New Space marine Codex and DA

[Gederas]

INTERROGATOR-CHAPLAIN IN TERMINATOR ARMOUR is in elite slot now.... Interesting

Hmmm. The data sheet shows the Elite symbol instead of the HQ symbol, but under the points costs, it's listed under HQ. I'd treat it as an HQ choice.

good catch

From the playtester in the Discord I'm in: The Elite symbol is a typo, it's an HQ

[RayJ]

The +1A is from upgrading to the Chapter Ancient. Yet to be clarified if you can upgrade the Deathwing Ancient, but if you can, then there you have it! (Although makes the model very expensive...)

 

Chapter Ancient gives +1 to hit rolls in melee, not +1 attack. He's still nice because Steadfast Example WT giving ObSec to your Deathwing is fun

Edited October 6, 2020 by RayJ

[Angel of Solitude]

[UtariOnzo]

Deathwing apothecary is a shoe in for upgrading to the chief apothecary, and yes these upgrades seem very clearly intended to work based on a unit having specific keywords. Combined assault is clearly remembered to work on ravenwing bikers, and lots used ravenwing apothecaries to do the job because it had the two keywords needed (ravenwing and biker). Nothing here suggests 9th has changed that

[Komodo]

We can fit now two Talonmasters in one HQ slot, isn't it nice? :)

 

Also, don't really get the benefit of Aura of Dread (Aura): While an enemy unit is within 6" of this model, it counts as being below Half Strength.

[Angel of Solitude]

We can fit now two Talonmasters in one HQ slot, isn't it nice? :)

 

Also, don't really get the benefit of Aura of Dread (Aura): While an enemy unit is within 6" of this model, it counts as being below Half Strength.

It’s to do with how combat attrition works: less than half strength and models now get a -1 modifier to the d6 roll, making them flee on a roll of 1 or 2.

[Komodo]

 

We can fit now two Talonmasters in one HQ slot, isn't it nice?

 

Also, don't really get the benefit of Aura of Dread (Aura): While an enemy unit is within 6" of this model, it counts as being below Half Strength.

It’s to do with how combat attrition works: less than half strength and models now get a -1 modifier to the d6 roll, making them flee on a roll of 1 or 2.

 

Thanks, that's even better than -1 to Ld in 8th. Pretty useful.

[G8Keeper]

Brings some other leadership debuffs we have into focus. Assuming interromancy comes back that is.

[Berzul]

How do you guys feel about relics and warlord traits in this coming codex and update? Lots of our old toys are now missing, but some good things remain. For instance, Fury of the Lion and Master of Maneuver were my go-to traits for my Smash Master, but now these are gone. Brilliant Strategist, in turn, seems like a good way to go, given that I could keep his biker retinue firing per the Devastator Doctrine for an extra turn or two, which would make their meltaguns range 15" instead of 12". Then again, the Imperium's Sword would also be good, as it would provide the benefits of the Key or Achrabael, which a regular Master can no longer take, since we lost the ability to grant them the Deathwing Keyword.

 

How are you shaping up your favorite units with these changes?

Edited October 6, 2020 by Berzul

[Zustiur]

I just noticed that No Escape only targets one enemy unit now. A fair change but sad nonetheless.

[RayJ]

We'll get more options when the actual supplement drops. I think it's best not to overcommit before then.

[jaxom]

My guess is that the DA BA SW and DW PDFs are placeholders and that the real supplements will be more complex

The total lack of the warlord traits (only the one from C:SM available), specific litanies and psychic powers, units from C:SM without special rules and so on lead me to think that

 

We'll get more options when the actual supplement drops. I think it's best not to overcommit before then.

 

Exactly, and they've said as much. These are just to let people grab the new Codex and get playing with their armies. It's Index 40k or pamphlet AoS. The rules look fast and loose and will likely change. The Dark Angels have the most contentious single rule and their supplement is slated to come out late (compared to, say, Blood Angels). I'm guessing it was the one that required the most work after Deathwatch.

[WrathOfTheLion]

The supplements in general likely required a lot of work to pull off.

 

Just from seeing the reviews of the codex, there are a lot of conditionals done to make it so that the DA/SW stuff especially can be fielded properly.

