Improving Shadow War: Armageddon

[Brother Tyler]

When Shadow War: Armageddon was released in 2017 it was a Big Thing. It took concepts that had previously been presented in the various iterations of Kill Team and wrapped them in Games Workshop’s familiar warband skirmish rules. Kill Team first saw life as a Chapter Approved article during the 3rd edition of WH40K, focused on the Last Chancers. These rules were then expanded in the WH40K 4th edition and received very limited updates and support through later editions. Meanwhile, Games Workshop’s brand of warband skirmish rules have been used for Necromunda, Mordheim, Gorkamorka, Legends of the Old West, and Legends of the High Seas. For many of us, Shadow War: Armageddon looked like the “new” Necromunda (since proven to be false, thankfully) and the replacement for Kill Team (still a distinct possibility). If you were lucky enough to grab the boxed set, you got a wealth of terrain in addition to the rules, counters, and models. Those rules were limited to three different kill teams, however: Space Marine Scouts and Astra Militarum Veterans for the Imperium, and the invading Ork Boyz. Games Workshop very wisely expanded the range of kill teams available to players, broadening the potential audience. Rules for kill teams for Grey Knights, Craftworld Eldar, Tau, and others were published, first as downloadable content (and still available as such), and later incorporated into the version of the book that replaced the box content.

The game was very popular for a short time, but has since dropped off the radar. The transition to the 8th edition of WH40K played a big part in this, as did the release of the true new Necromunda, both of which vastly eclipsed gamers’ interest in Shadow War: Armageddon. However, while those were both major factors in the decline in interest in Shadow War: Armageddon, there were also internal issues with the game that contributed to this unfortunate phenomenon. The basic rules for kill teams imposed significant limitations. While there are over a dozen different kill team choices, that range isn’t sufficient to give players the range of options that they’re used to in WH40K. Lastly, the setting of the game, too, was overly specific and imposed significant limitations. Perhaps one final issue was a problem of player execution, with multiple anecdotal citations of players confusing campaign play with pickup play.

As far as the kill team rules, there were three elements that imposed limits on players. First was the 1,000 point kill team size. Second was the limited fighter options available to each kill team. Third was the limited weapons and wargear options. Admittedly, none of these alone is “bad,” nor is the combination of the three “bad.” However, these limitations ignored a lot of the rich game background and prevented many players from using models that they may have already had. And while 1,000 points is a decent starting size for a kill team in a campaign, there’s no reason that players can’t agree to a higher points value to allow for some interesting games – players might come to the table with larger kill teams, or apply points to model advances and weapons and equipment that they can’t fit into a 1,000 point kill team. The Warhammer 40,000 game has plenty of options for players to choose from in building their armies, and the lore might support any number of different options for special missions such as those represented by a kill team. Yet each faction was limited to a single list, with one Leader option, one Trooper option, one New Recruit option (sometimes), and one Specialist option. There was a bit of flexibility in that some of these could be kitted out in a way that supported more than one option from the main WH40K game (e.g., the Inquisition list was extremely flexible) and the kill team as a whole didn’t have to be kitted out in a manner limited to a single squad from WH40K (e.g., the Craftworld Eldar kill team allowed for a composite of Dire Avengers and Guardian Defenders). However, most of the factions were still very limited and generic. All of these limitations that Games Workshop built in are akin to Ducati building a new motorcycle, but limiting it to 450 cc and only selling it in hot pink (sure, some people are going to buy it because it’s a Duc, but most others will move to the next rice burner that comes along).

