More from Jervis Johnson...

[jakehunter52]

So, I found this little bit from leonmallet over on Warseer. I found it fairly interesting.

"Jervis kindly delivered a seminar in Bugman's on Saturday night, and after running through the new releases for january (and February?) he was open to questions. With regard to most 'further out than the next two months' questions he stated that it was impossible to say what would come out when."

 

"He stated that the pan is to now work to a 4-6 year period of renewal for the codexes and army books. As in Canada a few months ago he reiterated that if they get ahead then new stuff can come in, but only if they are on course with the existing books. He sounded genuine in this to my mind.

 

I asked about the rumoured combined/not combined Inquisition book. What he stated was that Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters will remain seperate army lists, that they remain part of the planned 4-6 year edition life cycle, and that the focus will shift towards the militant chambers for each rather than the emphasis being on the Inquisitors. He indicated that the emphasis came from the fact that they were working on Inquisitor at around the same time and basically got a bit carried away."

 

I actually really like what they are saying, taking a focus on the militants and beefing them up. It will continue the trend of having a unique army except expanded in ways that are desperately needed (playing water can get tiresome after a while). Too bad for the inquisitors but I feel like if they can make them fit into a support role somehow, kinda like the thunderfire cannon, they will be much better (they are meant to question and torture, not be generals on the battlefield right?) and can continue to influence our army in significant ways. Also I hope the inquisition project here continues to get love so we can continue to be excited about our DHs. I'm on a fantasy binge right now so I am a bit out but I am sure once I save up for my Forgeworld Dread, I'll be back full throttle again.

 

edit:added italics

[Tauren]

I am of the opinion that the knights got shafted because of their "anti-daemon" abilities. On top of that the lack of heavy weapon choices to the core-troopers hurts also. I don't like the fact that the army itself is so centered towards daemons that ignores the fact that many other armies can be influenced and controlled by daemons... thusly you may never fight daemons but have a reason to fight other armies. Instead of making them capable of dealing with these armies (non chaos oriented wargear... psycannons that target invulnerable saves? ) you end up with an army that is limp against most things and against daemons you gave a rule that messes the knights up so badly its not funny.

 

I think they need to concentrate on making the knights an all-around army that is capable and has decent wargear, at the same time they should remain elite. Retain their heavy weapons, give them other heavy weapons, allow for psycannon bolts to be bought for the troops... All are ideas ...

 

Also I thought the inquisitor in our army was a "Support role". The IST's were the option for grabbing the heavy weapons we couldn't take. Practically the only problem was the lack of anti-tank stuff and you can throw IST's into a rhino with melta's for that. Or better yet use sisters for a fluffy 3-some (inquisitors, knights and sisters) of inquisitorial good-ness.

[Inquisitor Agrippa]

I would love to see an update on the list but am worried that the IST's might be taken away. I have six full squads of IST's with various extras for special weapons options. The main reason for this is that I use a radical list (with Daemonhosts) so I can't access Grey Knights. If IST's get taken away then I might be a little at odds as to what to do with my army.

[Tauren]

I hardly think they will take away IST's... They are important to the army and serve a role within the army.

[Melissia]

They said they would focus on the chamber militants, not completely remove the Inquisitorial aspect.

[Tauren]

And technnically the IST's are the all-purpose arm of the inquisition, they make up the standard forces that serve inquisitors on short notice...

[Mal]

If you take away IST's then in order to keep fluff you have to get rid of stormtroopers for guard armies.... since stormtroopers make up the 95% of candatiates who fail in becomming IST's.

 

But if the worst does happen and they drop them, then you have the core of a guard army right there.... just do grenadiers

[Gentlemanloser]

that they remain part of the planned 4-6 year edition life cycle

 

To me, this sounds like the new plan is to over 4-6 years update all current codexes to the new edition. So we missed out on the third edtion upgrade cycle, and the 4th.

 

We are now slated to be in the end of the 5th edition Rule book cycle, which having just been released, we've got a 4-6 year wait.

 

Not good news.

