World Eaters Rubicae?

[Commissar K.]

World Eaters don't have Rubricae

World Eaters don't have Sorcerers

 

Why is this even a discussion lol. We're better than this, come on

There was a time where all Chaos Marines didnt have Cultists, Vindicators or Forgefiends. Now Thousands Sons dont have Chaos Lords on discs and Space Marine have functional Night Lord units.

 

Were in 8th ed now, another set of changes has occured. Such as the use of Legion for non-Legion and Spawns, Daemons and Berzerkers with the option to flee and fail Morale.

[Marshal Loss]

What an absurd comparison. Mate, there's a difference between a Legion gaining access to Vindicators and using Thousand Sons Rubricae as World Eaters. A loophole (if it even exists, which I do not believe it does, not that it matters at the moment with the lack of Legion rules: it's the principle of it) in a rule does not compare in any way, shape or form to the examples you gave. No thanks. If that's how you want to play your game, go for it.

[raziel69r]

If <Mark of Chaos> is in the unit profile, it should be <Khorne> to qualify as a <World Eaters>, if instead of <Mark of Chaos> there is a fixed keyword like <Tzeentch> it can't be changed -because is fixed- thus not qualifying to be <World Eaters>, is really that simple. Trying to do otherwise is just <houseruling>, <cheating> or <WAAC>.

 

Cheers

^ What this guy said! how is it so hard to understand? 

[Kol Saresk]

Willful ignorance. They choose to ignore the Khorne restriction because they want to. They read and understand everything else that works just like it the right way, but when it comes to the bits they don't want to hear, they ignore them.

[Doom Herald]

Is not GW that loves to screw with the narrative, it is you that love to screw over the rules.

 

<Mark of Chaos> is a blank to fill with either <Khorne>, <Tzeentch>, <Nurgle>, <Slaanesh> or to leave it as it is

You dont leave it as <MARK OF CHAOS> though, it is dropped all together as evidenced by the Dark Vengeance 8e update. Saying it cannot be dropped and must be made Khorne assumes that you must assign the <LEGION> keyword before the <MARK OF CHAOS> keyword. This is stated no where. Now, per RAW, the best defense against this is the part in the rules that states if there is a disagreement about the order in which things occur, the players roll off. Honestly from a narrative perspective, I dont see a sorcerer using warp time and prescience as a automatic no: Khorne cares not from where the blood flows. Aiding in the blood flow seems like something that would be grudgingly accepted while not earning a mark due to use of sorcery, also having to roll off against an opponent seems like a decent way to see of Khorne will allow it or send away the psyker.

 

Admittedly I am rules lawyering, but its because im anoyed with the laziness and poor wording put into setting up the units available to World Eaters and Emperors Children. The whole "IF" portion is unnecessary if the RAI are units must have a Khorne keyword. Saying: "Units must have the Khorne keyword to qualify as a World eater." Would have been much more clear and concise as the only CSM units without <MARK OF CHAOS> or Khorne as a keyword that do have a blank <LEGION> keyword are Daemon princes who get it through their profile rules.

 

Also, GW has screwed the narrative in a big way for CSM. Dark apostles are supposed to be exclusive to word bearers among the legions is my particular axe to grind, along with the fact that space marines are extra resilient to fear, but space marines that literaly live in hell arent and daemons themselves have worse leadership than space marines and can run away from battle.

[DuskRaider]

This just sounds like rules exploitation at it's finest. No, you cannot have Khorne or World Eaters Rubricae. You can take Rubricae as Elites in a World Eaters army, but they do not benefit from any World Eaters or Khorne rules. Same with a Sorcerer. If you want to paint them up as World Eaters for some ridiculous reason, by all means go for it, but they cannot gain any World Eaters or Khorne rules.

 

WAAC players, ruining the game since it's inception.

[Panzer]

Oh wow here we go again with this ridiculous topic. 

[Doom Herald]

I love how no one actually has any way to counter the analigned sorcerer argument except by calling it ridiculous. I can see some validity to the pre-existing marks arguments, but no one has shown anywhere that states you must declare <legion> before <mark of chaos>. Mark of chaos says you neef not declare one, in which case it has no corresponding keyword (as backed up by 8e Dark Vengeance). You have no mark on the sorcerer, therefore it need not be Khorne, because its not there.