Expanding on the limited options, the kill teams didn’t cover the full range of options that players of WH40K expected. It has been argued that the limitations may have derived from the campaign itself, which was set during the Third War for Armageddon. However, that’s a false argument – factions that weren’t involved in that campaign were represented (e.g., Grey Knights and Tyranids) while factions that were present in that campaign weren’t represented (e.g., Deathwatch). It’s difficult to believe that Games Workshop published a game set in the WH40K setting that didn’t allow the most popular model line that the company produces, the iconic force of the setting, power armoured Space Marines, to be used. Sure, Space Marine players might take Scouts, but many really wanted to take their power armoured models; and they didn’t necessarily want to be limited to “Tactical” squads. Since when do the Black Templars send just their neophytes on special missions without the oversight of their initiate mentors? Similarly, why wouldn’t the Eldar possibly send Striking Scorpions? And why would the Dark Eldar only send Wyches? We might point to the campaign setting (more on that later), but Games Workshop violated that limitation with its choice of factions to include and exclude. Even if we accepted the limited options for the “starter” game (which is what we currently have, and which I have no problem accepting), there’s no reason that Games Workshop couldn’t provide follow-on support for the game by expanding the range of kill team options available to players.

The name of the game limited the setting to the war-torn world of Armageddon, with the campaign specifically focusing on the Third War for Armageddon (Ghazgkull Mag Uruk Thraka’s second invasion of that planet). The campaign rules identified “promethium caches” as the objective, rather than a generic “victory points” or other campaign-agnostic term. Now these aren’t “bad” if you just want people that are interested in that event to maintain interest in the game, but they’re not a good way to sustain interest over the long run. Also, they limit immersion – when did the Tyranids land on Armageddon and why do they care about promethium? Granted, the wars fought upon Armageddon have been a major focus of coverage by Games Workshop through the years, with two invasions by Orks and an earlier invasion by Angron and his Chaos minions forming a backdrop for much rich lore and gaming over the years. The celebrity status of the planet, however, limits the antagonists that might take part (which really only matters to purists who care that their battles fit in with the “history,” but there are many of those). In a game setting where there is only war, though, and with 10,000 years of history and a galaxy (and dimensions beyond) within which the various factions of the game setting have crossed blades, the choice to confine the setting to one event missed an opportunity.

The last issue I mentioned was poor player execution. The basic rules of the game indicate that a kill team is built to a 1,000 point limit. Later in the rulebook, rules for campaigns are provided and players are given rules to make their kill team more potent through recruiting additional/replacement fighters; advancing their fighters through skills, characteristic increases, and narrative development (e.g., hatred for opponents); and adding special operatives to games. All of these are great, but some players would use their kill teams improved through these campaign rules in pickup games. So Johnny Newguy might show up with his 1,000 point kill team of Space Marine Scouts and face Drake Campaignguy’s Ork Boyz that have been advanced in the campaign rules through six scenarios, with increased characteristics, better weapons and wargear, and more Boyz than the 1,000 point limit would allow. Lacking rules for compensating the gulf between the vastly more potent Boyz of Drake, Johnny’s totally outclassed Scouts fare poorly and Johnny leaves with a sour taste in his mouth. Never mind the fact that this should never have taken place, there are enough anecdotes running around to demonstrate that such matchups did take place, and probably far more often than they should have. Drake’s campaign kill team should have been confined to the campaign, not used for pickup games. Conversely, the game should have included provisions for playing at different point levels and/or balancing between kill teams of different point values (not just in campaign play).

So we’re left with a decent game falling by the wayside, and homegrown alternatives such as the Herald of Ruin Kill Team game, Inquisimunda, and others, filling the gap. The homegrown alternatives all demonstrate things that Games Workshop could have done to improve the game, giving Warhammer 40,000 players a way to use their models in smaller battles. And this wouldn’t keep players from buying new models – many players would continue to buy models to flesh out their kill teams as they progress, to create additional kill teams within the same faction, and to try out kill teams from factions they might not otherwise play simply because the buy-in cost for a kill team is much lower than a full WH40K army (most can get by with a single boxed set or two to create a starting kill team).

So what can Games Workshop do to revitalize this gem of a game?

