Two questions that we should send to 40kfaq@gwplc.com

[Phaeton]

I am very happy to finally receive some buffs to our army. Still two questions about this update come to my mind:

1. Why Azrael was not updated to provide full re-rolls to hit, not only failed rolls? Chapter masters in Codex: Space Marines enjoy full re-rolls, and we are lacking that.

2. Why Asmodai can recite only one litany, when Cassius and Astorath recite two?

Maybe we should send this questions to 40kfaq@gwplc.com and hope that they will be answered in FAQ for PA4.

[Grimdark_Garage]

I belive they're only updating datasheets that they need to. Eg, chaplains for litanies and bringing units in line with codex SM changes..

 

1.1 they feel Reroll all hits was too powerful and have pulled the plug

1.2 Codex SM is Codex 2.0. The PA books are supplements. Wait for the change in the next codex

 

2. Asmodai isn't technically the Dark Angels cheif Chaplain / Master of sanctity. Even so, seeing as we have no model or datasheet for Sapphon (sp) it would have been nice.

[Angel of Solitude]

Agreed with Grimdark_Garage on both points. Specifically, Sapphon, as the High Interrogator, is our Master of Sanctity equivalent. Asmodai is just a slightly more outspoken Interrogator-Chaplain.

 

Also regarding the re-roll aura...I wonder if this is one of the reasons for Azrael's significant price drop.

[Grimdark_Garage]

 Asmodai is just a slightly more outspoken Interrogator-Chaplain.

 

[Vector Strike]

Add this one as well: when will the Nephelim Jetfighter be a good anti-air vehicle as its lore entry says instead of being another anti-ground vehicle, as it is nowadays?

[Cpt_Reaper]

So I saw that PA4 introduces the strat that allows Successors to take non-successor relics...

CAN GW PLEASE CLARIFY HOW TO USE SUCCESSORS? Because with that strat it sure feel like I am cheating using anything labelled DARK ANGELS when my models aren't green/black/bone now.

[Skywrath]

Questions as follows:

 

1. Why isn't there an interaction between Azrael and Kaldor? (Reference to Pandorax, do something like when these two models meet, roll a die - highest die gets +1 to toughness). Also a new model for Azrael (preferably primaris is also a valid question). 

2. Why is terminator toughness only 4 and not 5?

[Berzul]

Questions as follows:

 

1. Why isn't there an interaction between Azrael and Kaldor? (Reference to Pandorax, do something like when these two models meet, roll a die - highest die gets +1 to toughness). Also a new model for Azrael (preferably primaris is also a valid question).

2. Why is terminator toughness only 4 and not 5?

1. Might be too specific to be practical (The Lion and the Wolf stratagem comes to mind)

 

2. I read someone explain, once, that this came about due to how old Cavalry rules worked. Where the mount gave an extra poijt of toughness in WHFB, which later was passed on to WH40K. And it kinda... Stuck there, as a rule. It makes little sense, really, but it stays that being mounted on a bike grants extra T, while being on foot does not. With the extra defense from the TDA suit being representes in the 2+ save, over the 3+ save.

[Skywrath]

 

Questions as follows:

 

1. Why isn't there an interaction between Azrael and Kaldor? (Reference to Pandorax, do something like when these two models meet, roll a die - highest die gets +1 to toughness). Also a new model for Azrael (preferably primaris is also a valid question).

2. Why is terminator toughness only 4 and not 5?

1. Might be too specific to be practical (The Lion and the Wolf stratagem comes to mind)

 

2. I read someone explain, once, that this came about due to how old Cavalry rules worked. Where the mount gave an extra poijt of toughness in WHFB, which later was passed on to WH40K. And it kinda... Stuck there, as a rule. It makes little sense, really, but it stays that being mounted on a bike grants extra T, while being on foot does not. With the extra defense from the TDA suit being representes in the 2+ save, over the 3+ save.

 

 

The first point admittedly, was more for jesting purposes, rather than for practical ones. The second point could be offered an alternative - if we can't have T5, why not change our crux terminatus save to a 4 instead of 5? And if that seems a bit "broken', then we could restrict it to Deathwing Knights? Lore-wise they are supposed to be the elite of the elite. 

[Berzul]

 

 

 

Questions as follows:

 

1. Why isn't there an interaction between Azrael and Kaldor? (Reference to Pandorax, do something like when these two models meet, roll a die - highest die gets +1 to toughness). Also a new model for Azrael (preferably primaris is also a valid question).