 

People are all too happy to say no to daemon princes in 7e Crimson Slaughter because of RAW, even though there was evidence to the rewording being an oversight, but arent willing to except an unaligned sorcerer even though RAW allows it.

[Panzer]

What makes you think there is any order in declaring such things tho? That's completely wrong thinking there. Also there were enough arguments. In this thread and in the other that got linked on page 1. If you don't accept those arguments, that's your problem.

[Doom Herald]

What arguments? Name a couple? They all apply to pre-existing marks, not unaligned (non existant) marks.

 

If i choose to have no mark on an HQ sorcerer, it does not have a mark of chaos, so the "IF" statement about mark of Khorne is null.

[Commissar K.]

I think its rediculous that Legions can be made up now and World Eaters and Emperors Children can fight as one army. But the latter has been the case for many editions now. So as before non narrative designs dont even bother me.

 

Play Chaos, play narrative designs if you want to. Going for matched play means you need to combine the best with the best.

 

Chaos Daemons mix all the same. Nonsence for older narrative. We even see a Bloodletter fight for a Keeper of Secrets in the book. Nonsence for older narrative, now its something were used to.

 

8th edition is new, new narrative and all. You can put World Eaters Legion on any model of page 16 to 42. Models who do not have the <Mark of Chaos> Keyword are still legit choices. Keyword Khorne in the rules as written is not a requirement.Not all models who have <Legion> have keyword <Mark of Chaos> either.

[Kol Saresk]

Games Workshop posted their FAQ today. Apparently they thought the answer to this question was so common sense that they didn't even put it in there. So the closest answer anyone is going to get is the answer they already gave out on their facebook page.

Which is "no".

@ThanatosMalleus: Notice how they didn't care about the order, only whether or not the unit with a <Mark of Chaos> keyword could take the Khorne keyword.

And notice how they said Sorcerers could not take the World Eaters keyword exactly because they could not take the Khorne keyword like it says they have to in that second paragraph Commissar K keeps ignoring.

[Doom Herald]

Notice the: "NOT an official answer" portion? Stop treating it like one. Until we get an official no, RAW allows an unaligned sorcerer in the World Eaters because it has no <MARK OF CHAOS> keyword nor its replacement.

 

Go read your index, they should too, it does not say World Eaters must have the Khorne keyword, it says "IF" they have a <MARK OF CHAOS> it must be Khorne. An unaligned sorcerer has no <MARK OF CHAOS> type keyword.

[Kol Saresk]

Funny, I see it my Sorcerer's datasheets. You must have a typo George. You should get it checked out.

 

Otherwise, all you are trying to do is sidestep the requirement.

 

The World Eaters Legion keyword does not allow units that start with a <Mark of Chaos> keyword to be unaligned, Nurgle, Slaanesh, or Tzeentch. RAW. Period. Anything else is willfully misinterpreting.

 

Literally the only units that do not have a <Mark of Chaos> keyword are Be'lakor, the Daemon Prince, Furies, and the Soul Grinder.

 

And the Daemon Prince, Furies, and Soul Grinder have to choose a daemonic allegiance.

 

And since the World Eaters keyword restricts you to the Heretic Astartes, then any World Eaters daemon princes you have also have to take the Khorne keyword. Just like everything else in the list.

 

You can try and sidestep it however you want. It doesn't change the RAW. You can ignore actual GW employees because "it's not in a FAQ". Doesn't matter, they're paid by the rule makers, you and I aren't.

 

If you want a psyker or cult units in your Khorne or World Eaters army, any one of us will be glad to tell you how to do it legally.

 

This is not legal. Period. End of discussion.

[Commissar K.]

You seem to skip out the not official part, like you skip out the part where <Mark of Chaos> Keyword is not the same as Khorne Keyword.

Good luck with your own house-rules and that.

New FAQ furthermore proves that all narrative reason does not apply. Though it's amazingly fantastic that Poxwalkers turn Necrons into Poxwalkers and Necron alike. All the while Skarbrand opens a portal where he pushes Flyer into.

This edition is a blast.

[Panzer]

I mean, why are we still discussing it anyway? You two seem to be adamant about your interpretation so keep playing it like that if you actually manage to find people who allow you to do so. Just stop telling people that it's possible on forums until it got clarified in another FAQ.

 

Also it's kind of funny how OP started the thread with a question and now he is defending his interpretation as if his life depends on it lmao

[Isengrin]

By the gods, it has spawned! I guess the aforementioned rules paragraph being headlined by Servants of Khorne is too ambiguous and can be read as Servants of Khorne and whoever the hell you like. Good times.

