Assassins

[Delta.Skies]

Curious...

 

Pages 114 and 115 – Vindicare Assassin, Callidus Assassin, Eversor Assassin and Culexus Assassin, Abilities Add the following ability: ‘Execution Force: So long as your Warlord is from the Imperium, you can include this unit in a Vanguard Detachment even if that Detachment contains no HQ units. However, if you do so, that Detachment’s Command Benefits are changed to ‘None’.’

 

anybody else feel like this would bypass the beta rule battle brothers due to its wording.

[dtse]

Yea. It does. That’s the point of it. Lol. Otherwise you would not be able to take assassins

[Delta.Skies]

Yea. It does. That’s the point of it. Lol. Otherwise you would not be able to take assassins

Lol had to confirm it.

[domsto]

Sadly this new rule isn't really good:/

Now you are forced to take at least 3 assassins even if you just wanna play one of them.

I personaly rather spend 1CP for the Auxiliar detachment instead to pay 2 tax assassins to field the one i like.

 

The same goes with the sisters of silence.

[Plasmablasts]

It does push you consider investing heavily in Assassins if you want to take them: is taking one Assassin worth it if you have to lose a CP? If you only have three detachments, are you better taking more Assassins in that one?

 

Sisters of Silence are a bit different as you can make use of the Adeptus Astra Telepathica keyword and combine them with Psykers in a standard Vanguard detachment, and get that CP.

[domsto]

It does push you consider investing heavily in Assassins if you want to take them: is taking one Assassin worth it if you have to lose a CP? If you only have three detachments, are you better taking more Assassins in that one?

 

Sisters of Silence are a bit different as you can make use of the Adeptus Astra Telepathica keyword and combine them with Psykers in a standard Vanguard detachment, and get that CP.

Well losing 1 of my 21CP thanks to the CP changes isn't that big of a deal^^

The think with only 3 detachments, yes thats right that could be a problem.

It might even be such a big problem i will drop Assassins completely

I just have no use for 3 of them in my list ans that too much points for units a don't wanna play

[Ice warrior]

Interesting, I read the execution force paragraph to say:

 

- You are allowed to take singular assassin to a detachment, if it is a vanguard detachment and you have a warlord that is of the imperium. The Vanguard detachment and remaining members of the detachment must follow regular rules. Alas, 1 hq + 3 elites of the same keyword (other than imperium, the assassin would bypass this being 1hq + 2 elites + assassin)

 

- You are allowed to make a Vanguard detachment of 3 assassin that would not require HQ element, but this would not grant you the benefit of +1 CP

 

That is how I read it. Please correct me, as I am not native english speaker

[domsto]

You understand this a little bit wrong.

You cannont put a Assassin in any detachment anymore because IMPERIUM isn't a keyword anymore.

And every unit in a Detachment now needs to have the same Faction keyword like Astartest,Astra Millitarum,..

If you still want to play Assassins you are forced to put them in a Vanquard Detachment.

[Plasmablasts]

My reading is that the Execution Force rule just over-rides the normal requirement for an HQ choice in a Vanguard Detachment. The Battle Brothers rule is not over-ridden so only Assassins may be taken in that detachment. The reference to the Warlord’s faction more-or-less limits the Execution Force to “Imperium” armies; you couldn’t take it if your Warlord was an Ork, for example. The Warlord would be likely to be in a different detachment from the Assassins.

[Plaguecaster]

Well if in doubt you can always take a Aux dettachment so you can easily include an assassin, sure you lose a CP but with the changes to CPs for battalions it won't be as bad

[swordofmandulis]

This is another really bad piece of rules writing by GW, would have been a great opportunity to give assassin's and inquisitors something similar to cypher and fabius Bile and be able to take them in any detachment in an army that has an imperium warlord and not break the battle brothers rules. Maybe for the assassin's they could made them in addition to the minimum detachments requirements, for example in a vanguard you still need the 3 elite units to make the Detachment but you can then include an assassin in it with no penalty. I really feel the way they work would justify this.

[Deadnaughty]

Well if in doubt you can always take a Aux dettachment so you can easily include an assassin, sure you lose a CP but with the changes to CPs for battalions it won't be as bad

The problem is that for tournaments your (almost always) limited to 3 detachments. Many lists use all 3 of these and don't have room for an Aux detachment. That's why Assassins, Inquisitors and Celestine were often throw into an Imperium detachment with some other models that didn't care about losing their trait (SM scouts, IG).

 

And yes the new rules don't let Assassins ignore Battle Brothers. No other unit can be in a detachment with them because nothing shares a keyword. Your only option is 3+ assassins alone in a Vanguard or using Aux detachments.

[Plaguecaster]

 

 

Well if in doubt you can always take a Aux dettachment so you can easily include an assassin, sure you lose a CP but with the changes to CPs for battalions it won't be as bad

The problem is that for tournaments your (almost always) limited to 3 detachments. Many lists use all 3 of these and don't have room for an Aux detachment. That's why Assassins, Inquisitors and Celestine were often throw into an Imperium detachment with some other models that didn't care about losing their trait (SM scouts, IG).

 

And yes the new rules don't let Assassins ignore Battle Brothers. No other unit can be in a detachment with them because nothing shares a keyword. Your only option is 3+ assassins alone in a Vanguard or using Aux detachments.