2. Why is terminator toughness only 4 and not 5?

1. Might be too specific to be practical (The Lion and the Wolf stratagem comes to mind)

 

2. I read someone explain, once, that this came about due to how old Cavalry rules worked. Where the mount gave an extra poijt of toughness in WHFB, which later was passed on to WH40K. And it kinda... Stuck there, as a rule. It makes little sense, really, but it stays that being mounted on a bike grants extra T, while being on foot does not. With the extra defense from the TDA suit being representes in the 2+ save, over the 3+ save.

The first point admittedly, was more for jesting purposes, rather than for practical ones. The second point could be offered an alternative - if we can't have T5, why not change our crux terminatus save to a 4 instead of 5? And if that seems a bit "broken', then we could restrict it to Deathwing Knights? Lore-wise they are supposed to be the elite of the elite.

Knights already save at 2+/3++.

 

With the new banner, they will most likely see a LOT of use, too. With a 2+/3++/5+++ save, they will be very hard to remove from the table.

[Skywrath]

 

 

 

Questions as follows:

 

1. Why isn't there an interaction between Azrael and Kaldor? (Reference to Pandorax, do something like when these two models meet, roll a die - highest die gets +1 to toughness). Also a new model for Azrael (preferably primaris is also a valid question).

2. Why is terminator toughness only 4 and not 5?

1. Might be too specific to be practical (The Lion and the Wolf stratagem comes to mind)

 

2. I read someone explain, once, that this came about due to how old Cavalry rules worked. Where the mount gave an extra poijt of toughness in WHFB, which later was passed on to WH40K. And it kinda... Stuck there, as a rule. It makes little sense, really, but it stays that being mounted on a bike grants extra T, while being on foot does not. With the extra defense from the TDA suit being representes in the 2+ save, over the 3+ save.

The first point admittedly, was more for jesting purposes, rather than for practical ones. The second point could be offered an alternative - if we can't have T5, why not change our crux terminatus save to a 4 instead of 5? And if that seems a bit "broken', then we could restrict it to Deathwing Knights? Lore-wise they are supposed to be the elite of the elite.

Knights already save at 2+/3++.

 

With the new banner, they will most likely see a LOT of use, too. With a 2+/3++/5+++ save, they will be very hard to remove from the table.

 

 

New banner? Please elaborate. Good thing I have 5 of those ready and rocking >:)

[Berzul]

The new Deathwing Ancient magic banner that supposedly comes with PA4's release. Gives a 5+ FnP aura of 6" for our Deathwing.

 

I'm thinking it is going to be an auto-include in any list that brings some Deathwing.

[Chaplain Elijah]

if we can't have T5, why not change our crux terminatus save to a 4 instead of 5?

 

We are going to have T5 Terminators (with a 1CP stratagem).

And we can already have 4++ Terminators : either you use Cataphractii or you use Azrael's bubble.

 

Frankly i don't think we could ask for more buffs to the Terminators now, perhaps a third Wound or a strat' to /2 the Damage (like the Dreadnought) for them to be truely competitive ?

Edited January 20, 2020 by Chaplain Elijah

[Berzul]

I think the stratagems are great, and they finally accomplish giving the Deathwing some better use and value.

 

Tactical Doctrine and Bolter Drill means that now you can deepstrike 5 barebone terminators for 165 points, fire 40 shots at 2CP, in turn 2, and have them wreck squads better than ever before, at no extra cost than what we had to pay before the book.

 

Combining the Pennant of Remembrance on a Deathwing Ancient, with either Transhuman Physiology (when whoever is hitting you has S6 or more), or Stand Firm (when whoever hits you has S5 or lower), will make any terminator a LOT more durable. In melee combat you can even combine this with Fortress of Shields, and make them only get injured on a 5+ at best, then save everything with a 2+ save, invul save, and then even a 5+ Feel no Pain.

 

If you want to go hunt for hordes, even 5 knights when paired the Ancient and 1 CP for Outnumbered But Never Outmatched, on a charge, will be hitting dishing out 26 hits. And if you go hunting for monsters, you can give the Ancient the Lay Low the Mighty warlord trait and get FULL to wound rerrolls on 21 attacks on a 5 man squad.

 

I am liking what I see. The only issue is that it is CP heavy and, due to limitations on stratagems, you are looking at abilities that work best on armies that include that ONE good unit of whatever it is you plan on bringing. Multiple units can spread the enemy attacks, but you will still only be able to play your deadly combo on one.

 

Now, I do think it will be good to try including 5 Deathwing Terminators, 10 Deathwing Knights, and the Ancient with the Pennant of Remembrance.

 

You can add a Ravenwing Biker squad that can move into position with Full Throttle (1CP),

> then drop the Terminators beyond 9" to shoot (2CP),
>> drop the Knights beyond 6" with Combined Assault (2CP),

>>> and then charge in for a 6" distance (which has a 72% chance of landing even before rerolls, either by 1CP command reroll, or 1CP to give the ancient Master of Maneuver).

