Wh40k 10th Edition Datasheet Changes

[Kastor Krieg]

21 minutes ago, KnightofSigismund said:

Your RIGHTEOUS ZEAL brother.

Oh, absolutely, I just hope that as the Index thing is temporary, we don't remain "just a pre-4ed paint scheme" for long :|

[KnightofSigismund]

8 minutes ago, Kastor Krieg said:

Oh, absolutely, I just hope that as the Index thing is temporary, we don't remain "just a pre-4ed paint scheme" for long :|

I agree, I’ve been busting my ass on finishing mine to parade ready and I’m hoping that our index isn’t a step down. Honestly I’m hoping we get more combat based things, as of now it doesn’t seem like a super close combat feel, more like it wants to be but isn’t really. 

[Noserenda]

1 hour ago, Kastor Krieg said:

OK, at this point, with chapter-specific rules completely gone. What makes my Black Templars even be Black Templars anymore? :|

Turns out the real Black Templars were the friends you made along the way :D 

Edited April 1, 2023 by Noserenda

[jaxom]

 

On 3/28/2023 at 5:26 AM, Halandaar said:

I'm expecting to see this manifested (pun intended) in 40K as Smite being on the psykers datasheet along with a default power known by that class of psyker (so all Librarians will know one, all Sorcerers, all Warlocks and so on). Then when the Codexes come out, they'll be able to pick powers from the psychic disciplines as part of their army rules just like is the case in AoS. After all, they need to get you to buy the Codexes somehow and the way to do it (given the datasheets themselves are free, like AoS Warscrolls) is to put the army abilities in there.

Mike mentioned during the reveal stream that Smite is going away completely. Each psyker will have the power or powers that make sense for them to have. In some cases that may resemble the old Smite, but at an altered power level. Magnus the Red still has a Psychic Shooting Power, but it hits harder than the Psychic Shooting Power on another [unnamed] Psyker's data slate.

 

On 3/27/2023 at 10:25 PM, ThePenitentOne said:

I'm not keen on the idea that bespoke "detachments" are a part of the swap in, swap out system. It could work if the detachments are varied enough, or if there's some choice. Like I don't want to be told that if I want to field Argent Shroud, I must use an Outrider-type detachment because that most closely matches the fluff. I always felt like the number and type(s) of detachments you would send to engagement would depend on the engagement, not on the faction's fluff.

 

Even in the case of DA- Ravenwing armies/ detachments DO exist, but they aren't appropriate for every mission, and when they aren't, either the Deathwing or the Greenwing are sent instead. Sometimes combined forces would be sent too. And of course, the DA options WILL be that nuanced because Marines. But I think I'm right to worry about "In Order to play Order of Our Martyred Lady, you must field Junith Eruita" or whatever.

I feel like the design intent is: "Who your little plastic people are is less important than how they fight," like in you Dark Angel example. Greenwing fight like bog standard Marines so one would take a bog standard Marine Detachment to benefit from those rules. If I were a new player, my big question would be why Argent Shroud are for some reason worse (within the limited granularity of 40k) than Bloody Rose for a force representing a slew of Sisters Repentia looking to die in battle? The Argent Shroud have preferred doctrine for lightning assaults and decapitation strikes, but does that mean they can't carry out a siege to a similar level as any other Order (I don't know, I know only a little about Sororitas Orders).

 

On 3/28/2023 at 12:21 PM, Scribe said:

 

Agreed. Adding on even more 'just buy the box, dont worry about army building' by fixing the unit size/upgrade path as well? It was already a huge turn off, and codifying it just makes it worse.

 

If I want 6 CSM in a squad, I want 6. If I want 8, I want 8.

 

"No sorry, its 5 or 10." Thats just not going to work.

Is this related to tweaking points within a list so it fits your image for the army?

 

3 hours ago, Kastor Krieg said:

OK, at this point, with chapter-specific rules completely gone. What makes my Black Templars even be Black Templars anymore? :|

Right up front, Crusade Squads and Sword Brethren. More directly to your point: if I were in charge (ha!) I'd make sure there is a Crusade detachment for Space Marines (with the No Psykers detachment limitation, and Vows as the central special rule). Black Templars have a preference for using it, but they're still Space Marines. I can imagine a hypothetical Choice Point in list design. I'm putting together a Black Templar force and I have a roughly equal mix of Bikers/Outriders, Crusader Squads in Rhinos, and Primaris Crusader Squads on foot. Do I take them as a Crusade Detachment, a Recon/Biker Detachment, or a Mechanized Infantry Detachment? I could choose to experiment, play it differently depending on my mood, etc, and end up with an army made of the same models, but plays differently from game to game.

 

EDIT; I also think Black Templar Chaplains will have different Prayers than Codex Chaplains.

Edited April 1, 2023 by jaxom

[Scribe]

Just now, jaxom said:

Is this related to tweaking points within a list so it fits your image for the army?

 

Could be, or it could be about something as esoteric as the army lore, or it could be just so one does not feel they are being forced into build choices due to a lack of flexibility in how GW presents the game.

 

Some people dont want a lot of choice, others do, and we have had the ability to add a model to an upper limit on a unit's size, forever.

[Redcomet]

4 hours ago, Kastor Krieg said:

OK, at this point, with chapter-specific rules completely gone. What makes my Black Templars even be Black Templars anymore? :|

They are not completely gone. Where did you get that notion from?

[DesuVult]

5 hours ago, Kastor Krieg said:

OK, at this point, with chapter-specific rules completely gone. What makes my Black Templars even be Black Templars anymore? :|

You are Black Templars by being Black Templars, as it has often been.

