What Happened to Mortis Pattern Dreadnoughts?

[Master Toddius]

Am i missing something? Dreadnoughts (for what I see in Grey Knights as well) for Dark Angels can't take mortis pattern dual twin linked Auto Cannons any longer? Is this across the board with ALL dreadnoughts? Was this addressed with the previous Imperial Codex's before Dark Angels?  I love my dual autocannon mortis pattern dreads. 

[Interrogator Stobz]

Still a FW option fortunately

[Bryan Blaire]

Per the Designer's Commentary, if the wargear options exist on an Index datasheet for a unit that has a datasheet in a Codex, you may still use the wargear options from the Index datasheet, but you must use the most recent rules and points values for the wargear itself from your Codex. This is addressed here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/ under the WH40K section in the document titled Designer's Commentary.

 

The Dreadnought Index datasheet still allows the use of dual autocannons for both of a Dreadnought's arms, so you are still covered.

[Syphid]

In fact, the FW Index expanded the options for the Mortis dreadnought.  They can take two multi-meltas, two assault cannons, or two plasma cannons if you can model it. Unfortunately they lost their targeting array that gave them a bonus against flyers.

 

I'm still holding on to my Mortis for their great synergy with Grim Resolve. Quad bolter and quad lascannon are great, and I'll probably swap my quad autocannons onto a Venerable frame.

[Dark_Master]

I have two Mortis Dreads, one Autocannon and one Lascannon, Can you run one arm auto/ one las? Or better to keep as Mortis?

 

DM

[RayJ]

I have two pairs of all of the classic Mortis weapon arms. My Lascannon Mortis dreads have been putting in work this edition.

 

Not sure dual plasma or assault cannon would be very appealing. It can take a cyclone now, so the Heavy Bolter version with cyclone sounds tempting.

[Syphid]

That change was reneged, you can't take CML on regular mortis anymore. I was jus trying about to put a CML on a HB Mortis, but then they issues another FAQ. Unforgiven minds think alike!

[Hoots]

Well I'm glad I found this thread as I just had a mild panic attack.

 

Do we think that this is the start of a slow death to the codex variety being allowed access to these weapons?  Having just bought some in October I'd be devastated as it seems that everything I buy then becomes the next thing that's either not very good, or only playable in restricted ways!

 

I do have access to the index so I suppose I'll make use of that (the points haven't changed anywhere have they?)  can just imagine my mate when I tell him that some diagram in the designers notes says i can have something that's not in my dex :P   

 

Good thing they don't expect you to carry all your rules with you to a game eh? 

 

Hoots

[Helycon]

Our codex has the latest point values. Any Forgeworld specific units and weapons may have changed from their index, and can be found in Chapter Approved 2017.

[Hoots]

Our codex has the latest point values. Any Forgeworld specific units and weapons may have changed from their index, and can be found in Chapter Approved 2017.

My concerns were primarily about the loss of twin autocannons for dreads in our codex. These were just just exclusive to mortis pattern and werenot a forgeworld exclusive either. I'll check chapter approved to see if anything has changed but I'd be gutted if I can't run a dreading a twin autocannon and CCW loadout.

[Helycon]

A Mortis dread is a dread with two identical ranged weapons. The Mortis is a Forgeworld index unit and is still fine to use.

 

The index with all its options can still be used and the loadout you describe is an option. Use the index for options and the codex for points values.

[Hoots]

A Mortis dread is a dread with two identical ranged weapons. The Mortis is a Forgeworld index unit and is still fine to use.

The index with all its options can still be used and the loadout you describe is an option. Use the index for options and the codex for points values.

Hey Helycon

 

Please forgive my ignorance but I don't see twin autocannons in the codex so I can't use the dex for points, do I just use the point value given in the index?

 

Hoots

[Helycon]

 

A Mortis dread is a dread with two identical ranged weapons. The Mortis is a Forgeworld index unit and is still fine to use.

The index with all its options can still be used and the loadout you describe is an option. Use the index for options and the codex for points values.

Hey Helycon

 

Please forgive my ignorance but I don't see twin autocannons in the codex so I can't use the dex for points, do I just use the point value given in the index?

 

Hoots

Yes, that's indeed the case.

[Stormxlr]

man they created such a damn cluster:cuss with how they are arranging rules between so many books.

[Helycon]

man they created such a damn cluster:cuss with how they are arranging rules between so many books.

In essence, they're just creating rules for models they currently sell, which makes sense. Just be happy they still have entries for older units and invalidating a lot of people's models. They didn't have to. 