 

When overwatch comes in, you can make the unit T5 (1CP), and shrug off some shots. Once in melee, you can try it again, either making them 5+ to be wounded by S6+ attacks for 3CP, or by S5- attacks for 2CP.

 

Expensive... but good.

[Isual]

Add this one as well: when will the Nephelim Jetfighter be a good anti-air vehicle as its lore entry says instead of being another anti-ground vehicle, as it is nowadays?

 

Just take a Xiphon Pattern Interceptor and call him a Nephelim, that model has every rule you want for a fighter jet.

[Solrac]

I believe OP's questions have been answered however if you are still keen to send something to the 40k rules team I suggest you request Psychic Awakening Faith and Fury be FAQ'd so the Dark Angels can use the Master of Sanctity, Chief Apothecary, Chief Librarian and Master of the Forge stratagems, relics and warlord traits. This will give us some amazing builds with all our new stuff. I don't see any reason why they couldn't give us access to this seeing as the only reason we didn't get it to start with was that we didn't have doctrines and litanies when it came out.

 

I sent an email to the rules team requesting this for Dark Angels and Blood Angels last week.

[ValourousHeart]

So I saw that PA4 introduces the strat that allows Successors to take non-successor relics...

 

CAN GW PLEASE CLARIFY HOW TO USE SUCCESSORS? Because with that strat it sure feel like I am cheating using anything labelled DARK ANGELS when my models aren't green/black/bone now.

 

Did someone accuse you of cheating for not painting your models in a particular color scheme with rigorously checked color hex codes.

 

If someone were to tell me that I would likely have a couple suggestions for alternative leisure activities for them to participate in.

 

Last time I checked there is not a single rule that requires models to be painted in a certain color scheme to have a particular rule applied.

Even the most obvious example, the Ork rule Red Ones Go Faster doesn't actually require you to use red paint on your model.

 

However if this is your own variation of OCD, then I'm afraid you are just out of luck and will be bared from using any rules whatsoever until GW releases a codex with the specific color hex codes you used.

It will really suck if you didn't use official GW primers, paints, glue and brushes.

[Phaeton]

I sent an email to the rules team requesting this for Dark Angels and Blood Angels last week.

 

Perfectly valid point, done it today.

[Cpt_Reaper]

 

 

So I saw that PA4 introduces the strat that allows Successors to take non-successor relics...

 

CAN GW PLEASE CLARIFY HOW TO USE SUCCESSORS? Because with that strat it sure feel like I am cheating using anything labelled DARK ANGELS when my models aren't green/black/bone now.

Did someone accuse you of cheating for not painting your models in a particular color scheme with rigorously checked color hex codes.

 

If someone were to tell me that I would likely have a couple suggestions for alternative leisure activities for them to participate in.

 

Last time I checked there is not a single rule that requires models to be painted in a certain color scheme to have a particular rule applied.

Even the most obvious example, the Ork rule Red Ones Go Faster doesn't actually require you to use red paint on your model.

 

However if this is your own variation of OCD, then I'm afraid you are just out of luck and will be bared from using any rules whatsoever until GW releases a codex with the specific color hex codes you used.

It will really suck if you didn't use official GW primers, paints, glue and brushes.

With the introduction of a Stratagem that costs the finite currency of Command Points to allow a Successor Chapter to take a non-Successor Relic, in addition to the rule that states Successors cannot use Relics other than the Heavenfall Blade or any named character then the colour of your Dark Angels absolutely matters.

 

If I have any relics or named characters in my army which is quite clearly not the Dark Angels and anyone pulls me up on that I have cheated by breaking a rule. 2 rules once RotD comes out.

[Berzul]

 

 

So I saw that PA4 introduces the strat that allows Successors to take non-successor relics...

 

CAN GW PLEASE CLARIFY HOW TO USE SUCCESSORS? Because with that strat it sure feel like I am cheating using anything labelled DARK ANGELS when my models aren't green/black/bone now.

Did someone accuse you of cheating for not painting your models in a particular color scheme with rigorously checked color hex codes.

 

If someone were to tell me that I would likely have a couple suggestions for alternative leisure activities for them to participate in.

 

Last time I checked there is not a single rule that requires models to be painted in a certain color scheme to have a particular rule applied.

Even the most obvious example, the Ork rule Red Ones Go Faster doesn't actually require you to use red paint on your model.

 

However if this is your own variation of OCD, then I'm afraid you are just out of luck and will be bared from using any rules whatsoever until GW releases a codex with the specific color hex codes you used.

It will really suck if you didn't use official GW primers, paints, glue and brushes.