[Toogeloo]

Well then, with any luck, we will have a codex designed around 6th edition in mind. Worst case scenario is that we update like the Dark Angels and get a crap codex designed around the current edition only to have it fall out from under us with the new edition a year later. At least with the new 5th edition Witchhunters actually improved over 4th edition and are closer to a top tier army. Daemonhunters on the other hand still need a lot of help...

[Reclusiarch Darius]

I hear a lot of talk about 'wow, Daemonhunters currently suck, they really need a leg up', and I whole-heartedly disagree.

 

Lets do a rough comparison with the new vanilla SM codex HQ's. Their re-balancing has shifted, IMO, the meta-game about how MeQ armies operate at the 'hero' level.

 

For the much the price as an GK Grandmaster with Icon of the Just, you can get either;

 

Terminator Master w/lightning claw+combi-weapon

(175 points)

 

or

 

Terminator Epistolary w/ force weapon+storm shield , any two psychic powers (for our purposes lets assume he selects 'Might of the Ancients' and 'Quickening')

(190 points)

 

 

So, in the first instance, the Master has +1WS, -2S with no force weapon ability (but re-rolls to wound) and -1A. Unlike the GM, he has no retinue option, so he can be picked out in close-combat. He is not Fearless, isn't a psyker, does not possess the Aegis or Shrouding, and does not have the 'Rites of Exorcism' ability. Instead, he auto-rallies at the start of the SM turn and can choose to auto-fail any Morale test. Shooting-wise, he has a one-shot flamer, melta or plasma gun, or a bolter. Also, he has a one-shot Orbital Strike ability (which is nice, but we can buy much the same in Heavy Support for a pittance and have it fire every turn, irrespective of what the GM is doing).

The Grandmaster and Chapter Master are otherwise identical, except for the above differences.

 

The Librarian has -1BS, -1W, -1I and -2A. Depending on what powers he selects (they're entirely interchangable), he can boost himself to S6 (and still use his nerfed force weapon, as well as rolling his S6+2D6 when attacking armour), or boost himself to I10 and gain Fleet. However, he can't use both 'Might' and 'Quickening' in the same turn and still use his force weapon (he's limited to any combination of the two). Also, like with the Master, he can't buy a retinue, so he can be picked out in close-combat. . He is not Fearless, does not possess the Aegis or Shrouding, and does not have the 'Rites of Exorcism' ability. Instead, he auto-rallies at the start of the turn and can voluntarily fail any Morale test. He has no gun, but has a 3+ invulnerable save over the 4+ invul of the other two.

Aside from these differences, the Epistolary and Grandmaster are the same.

 

 

Now, lets consider the retinue options. In the case of the Grandmaster, he can take between 3-9 x GKT's as a bodyguard, with all the same options as the Elite choice for them. However, they don't have a Brother-Captain (as obviously the Grandmaster leads the unit). Considering a typical and inexpensive retinue;

 

3 x GKT's, 1 x GKT w/NFW+incinerator

(199 points)

 

Now, looking over the retinue options for a Chapter Master, he unlocks a squad of Honor Guard, and being an IC can attach to any unit the army. Lets see what we can get for about 200 points with Honour Guard;

 

Chapter Champion, relic blade, 3 x Honour Guard w/ relic blades

(210 points)

 

For 11 points more, this is how they differ (ignoring charge bonus);

 

The regular Honour Guard have -1WS, Champion has +1A. They can choose to not use their relic blades (use their power weapons+bolt pistol instead), thus gaining +1A attack each but at -2S. Wargear wise, they have frags (so can assault units in cover)+bolt pistols+bolters, instead of storm bolters and an incinerator. None of them have 5+ invulnerable saves, Fearless, Aegis, Shrouding or Rites of Exorcism, and they have to buy a Drop Pod if they wish to Deepstrike. Instead, they auto-rally at the start of the SM turn, can choose to fail any Morale test, and the Champion re-rolls to hit and wound against IC's he is in BTB with.

 

 

The upshot of all of this is that the Grandmaster w/Icon+basic retinue is a real bargain, if you compare it to the vanilla equivalent. Most of their special rules kick in against mundane opponents ('Rites' being the only exception), and the Grandmaster outclasses the Libby and the Master when you add it all up.