First, transition the rules to allow for a range of settings. Instead of “Shadow War: Armageddon” they can call it “Shadow War 40,000” or somesuch, then change the promethium cache objectives to something more generic. The setting wouldn’t limit the concept to one in which sneaking and skullduggery are the name of the day, but would allow for a range of warband skirmish engagements to take place (i.e., maybe allow for cavalry or jump packs or other things, obviously with significant penalties). The generic setting would allow for follow-on support, providing rules for special settings later on (e.g., void/zero gravity battles, Daemon worlds, etc.). This would also allow for multiple campaign settings to be used, each with different nuances. Imagine a campaign in which your kill team represents prisoners of the Dark Eldar forced to fight each other in the arenas, sometimes against the Dark Eldar (Wyches, obviously, but perhaps against other denizens of the Dark City; and this might also allow for rules for one-on-one battles). Or a campaign set on Medusa V. Or going back to the Horus Heresy.

Second, expand the range of kill teams available to the various factions. Some might be specific to campaigns (e.g., the Horus Heresy offers a rich setting for the Legiones Astartes and other forces of the nascent Imperium that have changed or disappeared in the present time). Others might simply be additional lists (e.g., power armoured Space Marines are a no-brainer, but we’re missing the Deathwatch, Chaos Daemons, and others, as well as variations within factions such as the range of Eldar kill team rules that have appeared in the Homegrown Rules forum lately). I’ve been wondering if the current lists are the right way to go, or if an alternative might be better. The only alternative I can come up with is a bit complicated, though, so the current method is probably better – but we need GW to expand the choices of kill teams.

Third, give the special things like the Army of One concept a little more limelight and expand the options. If Sly Marbo is running around on the side of the Imperium (along with some assassins), why wouldn’t the Eldar find Illic Nightspear? And how did Snikrot not make the cut for the Orks? Or why not some more generic armies of one, perhaps evolving into hero models (GW did this in one of the their 6th edition books compiling different missions and styles of play)?

Fourth, adjust the rules so that the 1,000 point kill team is just a recommended standard, while allowing for players to build kill teams to other values. Also, allow for asymmetrical battles (i.e., kill teams of different point values). These should be descriptive rules rather than prescriptive, allowing players to apply judgment while providing a baseline for pickup play. Games of Warhammer 40,000 aren’t limited to a single point value. 8th edition Warhammer 40,000 gives us narrative play and matched play, but doesn’t prescribe a single framework for army composition. The warband skirmish game should similarly allow for flexibility so that players can make the game their own.

Will Games Workshop do these things? Or will they do other things? I don’t know. Perhaps if enough players communicate this to them, they might see community interest in sustaining the game, and they might listen to the suggestions from the community. While my ideas seem obvious to me, they’re obviously just my opinion and other hobbyists have their own views. We can all tell Games Workshop that we enjoy the game and would like to see it supported and improved, even if we disagree on the exact methods for continued support and improvement.

So I’m going to host an overall effort here at the B&C, a grass roots initiative to build additions and alternatives for Shadow War: Armageddon that we can enjoy and that Games Workshop might consider adapting for official support. We’ve actually seen efforts since the game was published, but I’d like to see what else the community might be interested in.

@Lysimachus has presented rules for Rogue Traders/Void Pirates.

@Ioldanach has presented rules for Black Guardians, Eldar Corsairs, Howling Banshees, and Striking Scorpions. He also pitched ideas about other ordos of the Inquisition.

@Doghouse has been working on rules for an alternate Horus Heresy campaign.

I’ve been working on rules for power armoured Space Marines, including the generic rules and the Chapters that participated in the Badab War so far, but with plans to develop rules for the Deathwatch, other Chapters, and the Legio Bolter & Chainsword (which is, admittedly, purely a B&C effort). I’ve also been working on the Hive of the Dead campaign (which is actually intended to be a series of campaigns).

What other kill team rules do you think would help the game? What campaigns? What special rules for settings (such as void warfare, daemon worlds/the Warp, the Zone Mortalis, etc.)? Are there alternative campaign progression/advancement rules that you can think of?