[Stormxlr]

 

man they created such a damn cluster:cuss with how they are arranging rules between so many books.

In essence, they're just creating rules for models they currently sell, which makes sense. Just be happy they still have entries for older units and invalidating a lot of people's models. They didn't have to.

I will stop this discussion because this might go off the rail, saying be happy about how a company functions is not how Capitalism works. Im not going to beat a dead horse, but they did invalidate a whole army ( Eldar Corsairs list, SM Vanguard/Assault armies). Also only giving rules to equipment that comes in the box is not a way to create balance, example of Cataphiractii with only a heavy flamer, it makes no sense for them not to be able to equip any other terminator equipment and that ruins balance, or in case of Tartaros them having access to Ripper autocannons goes against established fluff.

 

To get back on topic, does it make sense to anyone that Mortis Dreads lost Anti Air rules ? It doesnt make sense right, the same way that Leviathan Dreadnought lost 3 Hunter Killer Missiles while they are on the model therefore should have rules due to current GW logic.

[march10k]

 

 Im not going to beat a dead horse, but they did invalidate a whole army ( Eldar Corsairs list, SM Vanguard/Assault armies).

 

I'll beat that horse.  I finished my year-long corsairs project three weeks after they invalidated them.  No HQs, no transports...in effect, the FW index went a step further than the new codexes.  At least in the codex, every unit that could be represented with a current model (like company vets) is included.  FW indexes only include the most basic unit that could be fielded using a given resin kit...and then gave them all the wrong keywords, preventing any reasonable use of them in an 'elf soup' list.  Invalidated, indeed!

[Stoic Raptor]

 Just be happy they still have entries for older units and invalidating a lot of people's models. They didn't have to. 

 

 

No, they don't have to - but when people fear that their investment in the game might be  invalidated, they become reluctant to buy more.  When you've sunk money (and time to assemble and paint) into something you can no longer use, would you be so ready to reward that company by risking more of the same?  Most people see that as throwing good money after bad.

 

That's why it's in the company's best interests to make sure people can keep using what they've already bought.

[Helycon]

 

 Just be happy they still have entries for older units and invalidating a lot of people's models. They didn't have to. 

 

 

No, they don't have to - but when people fear that their investment in the game might be  invalidated, they become reluctant to buy more.  When you've sunk money (and time to assemble and paint) into something you can no longer use, would you be so ready to reward that company by risking more of the same?  Most people see that as throwing good money after bad.

 

That's why it's in the company's best interests to make sure people can keep using what they've already bought.

 

They need to dedicate their resources to things. Resources are finite, and they chose to make different kits. This applies to all companies. Sometimes, things get invalidated. It's called progress. Sure, it would be great if companies would always keep making older products. By that logic, you could still buy a T-Ford and it's components. Sometimes, things need to be cut to make sure there's room for the new. That also applies to rules. We're nerds, not too strong, so books don't need to get too heavy now! ;)

[Stormxlr]

 

 

 Just be happy they still have entries for older units and invalidating a lot of people's models. They didn't have to. 

 

 

No, they don't have to - but when people fear that their investment in the game might be  invalidated, they become reluctant to buy more.  When you've sunk money (and time to assemble and paint) into something you can no longer use, would you be so ready to reward that company by risking more of the same?  Most people see that as throwing good money after bad.

 

That's why it's in the company's best interests to make sure people can keep using what they've already bought.

 

They need to dedicate their resources to things. Resources are finite, and they chose to make different kits. This applies to all companies. Sometimes, things get invalidated. It's called progress. Sure, it would be great if companies would always keep making older products. By that logic, you could still buy a T-Ford and it's components. Sometimes, things need to be cut to make sure there's room for the new. That also applies to rules. We're nerds, not too strong, so books don't need to get too heavy now!

 

Literally got other thread shutdown coz I got off-topic was complaining that I got to carry around 5 books to play a game.

GW is not Ford, Biker HQs are prevalent all over in fluff and they were a staple of biker armies for 2 decades. They did not become obsolete in any way they were abandoned and thrown out because GW choose to only make rules for plastic that they create themselves. Which not only damages game balance but also customer trust, certainly has mine. Missing bike options from codex that are Index only now.

• Khan (on Moondrakken)
• Librarian on Bike
• Techmarine on Bike
• Apothecary on Bike
• Ancient on Bike
• Company Champion on Bike
• Veteran Squad on Bike

  So basically whole White scars army has been gutted. Ravenwing are lucky that we got plastic bikers in 6th edition. You wouldnt be saying the things you are saying if GW gutted ravenwing the way the gutted White Scars.