 

 

It's a limited example, but I hope it demonstrates to people how excellent our HQ can be, when you plunk him down next to the vanilla equivalents (the Libby is a bit unfair as he costs more by about 15 points but it's the closest I could get, seeing as he can't buy an Iron Halo anymore).

[Toogeloo]

Well, I wasn't bashing the Grey Knights (at least not intentionally) and whether their army sucks (which I don't think they do). I actually rather like Daemonhunters. I was simply stating that the Sisters are now a Top Tier army, due in large part to 5th ed., and the Grey Knights are not. Now in a perfect world, there would be no such thing as a Top Tier army, and all armies would have to work just as hard as any other army to win, but we all know that just isn't the case, now don't we...

[Tauren]

What space marines lack in elite warriors, which is expected, after all who the hell do you think we are... The Grey Knights. Sadly what they lack they also benefit in choices, choices that require us to ally with others. Sadly there are those who are too pig-headed *cough* to seek out allies and they do pure GK's armies... not a bad thing but they get pissed when they pay a premium for the benefits. I just think we are better off using an ally to fill the roles we need well... plus I'm a "more troops" kinda guy. I hate sticking all my might into one hero, or character, or HQ or 2 large land-raider sized targets... I'd rather my entire army reach forth with their gloved hands rip the heart out of the enemy then blow it away in a hail of stormbolter shots than a single expensive character.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

On-topic; I like what I hear so far. Buffing the Grey Knights is definately needed, the SoB do pretty well in 5th edition (maybe just consolidate their armoury, fix Repentia etc). I don't wanna see them nerf Inquisitors, if anything they need an adjustment up the power curve (especially the close-combat department, although the Hereticus Lord when tooled properly does pretty well currently, he's just overpriced). IST's need better hellguns (we'll see what they do with IG Stormtroopers and hopefully get the same buff, if any). Rhino's need to be brought into line with vanillla SM costs, etc etc....

 

GW has the real potential to completely kill off the player base for DH's if they screw up the 5th edition codex, so fingers crossed they don't totally destroy our uniqueness and playstyle. As I have said, SoB don't need too many tweaks, they handle themselves a lot better than GK's in 5th edition and remain a decent army.

 

edit: just responding to the above;

Well, I wasn't bashing the Grey Knights (at least not intentionally) and whether their army sucks (which I don't think they do). I actually rather like Daemonhunters. I was simply stating that the Sisters are now a Top Tier army, due in large part to 5th ed., and the Grey Knights are not. Now in a perfect world, there would be no such thing as a Top Tier army, and all armies would have to work just as hard as any other army to win, but we all know that just isn't the case, now don't we...

 

It's a not a matter of bashing, I'll freely admit on an 'army to army' level they're not a top-tier army, I just wanted to highlight the fact that due to being ignored for 2 editions now, our HQ selection (the Grandmaster+retinue) stacks up pretty well to his vanilla counterparts. There is an air of despondancy amoung many DH player about their army which I wanna dispell, at least in part.

 

Sadly what they lack they also benefit in choices, choices that require us to ally with others.

 

Yeah, there's really only a couple of builds of DH that work, and the best tend to ally themselves into an IG/SM base army.

 

Sadly there are those who are too pig-headed *cough* to seek out allies and they do pure GK's armies... not a bad thing but they get pissed when they pay a premium for the benefits.

 

:lol: I prefer the term 'themed', but whatever. I think all pure GK players are aware of how their army fares on the table-top, it's less about winning than about winning against the odds that appeals to me and others. I've actually found pure GK armies do very well against horde armies (Tyranid in particular), so long as you choose your close-combats wisely and shoot well.

 

I just think we are better off using an ally to fill the roles we need well... plus I'm a "more troops" kinda guy.

 

You're playing the wrong army then; Daemonhunters take the 'elite' army type to the extreme. I've never played a game where I wasn't outnumbered at least 2-1, not to mention facing down a lot more vehicles than I could afford in my own army. I think Orks or Imperial Guard might be more to your liking; hell, even SoB can spam their infantry to quite impressive levels.

