neither Heavy Bolters nor Lascannons are weapons I personally even consider when equiping a Tactical or Devastator so I dont feel like paying a 5pt premium for those weapons (on top of the 1CP for martial legacy) is an attractive option at all.