jagunio Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hey there, long time reader/lurker first time poster here . This was supposed to be posted in on of previous topics, but got a bit long so I thought it might get its own topic here. I've been also thinking about whats wrong with current blood angels/flesh tearers release, and what should be faq'd in the current set of rules, and not redesigning the codex from scratch. Here's what i've collected so far, feel free to use it, and upgrade it: FAQ/ERRATA: - blood angels scouts - increase ws and bs to 4 - blood angels dreadnoughts, librarian dreadnoughts and furioso dreadnoughts - increase base attacks to 4 - death company dreadnoughts and cassor the damned - increase base attacks to 5 - squad alphaeus, terminators and assault terminators - adjust points costs to a sm level - vanguard veterans and their options - adjust rules and points costs to a sm level - land speeder squadrons - adjust points cost to a sm level - assault marines - add an eviscerator as an option - terminator assault squad - add an option for a chapter banner - blood angels devastators - either add an option for heavy flamers (yes, I think that would be more in line with our rules, than grav cannon)or add an option for grav cannons (both for devs and tacs?) - techmarine - wounds increased to 2 Formations: - defenders of the cathedrum - replace 'Terminator Squad' with 'Terminator Assault Squad' What we're missing design-wise: - reclusiarch -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What we're missing design-wise/wishful thinking in my opinion (flesh tearers player): - sanguinary priest - add an option for a terminator armour and powersword, Artificer armour, and maybe a +4 FNP option - explosion of bloodlust - "rolled for its charge range is 10 or more" should read "rolled for its charge range is (8?) 9 or more" - there's too much weight on deep strike in our current formations. Most of them look like money grabs, and not something that was given some thought. Too much weight on tactical squads. I mean I get it, that Blood Angels are codex chapter, but Flesh Tearers Vanguard Strike Force which is supposed to be Demi Company equivalent looks nothing like flesh tearers to me (2 tacs on 2 assault squads would be fine i think). - a bit of muscle on Seth. I think his offensive capability is fine as is, but he is wearing power armour, and he is a chapter master after all. - this should be a big codex. Blood Angels, Flesh Tearers, Lamenters et modus operandi is so different, that this might actualy go sm way in design. - character formations, like: Strike Force Command, Librarius Conclave, Reclusiam Command Squad - rulebook rule clarifying how independent characters picked outside of a formation work with formation rules after joining units from those formations (i.e. arriving via deep strike turn 1, or Crimson Thunderbolt) - vehicle squadrons - decent AA outside of FW - unlock storm talon, or add something similar - not as heavy as stormraven - Might be nice, to get decent Up on Sanguinary Guard, +1 WS (like Deathwing Knights), No scatter on deepstrike - guess, that would be ok via formation - Up on Corbulo, Artificer Armour and 4+ FNP, maybe 3+ FNP if the sanguinary priest get a 4+ FNP - Unlock Land Speeder Storm for Blood Angels, for it is only logic - add rending (or simmilar) to chainswords Any thoughts? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenith Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hello and welcome to the forums! This was all good until you started wishlisting! FAQ/errata are areas that are unclear or out of line with other books. Units: - blood angels scouts - increase ws and bs to 4 - blood angels dreadnoughts, librarian dreadnoughts and furioso dreadnoughts - increase base attacks to 4 - death company dreadnoughts and cassor the damned - increase base attacks to 5 - terminators and assault terminators - adjust points costs to sm level - vanguard veterans and their options - adjust rules and points costs to sm level - land speeder squadrons - adjust points cost to sm level - terminator squad - add option for chapter banner - sanguinary priest - add option for terminator armour and powersword - blood angels devastators - add an option for heavy flamers (yes, I think that would be more in line with our rules, than grav cannon) - techmarine - wounds increased to 2 This is all good. What we're missing design-wise: - character formations, like: Strike Force Command, Librarius Conclave, Reclusiam Command Squad - rulebook rule clarifying how independent characters picked outside of a formation work with formation rules after joining units from those formations (i.e. arriving via deep strike turn 1, or Crimson Thunderbolt) - reclusiarch - vehicle squadrons - decent AA outside of FW What we're missing design-wise/wishful thinking in my opinion (flesh tearers player): - explosion of bloodlust - "rolled for its charge range is 10 or more" should read "rolled for its charge range is 9 or more" - there's too much weight on deep strike in our current formations. Most of them look like money grabs, and not something that was given some thought. Too much weight on tactical squads. I mean I get it, that Blood Angels are codex chapter, but Flesh Tearers Vanguard Strike Force which is supposed to be Demi Company equivalent looks nothing like flesh tearers to me (2 tacs on 2 assault squads would be fine i think). - a bit of muscle on Seth. I think his offensive capability is fine as is, but he is wearing power armour, and he is a chapter master after all. - this should be a big codex. Blood Angels, Flesh Tearers, Lamenters et modus operandi is so different, that this might actualy go sm way in design. Any thoughts? This is asking GW to change rules, which wont happen. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4103775 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagunio Posted June 26, 2015 Author Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hello and welcome to the forums! This was all good until you started wishlisting! FAQ/errata are areas that are unclear or out of line with other books. Yeah, thats why i separated that :). Everything below 'Formations' is just wishilisting :). I'll edit first post to make those clearly separated. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4103785 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hey there, long time reader/lurker first time poster here . This was supposed to be posted in on of previous topics, but got a bit long so I thought it might get its own topic here. I've been also thinking about whats wrong with current blood angels/flesh tearers release, and what should be faq'd in the current set of rules, and not redesigning the codex from scratch. Here's what i've collected so far, feel free to use it, and upgrade it: FAQ/ERRATA: - blood angels scouts - increase ws and bs to 4 - blood angels dreadnoughts, librarian dreadnoughts and furioso dreadnoughts - increase base attacks to 4 - death company dreadnoughts and cassor the damned - increase base attacks to 5 - terminators and assault terminators - adjust points costs to sm level - vanguard veterans and their options - adjust rules and points costs to sm level - land speeder squadrons - adjust points cost to sm level - terminator squad - add option for chapter banner - sanguinary priest - add option for terminator armour and powersword - blood angels devastators - add an option for heavy flamers (yes, I think that would be more in line with our rules, than grav cannon) - techmarine - wounds increased to 2 Formations: - defenders of the cathedrum - replace 'Terminator Squad' with 'Terminator Assault Squad' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What we're missing design-wise: - reclusiarch Any thoughts? Took out most of the second section as it just won't happen and is asking a bit too much - some good ideas though! Now that DA have 3W Interrogator Chaps, I agree we should most definately have 3W Reclisuirches, or 3W on Sanginary Priests with a statline to match. Terminator armour won't happen unless they bring out a mini :( blame the 3rd parties! The rest though are all just numerical changes that should happen :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4103851 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagunio Posted June 26, 2015 Author Share Posted June 26, 2015 Took out most of the second section as it just won't happen and is asking a bit too much - some good ideas though! Now that DA have 3W Interrogator Chaps, I agree we should most definately have 3W Reclisuirches, or 3W on Sanginary Priests with a statline to match. Terminator armour won't happen unless they bring out a mini blame the 3rd parties! The rest though are all just numerical changes that should happen I'm afraid that it's the same for reclusiarch as for priest in tda - you see, there's a chaplain mini, but there's no reclusiarch model. That's probably why gw made interrogator chaplain. If i recall anything, I add it to the list - like eviscerators on assault squads for example. I've shuffled first post a bit - moved priest to wishful thinking etc. btw - thanks for feedback :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4103870 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 True, but a normal chaplain would suffice that role quite easily, whereas for a SP theres no Terminators with Apothecary bits (...Bar one in the DA box :P) But yes, I suppose so :( Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4103901 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Basically, it comes down to IP. This is why we got a Sanguinary Priest - even though an Apothecary could suffice, it can't from an IP standpoint. Personally, I feel that if they ever got around to it, a Priest in TDA and a Reclusiarch would be a separate Datasheet to be purchased or available in White Dwarf. Lets see what the Christmas Black Library Advent Calendar brings :) True, but a normal chaplain would suffice that role quite easily, whereas for a SP theres no Terminators with Apothecary bits (...Bar one in the DA box ) But yes, I suppose so The GK TDA box has one too. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4103904 Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfThunder Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 How many FAQs were there when the 6th edition SM codex hit to adjust the prices of the 5th ed BA dex? In this case it's even worse since the BA were taken to marine standards 6 months before SM got their discounts, but I still don't see them issuing a FAQ changing so many book stats. I think DA and SM will have the discounts/better stats and BA (and to an extent SW) will get them at some point in 2016/early 2017. They could definitely FAQ the case of special reserve rules and independent characters joining formations though! There are more and more formations that allow to do funny things with reserves, and it's very important to know if you can attach an IC to the formation and benefit from those rules or not. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4103957 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frater Antodeniel Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hey there, long time reader/lurker first time poster here . This was supposed to be posted in on of previous topics, but got a bit long so I thought it might get its own topic here. I've been also thinking about whats wrong with current blood angels/flesh tearers release, and what should be faq'd in the current set of rules, and not redesigning the codex from scratch. Here's what i've collected so far, feel free to use it, and upgrade it: Color Code : Red : Ok and..... Green : No and... Yellow : Yes/No Cyan : Why not, don't really sure FAQ/ERRATA: - blood angels scouts - increase ws and bs to 4 (Ok) - blood angels dreadnoughts, librarian dreadnoughts and furioso dreadnoughts - increase base attacks to 4 (Ok) - death company dreadnoughts and cassor the damned - increase base attacks to 5 (Ok) - squad alphaeus, terminators and assault terminators - adjust points costs to a sm level (Ok) - vanguard veterans and their options - adjust rules and points costs to a sm level (Ok) - land speeder squadrons - adjust points cost to a sm level (Ok) - assault marines - add an eviscerator as an option (Ok, Logic for Blood Angels) - terminator squad - add an option for a chapter banner (Ok) - blood angels devastators - add an option for heavy flamers (yes, I think that would be more in line with our rules, than grav cannon) (I don't think that Heavy Flamers on devastators are the right thing, for if we Blood Angels had access to it, so do the Salamanders.....but i'm Ok with the Grav-Cannons) - techmarine - wounds increased to 2 (Ok) Formations: - defenders of the cathedrum - replace 'Terminator Squad' with 'Terminator Assault Squad' (Ok) What we're missing design-wise: - reclusiarch (Something to mind about, but something legit to ask for) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What we're missing design-wise/wishful thinking in my opinion (flesh tearers player): - sanguinary priest - add an option for a terminator armour and powersword (No, i think it would be more balanced to add the artificer armour option and maybe a +4 FNP option, even if terminator priest aren't that wrong, but not really what actually needed.) - explosion of bloodlust - "rolled for its charge range is 10 or more" should read "rolled for its charge range is 9 or more" (Ok, I would go for a 8 or more since it represent a 4+, so a 50/50 chance) - there's too much weight on deep strike in our current formations. Most of them look like money grabs, and not something that was given some thought. Too much weight on tactical squads. I mean I get it, that Blood Angels are codex chapter, but Flesh Tearers Vanguard Strike Force which is supposed to be Demi Company equivalent looks nothing like flesh tearers to me (2 tacs on 2 assault squads would be fine i think). (Maybe, Maybe not, something the think about...) - a bit of muscle on Seth. I think his offensive capability is fine as is, but he is wearing power armour, and he is a chapter master after all. (Ok, Gabriel Seth need his EVISCERATOR to be AP2 (Unwieldy too, for game balance), it's only logic, and an Eternal Warrior, by adding this two things, he could really become the Beast that he is supposed to be) - this should be a big codex. Blood Angels, Flesh Tearers, Lamenters et modus operandi is so different, that this might actualy go sm way in design. (I don't totally think so, since Blood Angels Legion successors are not on so many way, but it is clear that there is the Angel side and the Inner Deamon side, so 2 differents style, the Blood Angels one and the Flesh Tearers one) - character formations, like: Strike Force Command, Librarius Conclave, Reclusiam Command Squad (Ok, Logic for the librarius conclave, since BA are supposed to have extended librarius) - rulebook rule clarifying how independent characters picked outside of a formation work with formation rules after joining units from those formations (i.e. arriving via deep strike turn 1, or Crimson Thunderbolt) (I don't know what to thing about this^^) - vehicle squadrons (Ok) - decent AA outside of FW (Yes and No, since it is clearly stated in fluff that the blood angels do everything to "hold the sky", their AA mostly come from the sky, so, No hunter and No Stalker, but Ok Stormtalon and Ok Forgeworld Xyphon, Fire Raptor, and Storm Eagles) Any thoughts? (Up on Sanguinary Guard, +1 WS and BS, No scatter on deepstrike ? +1 Wound ? Can charge after DeepStrike ?) (Up on Sanguinary Priest, Artificer armour option access, and maybe a +4 FNP option) (Up on Corbulo, Artificer Armour and 4+ FNP, maybe 3+ FNP if the sanguinary priest get a 4+ FNP) (Unlock Land Speeder Storm for Blood Angels, for it is only logic) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4104150 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagunio Posted June 29, 2015 Author Share Posted June 29, 2015 Hey thanks for your replies. I added some of your ideas to the first post. Did I miss something from our codex/shield of baal, that should be faq'd after recent sm release? Should I add anything else? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4107117 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Raul Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Hey welcome to the forums! Firstly sign up to our petition to GW for said FAQ errata, the thread should still be on the 1st page of this forum. Email GW and then post in the thread Brother! Basically agree with most of what you've said, good luck! Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/310109-ba-7th-edition-faq-and-errata-of-bc-origin/#findComment-4107209 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.