 

I hate sticking all my might into one hero, or character, or HQ or 2 large land-raider sized targets... I'd rather my entire army reach forth with their gloved hands rip the heart out of the enemy then blow it away in a hail of stormbolter shots than a single expensive character.

 

You should really play Tyranids, they are pretty much the only army in 40k which can have a squad as a HQ choice (Warriors). Plus, a squad of Warriors is in many ways superior to a Hive Tyrant (their 'hero' type creature). You can field about 3 of these squads, kitted out with a reasonable amount of upgrades, and still field an immense horde of Gaunts backed up by Genestealers for Troops.

 

Anyway, with GK's we have one of the cheapest Terminator HQ's in the game (if it weren't for his 1 wound he'd be a bargain), and he's completely expendable. Just attach him to a PAGK squad and use him to soak up bolter wounds.

[Melissia]

Atlhough, one should note taht the Sisters can only do so in a footsloggers army... but in a footslogger kind of army, they can get up to 212 models... although they'd be horribly lacking in decent anti-tank if they did. (edit: more if you buy repentia, up to 222)

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Tauren Posted Today, 05:26 AM

Sadly there are those who are too pig-headed *cough* to seek out allies and they do pure GK's armies... not a bad thing but they get pissed when they pay a premium for the benefits.

 

Excuse me? I'm going to take issue with this particular comment. I have yet to see any GK player complaining that they have to pay a premium for their benefits. What does happen is people complain that they are not getting their points worth for GKs, due to most of the special rules needing attention and various updates elsewhere that are too many to list. A pure GK list is never going to be easy to play and we knew that when we started. Regardless of your opinion of those who play pure GK armies, kindly keep it and your sweeping generalisations to yourself next time. <_<

 

GKs can match up to SMs fairly well with their strengths, but their weaknesses (high numbers, lack of anti-tank) are still very real. GKs don't need those weaknesses toned down, they need their strengths bumped up to counter their weaknesses. That pretty much preserves the GK playing style.

[Gentlemanloser]

It's a limited example, but I hope it demonstrates to people how excellent our HQ can be

 

Sure. But who uses a 'nilla HQ in the SM list any more?

 

When all we've got is Stern and Coteaz versus the likes of Lysander, it's easy to see how outdated our HQ choices are.

[Mal]

Yes sure GK HQ's aren't that bad... but ealistically how many can you field in an army of say 2000 points? You thats right a mere 2. Somehow I don't think they will be the game winners at that scale, they are good but they are not that good.

 

Its the troop choices that really win the games for you (they after all are the only units that can capture objectives).

 

So lets look at the basic price of a 10 man squad + commander (no upgrades).

 

Justicar + 9 PAGK's = 275

 

nilla serg + 9 PA nilla's = 170

 

So thats a difference of 105 points, and for that we get a CC force with stormbolters, which by the time we get close (unless you want to charge) are the same as boltguns, and we need to get close to take advantage of our Str6 weapons), where as the nilla marines get grenades (bigger bonus that you'd think) and the choice of some nice anti-MEQ weapons, the best GK's have on an infantry model is a combi weapon on the HQ, other than that we can only get AP4. Which means at best we will get 2 melta shots off in an ENTIRE game, not something you can rely on.

 

Now as to out shrouding bonus, which everyone agrees is the best of our special rules.... the average number in a sequence of number (1,2,3,4,5,6) is 3.5, and the shrouding is 3D6x3 which averages out at 3.5x3=31.5 we start 24 inches away.... the range of most weapons with the exception of a ahndful of long range heavy anti-tank weapons is under 30 inches meaning for you to not be able to shoot us through shrouding you need an unlucky dice roll... and un/lucky cannot be considered when taking into account a units effectiveness. Or in otherwords... shrouding sucks when you actually look closely at the rule.