Are there things that you think I’ve missed above? Do you disagree with any of my opinions or the potential solutions? Do you think the game is fine as it is?

If you’d like to discuss your views on the game, and if you have ideas about how GW might improve it and/or continue to support it, I’d love to see feedback in this discussion.

If you have ideas about alternate rules, whether for basic kill team construction, additional kill teams, alternate campaign rules, special settings, etc., please post them in the Homegrown Rules forum and post a link here. Definitely use the tag “Shadow War: Armageddon” (the standard tag for any discussion about this game), and if you want, add the tag “Shadow War 40K” (for ideas that you think GW can consider adapting).

[Ioldanach]

The rules of SW:A were an interesting hybrid of WH40K 7th and Necromunda, but with the release of WH40K 8th and the new Necromunda, I suspect that another problem is that SW:A has fighter/weapon/equipment rules that don’t match either of those other (new) games. For example, Space Marine Scouts have a Movement characteristic of 6" in WH40K 8th, but only 5" in SW:A. This creates something of a gap between WH40K 8th (the mainstream) and SW:A (the gateway game).

 

One thing you didn’t mention that I would do (if I were king for a day) would be to align the fighter characteristics and special rules and the weapons/equipment characteristics and rules to match WH40K 8th edition. This would make it easier for players to transition between the two games. Assuming the baseline skirmish rules (i.e., Movement, Shooting, Hand-to-Hand, Advanced Rules) are left relatively intact, there would have to be a few small changes for special rules that affect Movement (e.g., Howling Banshees if they ever add them to the game). It's probably a bit more complicated than that, but I still think it would be worth the effort to increase the portability between the two games.

 

I also think that psyker powers (at the skirmish level, not powerful psykers like Farseers, Librarians, and Sorcerers) need to be explored. GW already gave us the Grey Knights, but the Thousand Sons have the potential to be in the same boat (and I admit that my efforts at a Warlock-led Black Guardian squad also need this addition).

 

I’m interested in your ideas on the kill team lists, the “complicated alternative” that you mentioned. Something that occurred to me while developing the Black Guardian Kill Team rules were the possibility of a faction’s kill team having multiple options for different roles, with the Leader option unlocking certain options and prohibiting others. For example, the Craftworld Eldar Kill Team might have, say, a Dire Avenger Exarch and a Warlock as Leader options. If you choose the Dire Avenger Exarch as your kill team’s Leader, you may take Dire Avengers as your Troopers and Guardians become your New Recruits. Meanwhile, if you choose the Warlock as your Leader, then Black Guardians become your Troopers. As you said, this can get complicated and the basic kill team rules would become multiple pages instead of just the single page that GW has been using. There is a trade off between the flexibility of a complicated list versus the elegance, but simplicity, of the current structure. While I'm all for flexibility, I'd prefer that it came via multiple lists rather than a single complicated one.

 

So how do I add the Shadow War 40K tag to my homegrown kill teams? Does a moderator have to do it, or can I do it myself?

[Brother Tyler]

So how do I add the Shadow War 40K tag to my homegrown kill teams? Does a moderator have to do it, or can I do it myself?

All you have to do is edit the first post using the full editor, adding/changing tags as needed.

[Brother Tyler]

One thing you didn’t mention that I would do (if I were king for a day) would be to align the fighter characteristics and special rules and the weapons/equipment characteristics and rules to match WH40K 8th edition. This would make it easier for players to transition between the two games. Assuming the baseline skirmish rules (i.e., Movement, Shooting, Hand-to-Hand, Advanced Rules) are left relatively intact, there would have to be a few small changes for special rules that affect Movement (e.g., Howling Banshees if they ever add them to the game). It's probably a bit more complicated than that, but I still think it would be worth the effort to increase the portability between the two games.

I agree in principle, but there are some areas where the expanded rules in SWA work and need to be retained. An example here is the differentiation between knives, swords, and chainswords. Other than those exceptions, though, the concept is sound. It would make Shadow War: Armageddon the inheritor of the concepts that were begun with Kill Team, replacing the latter as the squad skirmish level version of the Warhammer 40,000 game (ideally in parallel with Necromunda).