So what your saying is it's going to be harder to fit them in a force that mixes and matches multiple factions to try get all the best units since they can no longer fit multiple faction units all in the same dettachment, which means less armies that combine all that into soup based lists

 

Well I really don't see that as being a problem anymore since that was precisely the main reason the battle brothers rule got the nerf

 

I mean why take so much different dettachment now, one of the reasons was not enough CPs well this isn't a problem any more after all if I took one battalion plus a vanguard or outrider I got 5 extra CPs now I can easily just take one battalion and I will have exactly the same CPs as what I would of got had I took 3 dettachments

 

Quite a lot of armies are going to be drastically changed so they won't be taking any where near as much dettachments as before especially with nerfs to spamming etc so if anything it'll actually be easier to fit them in

[Aegir_Einarsson]

But now If i want to take inquisitor Ab f.ex. Culexus i need to take two different detacments that make No sense at all

[domsto]

I am pretty shure every Imperial Tournament list will still but a AM battalion for CP farming in

Now more than ever

I mean 180p for 5cp and getting them back on 5+

You can't top that.

So this Anti-Soupe rule don't effect any real soup list in the current meta.

But it makes it hard to include some units whow are ment to be souped like assassins

[allegedlynerdy]

I am pretty shure every Imperial Tournament list will still but a AM battalion for CP farming in

Now more than ever

I mean 180p for 5cp and getting them back on 5+

You can't top that.

So this Anti-Soupe rule don't effect any real soup list in the current meta.

But it makes it hard to include some units whow are ment to be souped like assassins

Instead of banning the broth, the FAQ made the broth more appetizing, but stopped us from putting in the crackers.

 

Around me most tournaments have a hard limit of 2 detachments- patrol and battalion, but you can replace the battalion with something else. As a result it is basically impossible for me to take assassins, Inquisiton, SoS, etc. But incredibly easy for Celestine to still be taken.

[Charlo]

But now If i want to take inquisitor Ab f.ex. Culexus i need to take two different detacments that make No sense at all

Makes perfect sense.

 

They are totally different factions in both rules and fluff!

[Aegir_Einarsson]

BIt inq. Can request any imperial force that he needs, And that provides us the different topic:)

[Constantine Trajanus Ultor]

This messed up my list. I was running a Custodes Battalion, vanguard with 2 x Sisters of Silence, 1 x Culexus Assassination, led by Hector Rex.

 

It was the only way to run SoS with my army, without a penalty. Now, I may just run all SoS and drop the Assassin, but I really loved the Hector Rex model.

 

The positive I guess is psychic powers got hit a bit, so there is less of a reason to bring th culexus and Hector.

[Stoic Raptor]

Yea. It does. That’s the point of it. Lol. Otherwise you would not be able to take assassins

 

Sure you could - in a Vanguard of their own.  It just means that your all-Assassin or all Null-Maiden detachment doesn't have to have an HQ (because there's no HQ that shares a keyword).  

I agree that was probably the intent and the implication, but if so, that needs to be explicit.

 

Yes, I suppose I could use an Astropath or Primaris Psyker as an HQ for my Sisters of Silence, but I didn't do that because 1) they kinda suck and 2) it didn't support the theme, which is psychic defense for my Custodes.  An Inquisitor makes sense - who else would accompany Null-Maidens and Custodes against foul sorcery?  You're not going to send an Astropath, that's insanity.

 

If what they really meant was "Null-Maidens can be in any detachment as long as your warlord is Imperium, but that detachment loses its command bonuses" that needs to be made explicit.

[Stoic Raptor]

 

But now If i want to take inquisitor Ab f.ex. Culexus i need to take two different detacments that make No sense at all

Makes perfect sense.

 

They are totally different factions in both rules and fluff!

 

 

I disagree.  Read "Watchers of the Throne" for instance.  If you're hunting sorcerers, you're definitely sending an Inquisitor, right?  And what's a Culexus' sole purpose?  Hunting sorcerers.  In what way are the different in fluff?

 

People are like "But the Culexus would null the Inquisitor" but hey, the assassin isn't a bodyguard, he's a hunting dog.  If he's close enough to null the Inquisitor you're doing it wrong.

And what's the one HQ that shares a keyword with Null-Maidens?  A Primaris Psyker.  So there goes that argument, anyhow. ;)

[Gibbous]

Do the assassins suffer from the tactical reserves FAQ?

[Deadnaughty]

Yes, no deepstriking assassins until turn 2.

Not so bad for the Culexus who is hard to kill and can run into range of psykers.

Horrible for the Eversor and potentially the Callidus (harder to deny her range if you roll low).

[Felstone]

Sadly this new rule isn't really good:/

Now you are forced to take at least 3 assassins even if you just wanna play one of them.

I personaly rather spend 1CP for the Auxiliar detachment instead to pay 2 tax assassins to field the one i like.

 

The same goes with the sisters of silence.

 

He makes a good point, but unfortunately i'm running a custodies army in 8th and i'll already be low on CP with a single battalion, so 3 Culexus it is.

[NatBrannigan]

I really hope there's an Imperial Agents codex on the horizon that fixes some of these units... Inquisitors should be one of THE iconic Imperium units and they never get the treatment they deserve :(

 

Why there's still not a generic box for a model I don't know. They could sell two models (say one Terminator armour, one more regular armour) and a butt load of options in a box and watch the £'s roll in!