[Kol Saresk]

No, Page 11 makes it clear that it is the same. Especially with the example of Khârn's Khorne keyword being his <Mark of Chaos> choice.

 

The fact that even ThanatosMalleus agrees that it's the same thing speaks for itself. His problem is that he's trying to make a loophole to sidestep it where there is none. You stand alone. He stands alone. So adios.

[Commissar K.]

No, Page 11 makes it clear that it is the same. Especially with the example of Khârn's Khorne keyword being his <Mark of Chaos> choice.

 

The fact that even ThanatosMalleus agrees that it's the same thing speaks for itself. His problem is that he's trying to make a loophole to sidestep it where there is none. You stand alone. He stands alone. So adios.

You seem to read things wrong again. It is stated that some do not have the Keyword <Mark of Chaos> like Khârn, The Fallen and more. Likewise not all models have the Keyword <Legion>, every Keyword counts as another one and not multiple. It's why Abaddon has Keyword Khorne, Nurgle, Slaanesh and Tzeentch because <Mark of Chaos> is not a count all and a seperate Keyword in itself.

 

Cheers,

[Doom Herald]

The World Eaters Legion keyword does not allow units that start with a <Mark of Chaos> keyword to be unaligned, Nurgle, Slaanesh, or Tzeentch. RAW. Period. Anything else is willfully misinterpreting.

 

It does not say Units whos datasheets START with <MARK OF CHAOS>, it says units with <MARK OF CHAOS>.

 

Mark of chaos segment says you do not have to have a <MARK OF CHAOS> if you choose not to.

 

Units that choose not to loose the <MARK OF CHAOS> keyword, they do not reatain an unmodified <MARK OF CHAOS> keyword. This is supported by the Dark Vengeance 8e update along with the fact that unaffiliated heretic astartes do not have a <MARK OF CHAOS> keyword.

 

The World Eaters section says "IF" a unit has <MARK OF CHAOS> it must be Khorne. This supports the notion that models that lack a <MARK OF CHAOS> can be World Eaters despite lacking the Khorne keyword, especially since the ONLY unit lacking <MARK OF CHAOS> (before opting to drop it) with an unassigned <LEGION> in Heretic Astartes is the daemon prince who is already mentioned as following different requirements.

 

The only way this is arguable as not legal as written is if you have to assign a <LEGION> before <MARK OF CHAOS>, which is not written anywhere.

 

Im defending it because people are telling me the same issue with Tzaangors and Rubicae is what we are dealing with here and it is not.

 

If you opt to have no <MARK OF CHAOS>, which the index says you are free to do, the <MARK OF CHAOS> keyword ceases to exist. The World Eaters rules make an "IF" statement to which the "IF" condition is not met, so the proceeding requirement is nullified.

 

THAT is the issue I have with being told it is not possible and people refuse to adress that.

 

You know what, lets cut the sorcerer out of this since it gives a knee-jerk reaction. A squad of CULTISTS could opt put of having a <MARK OF CHAOS> keyword and join the World Eaters as unaligned since they would neither have <MARK OF CHAOS> or any of its replacement keywords. So, the "IF" statement is irrelevant.

[Lord Abaia]

If a World Eaters unit has the Mark of Chaos keyword, it must be Khorne.

"Lol. Not if I don't give it one first."

[Doom Herald]

 

If a World Eaters unit has the Mark of Chaos keyword, it must be Khorne.

"Lol. Not if I don't give it one first."

Precisely, and the Index says that is an option.

 

If GW did not want me to be able to sidestep the requirement, they should not have written it as an IF statement.

[Panzer]

 

 

If a World Eaters unit has the Mark of Chaos keyword, it must be Khorne.

"Lol. Not if I don't give it one first."

Precisely, and the Index says that is an option.

 

:facepalm:

[Khornestar]

There's a lot to be said about players being the problem, at least equal to GW's writing. I was hoping this kind of bull would be gone in 8th, but here we are.

 

Not the specific issue, but the argument itself. Both sides of it, mind you, and no particular care toward individual players.

[Doom Herald]

With daemon princes being specificaly named as following different rules, making the rule an "IF" statement is completely unnecessary except to allow unmarked units into the World Eaters. Tell me why else it says "if"?