With the introduction of a Stratagem that costs the finite currency of Command Points to allow a Successor Chapter to take a non-Successor Relic, in addition to the rule that states Successors cannot use Relics other than the Heavenfall Blade or any named character then the colour of your Dark Angels absolutely matters.

 

If I have any relics or named characters in my army which is quite clearly not the Dark Angels and anyone pulls me up on that I have cheated by breaking a rule. 2 rules once RotD comes out.

 

 

So, is there a bit for the Foe Smiter, or the Mace of Redemption, or the Eye of the Unseen, or the Shroud of Heroes, or any other relic whatsoever?

 

I mean... what could possibly constitute the fact that your model is equipped with a relic they cannot use?

 

And, even then, what could possibly forbid you from stating that the bit applied to the model is just decorative?

 

And, what relation does that have to do with color?

 

I see no issue with any of this points. I could have a deathwing terminator painted blue, with a power sword in hand, a tabbard on the armor, and a storm bolter on the other. And I could claim him to be just a terminator sergeant, or I could claim him to be a master in TDA with a relic blade and the foe smiter and the DA keyword, or I could claim him to be a successor master with the heavenfall blade, or I could even say he is Belial.

 

Seriously, the rules are NOT in the way of doing any of this things.

 

[Cpt_Reaper]

 

 

So, is there a bit for the Foe Smiter, or the Mace of Redemption, or the Eye of the Unseen, or the Shroud of Heroes, or any other relic whatsoever?

I mean... what could possibly constitute the fact that your model is equipped with a relic they cannot use?

 

And, even then, what could possibly forbid you from stating that the bit applied to the model is just decorative?

 

And, what relation does that have to do with color?

 

I see no issue with any of this points. I could have a deathwing terminator painted blue, with a power sword in hand, a tabbard on the armor, and a storm bolter on the other. And I could claim him to be just a terminator sergeant, or I could claim him to be a master in TDA with a relic blade and the foe smiter and the DA keyword, or I could claim him to be a successor master with the heavenfall blade, or I could even say he is Belial.

 

Seriously, the rules are NOT in the way of doing any of this things.

 

 

 

Please don't move the goal posts for my argument.

 

You can very easily say a models is not something - if your models doesn't have a relic, it doesn't have it. A storm bolter is a storm bolter, no matter how pimp the model is.

But (and I have literally just picked up RotD and have it right here), the rules go to great lengths to specify what your model cannot be armed with. Unless you spend CP on Honoured of the Rock, a Dark Angels Successor cannot be given a Relic that isn't a Heavenfall Blade or Special Issue Wargear.

 

If a model is not clearly a Dark Angel, it's a Successor Chapter. If you don't use Honoured of the Rock to get a Relic other than HFB and SIW you're breaking the rules.

 

I know what a Dark Angel looks like. You know what a Dark Angel looks like. If my black and silver marines have a model armed with the Foe Smiter, or the Mace of Redemption, or the Eye of the Unseen, or the Shroud of Heroes and I didn't use Honoured of the Rock and anybody brings that up then I have broken the rules and therefore cheated.

 

Honoured of the Rock introduces the spending of a finite resource, tied to the look of your army. Until GW says that it doesn't, there is only one way to interpret the rules. You either have Dark Angels on your table, or you don't and have to spend CP.

[Grimdark_Garage]

The way your army is painted should have zero bearings on your army rules. After all, GW go to great lengths to suggest this is "your" hobby.

 

WYSIWYG wargear is far more important.

 

If any player wanted to enforce successor relic rules on anything other than codex:SM (where the player has selected succcesor traits) I'm not going to be playing that person.

[Berzul]

I see your argumwnt. I am not trying to misrepresent it.

 

But RAW, the color of the model es 100% irrelevant. So, if the model si properly equipped, if it is black and silvwr, or whatever other color, should not matter.

 

You decide if you are olaying DA or successors, declare it, and abidw by the rules.

 

But colors are not covered in the rules.

[Cpt_Reaper]

Then how does Honoured of the Rock work? If I can just say my very-clearly-not-dark-angels are dark angels I don't have to use the stratagem to acquire a relic. Is that not cheating by avoiding paying a required cost?

[Berzul]

Well, it may be seen by some as bad form. But it is not against the rules at all.

 

Seriously, that is kind of thw problem here. There is NO reason or advantage to play successors... And I play them!

 

Rules wise, you are always better served with playing as Dark Angels, regardless of color. But, if you WANT to play as a successor (which I do, too, often times), you can.

 

It becomes an issue of personal choice. It might be weird and unfair, but that is RAW.

 

Now, you could argue RAI would force you to play successors if you are not on the official GW Paints color scheme. But it is not RAW.