30k in 7th - Army Creation

[hisdudeness]

My group is gearing up to start the Betrayal campaign after our very successful (yet unfinished) escalation campaign.  We have  6+ people with sizeable armies and even starting a second legion.  We are also looking at getting a narrative tournament going in a few weeks. The upcoming Shatter Legions rules may answer change some of these.

 

My question is this: How is everyone incorporating Battle Forged and Unbound with 30k?  Lacking a FAQ there are some  issues that can cause questions.

 

 

 

Here is my idea and some gray areas:

 

1) The AoD, Onslaught, and Castellan FOCs are Core Detachments and each has the Restriction of all units must have the same Faction and gain The Ideal Commander and Objective Secured Command Benefits.  The Combined Arms Detachment is not used from the 40k BRB.

 

2) Leviathan Detachment is only used in specific instances for balance issues.  When used it is a Core Detachment with Ideal Commander and Objective Secured Benefits.  *For tournaments I am thinking of banning this detachment or limiting it to no Allies...

 

3) Your Primary Detachment is the detachment containing the armies warlord.

 

5) Allied Detachment is the standard FOC for allies listed in the 30k.  Cannot be the Primary detachment and all units in this detachment must be from the same faction and cannot be the same faction as your Primary detachment.  The Objective Secured Benefit is gained.  AD is not available if the Onslaught Core Detachment is taken, even if not the primary CAD.

 

6) Unbound, much the same as 40k rules but units with the Lords of War battlefield role are still restricted to 25% of total list points.  To run multiple LoW, the Leviathan Core Detachment is to be used. 

 

7) Factions are defined by the Allies Matrix.  Interactions are defined by the 40k Levels of Alliance.

 

8) Warlord traits can be chosen from the BRB or the 30k books.

 

9) Rights of War are chosen by detachment, if available.

 

 

Any other issues or things I am missing?

[corai]

I think FW have expresly said in an email to only use the BiTAOD suppliemt's rmy list creation. So no battle forged, no unbound, just the restrictions and methods mentioned in Massacre and the crusdaes Army list.

[hisdudeness]

Unfortunately, random emails mean nothing.

 

Problem being is if you effectively keep 6th edition army creation and play 7th edition rules you will encounter many more issues. So the "only BitAOD" creation make a little sense.

[corai]

Which other issues are you forseeing? This seems increadibly simple to me (so I assume I'm missing something!) but I can't see an issue with no one having access to unbound or objective secured, being restricted to single detachment + allies etc as long as its consistent across every player taking part in your campaign.

[hisdudeness]

It is simple if that is defined, but as we move further into 7th and find the changes we are finding more conflicts with 30k and 7th. Most are easy to reason out.

 

The reason for this is that some of our players still play 40k. In 6th the difference between the two minor. In 7th, the differences are wider and have some strange effects. The goal is to unify the two so they are closer together in how they work.

 

We really don't want to effectively learn two systems.

 

Everything scoring and no super scoring troops has led to some grief. In a competitive environment grief is bad.

[Triacom]

I'm with Corai, people sometimes forget that the main rulebook is NOT set in stone, you can alter parts of it if it let's you play the game better with your friends, and the rulebook even encourages this, there is no issue with restricting everyone to AoD Force Organization Charts, and removing unbound armies altogether (which is what every 30K player I've seen is doing) keeps things more consistent, otherwise you can make completely broken combinations like Death Guard where the troops are made up of nothing but support squads with shredding flamers in rhino's, besides, the AoD charts are what the game is meant to be played with in the first place, and if you're restricting points use in an unbound army, then it's not unbound any more.

 

I don't have a problem with the leviathan list, more LoW mean far less points elsewhere, and LoW aren't too bad to deal with if you have your own or lots of AT unless you get really high in points.

 

Most of the updates you are making here are already made in the 7th edition book, if I remember right, it doesn't tell you that only troops are scoring, it just refers to "scoring units", so that got updated to 7th nicely.

 

Overall I think what you're doing will be just fine, I think the reason we don't see people making lots of unbound lists is because there's not much point to, your regular troops are solid choices that are going to show up in a bound or unbound list, and the AoD chart has so many slots for everything that there's next to no issue of you running out of them.

[hisdudeness]

I'm with Corai, people sometimes forget that the main rulebook is NOT set in stone, you can alter parts of it if it let's you play the game better with your friends, and the rulebook even encourages this, there is no issue with restricting everyone to AoD Force Organization Charts, and removing unbound armies altogether (which is what every 30K player I've seen is doing) keeps things more consistent, otherwise you can make completely broken combinations like Death Guard where the troops are made up of nothing but support squads with shredding flamers in rhino's, besides, the AoD charts are what the game is meant to be played with in the first place, and if you're restricting points use in an unbound army, then it's not unbound any more.