 

This had to have been an utter pain to get right.

[Gederas]

So, looks like there's going to have to be a FAQ for the FAQ because of the Interrogator-Chaplain in Terminator Armour and the Talonmaster.

 

Regarding the Talonmaster: The Relics of Caliban section specifies you cannot give any of the following Relics to a VEHICLE and then the second Relic is for the Ravenwing Talonmaster...

 

Which is a VEHICLE

 

Oops?

Edited October 7, 2020 by Gederas

[Angel of Solitude]

Hmmm.

 

In Ritual of the Damned, there was a distinction between Relics and Special Issue Wargear - the latter being unavailable to vehicles. In the new C:SM, it’s all just relics, with the no vehicle restriction for all. This structure has carried over to the Index Astartes, but then they forgot that the Talonmaster is a vehicle...

 

Dunno how they fix this one, but I don’t think they’re about to deny us that relic.

[WrathOfTheLion]

It's a cut and paste error I think.

 

Obviously can assign it to the bespoke unit it says, so nobody in good faith would say it can't be used.

[Aeri]

Looking forward to a master of sanctity on bike dropping some Deathwing knights in 6'' to an enemy.

[Brother Ramael]

So, looks like there's going to have to be a FAQ for the FAQ because of the Interrogator-Chaplain in Terminator Armour and the Talonmaster.

 

Regarding the Talonmaster: The Relics of Caliban section specifies you cannot give any of the following Relics to a VEHICLE and then the second Relic is for the Ravenwing Talonmaster...

 

Which is a VEHICLE

 

Oops?

Just another wednesday I'd say

[bigtrouble]

Looking forward to a master of sanctity on bike dropping some Deathwing knights in 6'' to an enemy.

This rocks

[Brother Ramael]

I found this article puts nicely into words what I feel it's happening ( and happened in the past) for DA https://www.goonhammer.com/editorial-why-the-dark-angels-faq-rules-actually/ .

Regardless of what happens to a definitely very strong rule in the proper da codex next year, I feel it won't be possible just going back to a lame "auto pass morale", which is by itself a result in my book.

[jaxom]

 

 

Dark Angels never had a bit like that. Games Workshop (and Forge World, this has been a problem in 30k as well) never really had a good idea what they’re about – they weren’t really a definable type of Guy.

 

I've been saying that for years. Gav Thorpes asked the most important question in Angels of Darkness, "what are the Dark Angels without the Fallen?" and absolutely no one within the company has since addressed it. Why did the question have to be asked? Because Imperial Fists had become the "stubborn chapter" and Black Templars had become the "knight chapter."

 

If GW wants to start stressing that the Deathwing are the really intractable marines then awesome. How they choose to do that, well, I'm not 100% on-board with the Index, but I don't write the rules.

[Gederas]

I found this article puts nicely into words what I feel it's happening ( and happened in the past) for DA https://www.goonhammer.com/editorial-why-the-dark-angels-faq-rules-actually/ .

Regardless of what happens to a definitely very strong rule in the proper da codex next year, I feel it won't be possible just going back to a lame "auto pass morale", which is by itself a result in my book.

Dark Angels never had a bit like that. Games Workshop (and Forge World, this has been a problem in 30k as well) never really had a good idea what they’re about – they weren’t really a definable type of Guy.

I've been saying that for years. Gav Thorpes asked the most important question in Angels of Darkness, "what are the Dark Angels without the Fallen?" and absolutely no one within the company has since addressed it. Why did the question have to be asked? Because Imperial Fists had become the "stubborn chapter" and Black Templars had become the "knight chapter."

 

If GW wants to start stressing that the Deathwing are the really intractable marines then awesome. How they choose to do that, well, I'm not 100% on-board with the Index, but I don't write the rules.

Agreed 100%. They never really gave Dark Angels in 40k their own "flavour" that wasn't tied to the Fallen, instead giving it to other Chapters.

 

The playtester in the Discord server I'm in plays Imperial Fists, and the banner image is how he is right now. Like, he was whining about the Doctrine change and when I pointed out that it was Iron Hands and Imperial Fists that caused the Doctrine nerf in the first place he says "Don't lecture me".