 

I’m interested in your ideas on the kill team lists, the “complicated alternative” that you mentioned. Something that occurred to me while developing the Black Guardian Kill Team rules were the possibility of a faction’s kill team having multiple options for different roles, with the Leader option unlocking certain options and prohibiting others. For example, the Craftworld Eldar Kill Team might have, say, a Dire Avenger Exarch and a Warlock as Leader options. If you choose the Dire Avenger Exarch as your kill team’s Leader, you may take Dire Avengers as your Troopers and Guardians become your New Recruits. Meanwhile, if you choose the Warlock as your Leader, then Black Guardians become your Troopers. As you said, this can get complicated and the basic kill team rules would become multiple pages instead of just the single page that GW has been using. There is a trade off between the flexibility of a complicated list versus the elegance, but simplicity, of the current structure. While I'm all for flexibility, I'd prefer that it came via multiple lists rather than a single complicated one.

Conceptually, each faction would have the equivalent of a codex, with a default Trooper and New Recruit option. There would be multiple HQ and Specialist Options. Since each kill team must have 1 and only 1 leader, the choice of a Leader unlocks the other options, and shapes what can and cannot be taken. Since you're working with the Asuryani, I'll use them as an example. The default Trooper choice would be a Guardian. If you choose a Warlock as your HQ, it would unlock your rule where you get to increase either the BS or WS or each Guardian and align the New Recruit and Specialist choices to match those in your Black Guardian Kill Team rules. Alternately, if you choose a Dire Avenger Exarch, then the Guardian becomes a New Recruit and the Dire Avenger becomes your Trooper. And so on with other HQ choices.

 

When I say "complicated," however, that's an understatement. What happens if your Leader dies and you recruit a different type of Leader - how does this affect skills (if your Trooper becomes a New Recruit) and fighters that aren't allowed?

 

Practically speaking, I'm leaning away from the complicated all-in-one construct with the unlock mechanic. It might be better to just collect multiple kill team options into a single set of rules (which is what I think you are planning on doing with your Aeldari kill teams).

[Ioldanach]

The elephant in the room:

 

How will the upcoming Kill Team affect Shadow War: Armageddon and this project?

 

I've already been mulling over my own (SWA) kill team rules and creating versions for Kill Team.

[Brother Tyler]

Indeed. I'm going through the same process with my Adeptus Astartes kill team rules and the Hive of the Dead campaign.

 

Ironically, back in 2015 I started a Homegrown Rules project for Advanced Kill Team rules. It's too soon to say whether or not anything in that project will even be applicable to the new Kill Team since it appears that they're going to revamp the rules.

 

I think I'm going to press forward with this for now.

[Brother Tyler]

GW has made it clear that the upcoming version of Kill Team is a "successor" to previous versions and Shadow War: Armageddon. Implicit in this is that SWA will no longer be supported.

 

So the question is whether or not this project is worth preserving as-is. I have no problem pressing forward with it if people are actually going to use the rules. If no one is going to use them, though, there's no point in wasting the time and effort.

 

Longer term, depending on what the Kill Team rules look like, I could see adapting the concepts that have been developed to the new Kill Team. I'll have to see the new rules before I commit to that, though.

[Dosjetka]

A lot of people seem to be keen on this new version of Kill Team so I believe we'll be hard-pressed to find people who'll still be playing SWA (unless the rules are dreadful, but I somehow doubt that).

[Ioldanach]

Yes, if the new Kill Team isn't a bust, I'll be switching to it for my WH40K skirmish wargaming. If the Asuryani provide a range of options similar to those available to the Genestealer Cults, I'll probably be able to proxy a suitable Eldar Corsairs kill team. I'll probably develop some homegrown rules for the Eldar Corsairs, too; doubtless, I'm not the only one that will be doing that.