 

I'm not talking about a game with just friends...we can make it up as we go.  I completely get the "play it how you want" setup and don't need it repeated here. 

 

I talking about set games where make it up as you go do not cut it.  For 30k for grow it cannot hide in garages, it must be played at stores/clubs.  These need well defined rules so you're not spending the entire time answering questions. 

 

 

I don't have a problem with the leviathan list, more LoW mean far less points elsewhere, and LoW aren't too bad to deal with if you have your own or lots of AT unless you get really high in points.

Neither do I, but there has to be a balance.  If only one side has them the game destills down to kill the LoW.  The 25% rule is there to limit this, we further limit this to specific games.

 

Most of the updates you are making here are already made in the 7th edition book, if I remember right, it doesn't tell you that only troops are scoring, it just refers to "scoring units", so that got updated to 7th nicely.

 

I never said only troops are scoring...everything is scoring in 7th. But if the detachment system is not included in 30k then you will not have Objective Secured for troops.  This means  controlling objectives is near impossible, which turns games into annihilation games.  We figured this out the first set of 7th games we played.

 

Overall I think what you're doing will be just fine, I think the reason we don't see people making lots of unbound lists is because there's not much point to, your regular troops are solid choices that are going to show up in a bound or unbound list, and the AoD chart has so many slots for everything that there's next to no issue of you running out of them.

I'm not sure what you are getting at and I do not believe you are understanding my first post.  This list is supplimental rules for camapigns and tournaments at the local stores.  I want to make sure I'm not missing anything others have found.  Additionally, we play 40k v. 30k games so if they are not in sync then we have issues. I'm only using the 30k FOC chart, just defining them as detachments instead of a 6th FOC. 

 

Unbound is an after thought that some of the players asked about...I believe it will be handled with the shattered legions rules coming out.  My plan is to only use them for specific games for a set reason.   But it needed to be addressed

[Triacom]

I get you want this to be supplemental, and I wasn't criticizing you for it, I was giving my opinion on the subject with the fist paragraph, using the troops as an example in the third paragraph, and giving my overall thoughts on what you were doing in the last paragraph, as well as answering your question about unbound armies.

[Moonstalker]

The random email that corai mentioned was one I posted here.  It wasn't the clear-cut response of how to do army construction I had wanted, but they were also very concrete in that you should never use unbound in 30k.  You can see the topic and the email in full here.  So, if you trust emails on the internet (which you could double check by emailing them yourself), then unbound is right out.  You can leave it out of your planning entirely.

 

As you can also see in that topic, I am of the opinion that BitAoD is not the same as Battleforged, and that the AoD FOCs are not available to Battleforged armies/cannot be combined with Combined Arms detachments/etc.  The issue, as you've hit on, is the changes to scoring units in 7th.  In my opinion, the best solution until an official FAQ is produced is to try and replicate the 6th edition rules and NOT incorporate battleforged/unbound.  There are just too many special rules on characters and units and RoW making X scoring or making Y not or limiting your number of Heavy Support choices in that detachment or whatever that you're going to have real problems adapting all of those things into 7th.

 

So, if I was doing it, I'd institute the following house rules for a 30k campaign.

 

1. Only troops are scoring, unless a unit or mission has a special rule that states otherwise (like terminators with implacable Advance).  Dedicated Transports for troops are not scoring (basically like 6th).

2. No Unbound.  No Combined Arms/Battleforged.  You get one AoD Primary Detachment (with the 3 HQ/4 elites), and then an optional Allies, Fortification, and Lord of War detachment (points and mission permitting).  Want multiple rolls for Warlord Traits?  Take a Praetor for Master of the Legion.

3. As listed in Massacre, Onslaught, Leviathan, and Castellan FoC are only available mission/opponent permitting, and cannot be combined with RoW.  Otherwise they follow the rules in 2.  You only get what's listed in the chart.

4. Allies and allied benefits/levels as per Betrayal.

5. Warlord can use 30k table or the ones out of the 7th rulebook, but none of the 7th ed silliness of letting just any ol' character be the warlord.  Back to the 6th ed method of HQ with highest Ld.

 

 

For 40k vs 30k, I think you can find appropriate guidance in the Betrayal FAQ.  In there, it indicates that if a 30k army is using the AoD force org, then the Xenos army should have access to it (and LoW) as well.  For 30k vs 40k, I would either have both armies follow the rules above, or both armies follow the 7th ed rules and completely disregard the AoD force org, rules, and limitations.  You also have the choice of using the 30k Superheavy rules as they are given in Massacre, how they are in 7th, or trying to combine the two (IE, 7th ed rules for superheavies and D weapons, but add the vulnerability of Superheavies to AP1 and Armorbane weapons - those weapons can inflict weapon destroyed and immobilzed results on superheavies -  that is presented in Massacre).