 

These comments on that article also sums up my thoughts:

 

"The worst part of all of this to me (lifelong DA) is that the DA own player base had such a critical reaction to the Ravenwing and Deathwing buffs. We all loved it right before we critiqued it.

Objectively they were strong buffs but not game breaking and not even top meta imho (Still Salamanders and maybe incoming necrons). We are so used to having nothing as a player base everyone immediately started speculating on how GW will take it away from us.

Not to mention virtually all of our unique offensive tools were stripped away (WotDA, Stoic prosecution, speed of the raven, Deathwing assault, etc)."

 

"At least Imperial Fists got a good year with their thing. Ritual of the Damned has been nothing but a cruel exercise in giving the Dark Angels new toys only to take them away one by one since then; we needed this Index to not be completely shuffled off into non-entity again."

Edited October 7, 2020 by Gederas

[WrathOfTheLion]

I try not to care about what the rule is. I was saying it a few days before the FAQ when we were talking about the Chapter Tactic and some of the more codex folks were mentioning eradicators, I thought Deathwing and melee was set up to be the most fun.

 

The main thing is that, regardless of what it ends up as rulewise, it's a good sign that I think they're going to do some cool stuff with the boys in bone.

 

But we shouldn't apologize for loving it, even if it's good. Maybe it needs to be dialed back, but who cares, it is finally something cool for like the first time ever and we should enjoy it and hope that it's good for the future. As I pointed out earlier, now that the buff is here it's mob rule going around, even if they reverted it back to what it was, that won't appease the folks that had their sensibilities injured, so you may as well not apologize and be happy about it.

Edited October 7, 2020 by WrathOfTheLion

[Berzul]

 

 

I found this article puts nicely into words what I feel it's happening ( and happened in the past) for DA https://www.goonhammer.com/editorial-why-the-dark-angels-faq-rules-actually/ .

Regardless of what happens to a definitely very strong rule in the proper da codex next year, I feel it won't be possible just going back to a lame "auto pass morale", which is by itself a result in my book.

 

Dark Angels never had a bit like that. Games Workshop (and Forge World, this has been a problem in 30k as well) never really had a good idea what they’re about – they weren’t really a definable type of Guy.

I've been saying that for years. Gav Thorpes asked the most important question in Angels of Darkness, "what are the Dark Angels without the Fallen?" and absolutely no one within the company has since addressed it. Why did the question have to be asked? Because Imperial Fists had become the "stubborn chapter" and Black Templars had become the "knight chapter."

 

If GW wants to start stressing that the Deathwing are the really intractable marines then awesome. How they choose to do that, well, I'm not 100% on-board with the Index, but I don't write the rules.

Agreed 100%. They never really gave Dark Angels in 40k their own "flavour" that wasn't tied to the Fallen, instead giving it to other Chapters.

 

The playtester in the Discord server I'm in plays Imperial Fists, and the banner image is how he is right now. Like, he was whining about the Doctrine change and when I pointed out that it was Iron Hands and Imperial Fists that caused the Doctrine nerf in the first place he says "Don't lecture me".

 

These comments on that article also sums up my thoughts:

 

"The worst part of all of this to me (lifelong DA) is that the DA own player base had such a critical reaction to the Ravenwing and Deathwing buffs. We all loved it right before we critiqued it.

 

 

Objectively they were strong buffs but not game breaking and not even top meta imho (Still Salamanders and maybe incoming necrons). We are so used to having nothing as a player base everyone immediately started speculating on how GW will take it away from us.

Not to mention virtually all of our unique offensive tools were stripped away (WotDA, Stoic prosecution, speed of the raven, Deathwing assault, etc)."

 

"At least Imperial Fists got a good year with their thing. Ritual of the Damned has been nothing but a cruel exercise in giving the Dark Angels new toys only to take them away one by one since then; we needed this Index to not be completely shuffled off into non-entity again."

What DID the Imperial Fists lose?

[jaxom]

The +1 damage to weapons against vehicles and buildings during Devastator Doctrine now only applies to Str 7 and higher weapons. So all the Stalker Bolt Rifles, Heavy Bolters, and Gatling variants which became very good anti-tank (due to volume of fire per points spent versus damage output) are not as universally good as they were.