 

To sum it all up... our troop choices for a 10 man squad are 1.62 times more expensive and we cannot be geared to anti-MEW armies (which are the mainstay of 40K nowdays) Thats a fairly major kick in the teeth to start a game with, and to counter it we need some major power on our side, my personal preference is a pair of godhammer pattern landraiders, but even those have some glaring weaknesses, and are pretty easy to kill once you know how. (Dont ask, if you dont already know, im certinally not going to tell you).

[Gentlemanloser]

Or in otherwords... shrouding sucks when you actually look closely at the rule.

 

If only Veil of Tears rolls the same as Shrouding! :D

 

(Or the other way round!)

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Mal Posted Today, 11:40 AM

Yes sure GK HQ's aren't that bad... but ealistically how many can you field in an army of say 2000 points? You thats right a mere 2. Somehow I don't think they will be the game winners at that scale, they are good but they are not that good.

 

Wrong. A GK Hero is 0-1.

[Tauren]

Tauren Posted Today, 05:26 AM

Sadly there are those who are too pig-headed *cough* to seek out allies and they do pure GK's armies... not a bad thing but they get pissed when they pay a premium for the benefits.

 

Excuse me? I'm going to take issue with this particular comment. I have yet to see any GK player complaining that they have to pay a premium for their benefits. What does happen is people complain that they are not getting their points worth for GKs, due to most of the special rules needing attention and various updates elsewhere that are too many to list. A pure GK list is never going to be easy to play and we knew that when we started. Regardless of your opinion of those who play pure GK armies, kindly keep it and your sweeping generalisations to yourself next time. :)

 

GKs can match up to SMs fairly well with their strengths, but their weaknesses (high numbers, lack of anti-tank) are still very real. GKs don't need those weaknesses toned down, they need their strengths bumped up to counter their weaknesses. That pretty much preserves the GK playing style.

 

 

Geeez I must have plucked a bad string... GK's are fine, the problem is something that happens to any elite army... Small model count... That's why I love playing armies that pack punch and instead of buying all the nifty gadgets I instead buy lots of them. Keep the HQ cheap as dirt... Buy more troops. That said... Sorry if I hurt your pride by slapping pure GK forces in the face on the internet... As for sweeping generalizations I can make them if I choose to. Fact of the matter is the choices to fulfill some roles in our army are poor and offer little in the creative department. On the other-hand taking allies gives us far more choices. Other armies do better because they have choices in their units, If you play a pure GK army you have 1 choice... grey knights, they are expensive and have no anti-armor abilities. That leaves your anti-armor to your heavy support dreadnoughts and landraiders, of which you must buy 2-3 of either or, which is boring... and unfluffy (dreadnoughts are a rare occurrence for the Grey Knights). Space marines on the other hand can buy more troops at a premium with special weapons, special weapon teams, cannons, tanks, walkers, elite troops with special weapons. The point is they have options, we don't...

 

As for GK's matching SM's, we are a slave to the numbers, and until the numbers turn our way (utilization of terrain to limit the amount of incoming dice rolls we take) and find ways to curve those numbers (cover saves for instance or utilizing vehicles to block LOS) we will suffer from what all elite armies suffer... The opponent grabbing his pile of dice and throwing it at us... One of them is gonna scratch my cornea eventually...

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Tauren Posted Today, 02:26 PM

GK's are fine, the problem is something that happens to any elite army... Small model count...

 

Yeah, thats why its called an elite army. Models that cost more should be better than those that cost less, but have their numbers restricted, thats what happens with GKs, right . . .

*Checks Codex: DH*

*Checks new Codex: SM*

*Checks Codex: DH again*

Oh wait.

 

Tauren Posted Today, 02:26 PM

Sorry if I hurt your pride by slapping pure GK forces in the face on the internet... As for sweeping generalizations I can make them if I choose to.

 

Slapping Pure GKs is your priviledge, as long as you provide reasons. Otherwise its an inflammatory statement. Doesn't mean I'll agree with you if you post reasons, but I will have no reason to get annoyed. Same goes for sweeping generalisations, reasons please!