[Helycon]

What are you complaining about? GW still made rules for all of them in de the index which are useable. Nothing got gutted. It's just not to confuse newer players.

 

They don't make rules for models they never created themselves, that's...odd? No, it's not. That's simply something that makes sense, since they weren't official models.

 

And the Ford comparison was just one. I can name multiple. Try and find a company that is still able to make anything they have done over the course of their existence and you'll see what I mean. Progress means things get left behind.

[Bryan Blaire]

Yes, it can leave things behind. That doesn’t instantly mean that what has been moved to has any inherent quality as “better” just because it’s forward.

 

And you can easily make some of the things that Stormxlr listed by simple parts swaps with a standard Marine biker kit and things like the Sternguard box, Command Squad box, etc. It’s not even like GW is consistent about it - they put out rules for a GK Grand Master in Nemesis Dread Knight, but they certainly don’t make a model for that. You have to kit-bash and possibly even apply some greenstuff for gap filling to make one of those, or you have to just call a plain NDK a NDKGM and make it work with paint.

 

The best we can probably hope for is that GW realizes that people do still want these options and incorporate them into some kind of campaign book they can sell us with some new models. Or that they simply kill off all the old names characters so that people can move beyond them and the Studio can produce their new favorite dreamed up characters.

[Schlitzaf]

I just want to add on, the Crusader Squad has no dedicated set it’s just our upgrade sprew + Tactical Marines. So should the BT lose our Crusader Squad?

[Stoic Raptor]

They need to dedicate their resources to things.

By that logic, you could still buy a T-Ford and it's components.

 

Gamers need to dedicate their resources to things, too - the time and money required to participate in this hobby.  Unlike many similar games, rules are overhauled every year or two - there is no "living document" that keeps things fresh.  Every other successful tabletop game I can think of either makes their rules available for free and/or updates the unit cards without making any obsolete.  If customers are apprehensive that the time and money they put into this game might become irrelevant in a year or two, they're likely to seek out other forms of recreation.

 

Even gaming consoles are not replaced as frequently, and usually offer some backwards compatibility for titles and support for older versions for quite some time.

 

As for the Model T analogy?  If you still have one, you can still use it.  Lots of people have collector cars and they haven't released some new edition of road that makes it impossible to use them now.  You may need to reach farther for a better analogy. ;)

[Helycon]

 

 

They need to dedicate their resources to things.

By that logic, you could still buy a T-Ford and it's components.

Gamers need to dedicate their resources to things, too - the time and money required to participate in this hobby. Unlike many similar games, rules are overhauled every year or two - there is no "living document" that keeps things fresh. Every other successful tabletop game I can think of either makes their rules available for free and/or updates the unit cards without making any obsolete. If customers are apprehensive that the time and money they put into this game might become irrelevant in a year or two, they're likely to seek out other forms of recreation.

 

Even gaming consoles are not replaced as frequently, and usually offer some backwards compatibility for titles and support for older versions for quite some time.

 

As for the Model T analogy? If you still have one, you can still use it. Lots of people have collector cars and they haven't released some new edition of road that makes it impossible to use them now. You may need to reach farther for a better analogy. ;)

The point being it's no longer a thing Ford had anything to do with. People are fine when old cars break down and dealers can't help them. Charm of an oldtimer. The point was you can no longer buy one, not that you couldn't use it. My points was the production is no longer ongoing in favour of new models.

 

Plenty of furniture shops can no longer supply covers for older chairs, since they have new models. The older ones are simply no longer being made.

 

People keep bitching about the number of rules they bring to a game. Games Workshop did this by cutting for models they don't do, or no longer do. Is it faultless? Nope. Thee GMNDK is valid, as is the fact a Razorback doesn't have a bloody assault cannon in the box. Their consistency is lacking for sure, but I for one am glad they did rules for the older models, and I reckon about 98% of them, in the first place.

 

Sure I'd love to get the rules for free, which they sort-of did with the 8 pages. The total amount of rules isbstaggering for Warhammer thoughce there are quite a lot of factions. I like that they keep them fresh and add new things. Sadly, the latter can cause issues and balance gets shifted. 7th was a perfect example with the detachment debacle. It'd be great if they had just one, central document where all this was kept and updated as a living document. I'm afraid that GW was here long before the interwebz though, so they may need to have some change management in that regard. He only way in the past was new updated books for new editions, and that's still their model. That's the burden of a non-digital game. You can't just patch in balance.

 

Anyhow, this is starting to get majorly off-topic. I'll just leave it there.