[hisdudeness]

Emails are not rules.  While FW is a little better as being consistent in responses they don't mean much.  I've read the email before and it doesn't say much beyond ignore 40k (which is impossible unless you keep using 6th).

 

My guess is that you have not played a competitive 30k game...or play competitive at all.  Winging it does not work.  Your house rules do not work for 30 v 40k, so don't help much.  The key is to have a standard guidlines that work in a completive setting, campaigns, and against 40k. 

 

Like it or not 30k will be brought in line with 40k, I'm trying to prep for it with standard rules for my area.

[Moonstalker]

I don't doubt that they will be brought in line eventually, but until then any adaptation of 30k to 7th is going to change the balance of 30k, invalidating various special rules, devaluing some units and making others more useful.  I don't think it is something you can actually prep for, because there is no telling which way FW will come down whenever they do get around to issuing a 7th ed FAQ for 30k.  Whatever you create is just a guess, and you may be preping your group, store, or area for the completely wrong thing.

 

My choice is to try and stick as close to 6th as possible because it changes the balance the least and creates the fewest rules issues.  A couple simple changes to what counts as scoring and ignoring 7th's army creation rules produces something workable that lets us continue with the status quo until we receive official word from FW.  All those Rites of War that alter what is scoring, or troops, or units that have special rules that make them scoring, etc. don't have their value changed.  You don't have to deal with weird things like an army of Objective Secured Land Raiders with the Armored Spearhead RoW.  It causes the fewest issues by just not introducing them.

 

And I did address the issue of 30k vs 40k, by referring to the actual Betrayal FAQ.  It tells you that both sides should use the AoD rules.  Which, in this case, would mean both sides are using the same AoD FoC, only troops scoring, no battleforged, etc, as I outlined.  Or, if you'd prefer, both sides just use battleforged, BRB rules for LoW, etc.  Considering we've only had one 7th ed codex so far, the former doesn't really hurt any of 40k armies, since it's mostly just a return to normal from 6th, and is my preferred route.  This works just fine for just fighting against your friends.  Trying to design some overarching adaptation for using 30k in 40k?  See my first paragraph.  You're not in the position necessary to enforce any kind of standardized adaptation, and if you are playing competitively you will abide by whatever the TOs have come up with.

[hisdudeness]

Huh...good thing I'm the TO.

[Moonstalker]

Then maybe you should have made that a little clearer =p

 

 

I still think the issue here is in how much 30k and the RoW rely on having only a AoD Primary Detachment + 1 Allied Detachment, along with the value of being scoring (or not) being worked into the cost of various units.  The everything scores/OS thing is a very fundamental change to 30k and can significantly upset the balance, which is why I think conservative houserules and waiting for FW is preferred.  Unless you're prepared to make more in-depth rulings, I think just diving headlong into battleforged with 30k has the potential to unbalance things in 30k vs 30k.

 

Vs 40k, I'm unconcerned.  Whatever breaks in 30k, it's still not going to unseat the current kings of the 40k meta.  If you had to go any direction with it, though, I would say force them to use only combined arms/allied detachments in battleforged or go unbound to put them on equal footing (in that regard, at least) with 40k lists.  One change I might make is to make things like Implacable Advance for Terminators into an Objective Secured thing.  Letting them take Onslaught/Castellan/Leviathan is ill-advised, since those were specifically marked as for-narrative/by-opponent's-permission.  Lords of War should have the same availability/restrictions as whatever the 40k armies can get (so, if the 40k armies can go ahead and just bring 2 Knight Titans or a Hellhammer without regard to points level, then the 30k army should be allowed to as well).  Drop the Age of Darkness rules, because you're not doing battles in the Age of Darkness.  You're shoehorning 30k into a 40k environment.

[hisdudeness]

There is no problem with an army using a 40k codex playing against an army using the 30k codex.  We did it all the time in 6th. The 30k doesn't belong in 40k is just straight poop.

 

7th makes it even easier by allowing any army to fight any army regardless in how it was created.  All you have to do is follow a few basic rules.  The list I posted follows those.

[Moonstalker]

 

 

The 30k doesn't belong in 40k is just straight poop.

 

I never said this or implied it.  In fact, the majority of my games are 30k vs 40k.  However, the existing literature does make it clear that if you're going to do this, then both armies should have the same options available.  So if 30k armies get the AoD force org, then 40k armies do, too.

[hisdudeness]

And that existing literature is from 6th when the only real difference was the difference in FOC. 

 

I'm not really interested in if/should this be done, my question is are there any other issues with army creation when using 7th.

[Triacom]

With your army creation I only see a small issue, what are you going to do about special units that counted as scoring like troops in sixth?  For example, Justaerin terminators are scoring wherever troops are scoring, but now that everything is scoring do you plan to give them the Objective Secured rule so that they still score like troops?

[hisdudeness]

We've played a few games with Implacable Advance giving Objective Secured.  It works fine.  That's one of the easy ones.