 

Tauren Posted Today, 02:26 PM

That leaves your anti-armor to your heavy support dreadnoughts and landraiders, of which you must buy 2-3 of either or, which is boring... and unfluffy (dreadnoughts are a rare occurrence for the Grey Knights). Space marines on the other hand can buy more troops at a premium with special weapons, special weapon teams, cannons, tanks, walkers, elite troops with special weapons. The point is they have options, we don't...

 

I agree wholeheartedly that GKs should have more options, as long as they don't negate their weaknesses (so GK Devastators w/Lascannons are out).

But on the Dreadnought point I'm going to disagree. I've only run a single GK Dread w/ Twin-Linked Las and DCCW in my list since I started playing GKs, and have yet to have my butt handed to me because I couldn't take out tanks (Not to say I haven't had my but handed to me before now :P ). That said, I have only faced my friend's Armoured Company w/Stormblade under 4th ed. rules.

[Tauren]

Also take note that what you are stating tyr is something called being out of date... I play Beasts of Chaos, I know what it means to be out of date...

 

As for slapping pure GK my reasons have been stated... I love them, I love the models, I just finished buying 30 of them and plan to field them gloriously... at the same time I plan to expand with allies and utilize IST's because I believe that is how the army is built. Other than that everyone is welcome to field them pure, but those same people do whine about the lack of (insert comment here). It's a choice and just like playing with 1 gun in a FPS, you are limiting yourself... that's no ones fault but your own. The army is out of date, if anything bringing in allies will keep you competitive, plus you get more painting and modeling variety, which is why I choose the inquisition army... Sisters, ISTs, inquisitors, knights! all beautiful models... Plus the cheaper I can get them the better... I <3 ebay...

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Tauren Posted Today, 06:57 PM

Also take note that what you are stating tyr is something called being out of date... I play Beasts of Chaos, I know what it means to be out of date...

. . . . It's a choice and just like playing with 1 gun in a FPS, you are limiting yourself... that's no ones fault but your own.

 

Thats a miscommunication on my part. I am referring to the Forge World Armoured Company List in Imperial Armour 1, which is not out of date. The Armoured Company list in WD is out of date.

Sure I'm limiting myself. I didn't claim otherwise.

[Marid]

I just think we are better off using an ally to fill the roles we need well... plus I'm a "more troops" kinda guy.

 

You're playing the wrong army then; Daemonhunters take the 'elite' army type to the extreme. I've never played a game where I wasn't outnumbered at least 2-1, not to mention facing down a lot more vehicles than I could afford in my own army. I think Orks or Imperial Guard might be more to your liking; hell, even SoB can spam their infantry to quite impressive levels.

 

I hate sticking all my might into one hero, or character, or HQ or 2 large land-raider sized targets... I'd rather my entire army reach forth with their gloved hands rip the heart out of the enemy then blow it away in a hail of stormbolter shots than a single expensive character.

 

You should really play Tyranids, they are pretty much the only army in 40k which can have a squad as a HQ choice (Warriors). Plus, a squad of Warriors is in many ways superior to a Hive Tyrant (their 'hero' type creature). You can field about 3 of these squads, kitted out with a reasonable amount of upgrades, and still field an immense horde of Gaunts backed up by Genestealers for Troops.

 

Anyway, with GK's we have one of the cheapest Terminator HQ's in the game (if it weren't for his 1 wound he'd be a bargain), and he's completely expendable. Just attach him to a PAGK squad and use him to soak up bolter wounds.

 

There's no reason to switch to another army because one likes troops. In 5th Ed troops are 'kind of' important. It is a point that going 'pure' is purposefully limiting one's options. In the age of only troops score, going pure makes it even harder to field a competitive list. Like others have said, I believe that a Daemonhunter army was intended to not be 'pure.' The codex even tells us that is a difficult approach to building an army.

 

I happen to really like ISTs and inquisitors. They give the army a decidedly non-SM feel. I hope that the next DH codex is not really that different than the present one.

[Tauren]

Couple units of elite PA Grey Knights... IST's and Sisters, Seraphim, rhino's and chimera to block line of sight and provide some bigger guns, unit of termies with a BC... Provides a hard-hitting army that fills all the roles needed and provides some great look...