[Rain]

5 hours ago, Kastor Krieg said:

Oh, absolutely, I just hope that as the Index thing is temporary, we don't remain "just a pre-4ed paint scheme" for long :|

Black Templars had a unique variant list in Codex: Armageddon in 3rd which came out in 2000(?). They are also probably the most divergent Chapter on the tabletop, with mixed power armor/scout squads as their general line units.

 

Making BT use vanilla marine rules would be awful for game flavor.

[jaxom]

*Finds cover for the expected wave for angry BT players flashing back to 6th and 7th edition*

[redmapa]

I started looking at the rumored 10th ed with excitement specially because we finally got a proper update and models, but now? I am dreading to see how subfactions work, I refuse to lose what made my Templars what they are and I dont know what I will do if its a return to 6th/7th/8th ed where we played like black ultramarines and still lost.

 

Too little info to go on for now but I am no longer excited.

[spessmarine]

8 hours ago, redmapa said:

I started looking at the rumored 10th ed with excitement specially because we finally got a proper update and models, but now? I am dreading to see how subfactions work, I refuse to lose what made my Templars what they are and I dont know what I will do if its a return to 6th/7th/8th ed where we played like black ultramarines and still lost.

 

Too little info to go on for now but I am no longer excited.

 

I wouldn't sweat it too hard. Indexhammer as seen in 8th is fleeting, codices will yet again shape the stage.

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by Tyriks
removed hidden quote

[DesuVult]

1 hour ago, spessmarine said:

 

I wouldn't sweat it too hard. Indexhammer as seen in 8th is fleeting, codices will yet again shape the stage.
 

Popularity granting disproportionate special attention I feel is one reason AoS seems to be growing in my area.

Edited April 2, 2023 by Tyriks
removed hidden quote

[KnightofSigismund]

6 hours ago, redmapa said:

I started looking at the rumored 10th ed with excitement specially because we finally got a proper update and models, but now? I am dreading to see how subfactions work, I refuse to lose what made my Templars what they are and I dont know what I will do if its a return to 6th/7th/8th ed where we played like black ultramarines and still lost.

 

Too little info to go on for now but I am no longer excited.

Have faith brother. They aren’t going to undo anything that made our army unique. Or any of the others. I think people are getting a bit worked up for no reason. Just my opinion. 

[WrathOfTheLion]

6 hours ago, redmapa said:

I started looking at the rumored 10th ed with excitement specially because we finally got a proper update and models, but now? I am dreading to see how subfactions work, I refuse to lose what made my Templars what they are and I dont know what I will do if its a return to 6th/7th/8th ed where we played like black ultramarines and still lost.

 

Too little info to go on for now but I am no longer excited.

I expect at least for the bigger Space Marine factions that there will be detachments representing their fighting style. I think the way they'll approach it is different. For my faction as an example, you won't play 'Dark Angels' with its trait and all sorts of stuff, but will take a Ravenwing or Deathwing detachment. So you'll have one of <X> SM detachments representing the general chapter, but those two specialized ones for its two specialized formations.

 

Given Dark Angels' (and their Successors') organization, I think they're the easiest to envision with the most clean cut and direct formations mapping to this concept.

Edited April 2, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion

[Lemondish]

1 hour ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

I expect at least for the bigger Space Marine factions that there will be detachments representing their fighting style. I think the way they'll approach it is different. For my faction as an example, you won't play 'Dark Angels' with its trait and all sorts of stuff, but will take a Ravenwing or Deathwing detachment. So you'll have one of <X> SM detachments representing the general chapter, but those two specialized ones for its two specialized formations.

 

Given Dark Angels' (and their Successors') organization, I think they're the easiest to envision with the most clean cut and direct formations mapping to this concept.

 

I think it's also possible that we don't even see a "Deathwing" or "Ravenwing" detachment, but rather one that represents the way these forces fight. After all, the special rules are just one part of what makes Dark Angels special today - it's also their unique units. But it isn't like a Terminator heavy (or even exclusive) 1st company force is unique to the Unforgiven, it's just that they have unique units that fit well with it. The same is true of a bike and land speeder heavy force - it isn't like the White Scars couldn't fight that way either, but again, the unique units give the Ravenwing an edge even if it isn't, strictly speaking, a Ravenwing detachment.

[WrathOfTheLion]

14 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

 

I think it's also possible that we don't even see a "Deathwing" or "Ravenwing" detachment, but rather one that represents the way these forces fight. After all, the special rules are just one part of what makes Dark Angels special today - it's also their unique units. But it isn't like a Terminator heavy (or even exclusive) 1st company force is unique to the Unforgiven, it's just that they have unique units that fit well with it. The same is true of a bike and land speeder heavy force - it isn't like the White Scars couldn't fight that way either, but again, the unique units give the Ravenwing an edge even if it isn't, strictly speaking, a Ravenwing detachment.

Given Deathwing doesn't take Vanguard or Sternguard Veterans, I think it's very likely they will make a separate detachment just to keep the rule design simple.

 

Ravenwing is still yet more divergent than a fast attack detachment would be, and is really the most divergent formation the DA run in reality.

 

Edit: To elaborate, although they do want to cover a lot of playstyles, really specific ones like these I think they will want specific detachments with vs branching logic on the main ones. Doing too much there is against the design philosophy of how this system works.

Edited April 2, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion
elaboration

[DesuVult]

With terminators the new hot thing and if the WE codex is an indication of what formations might look like it is entirely possible for a marine formation that excludes non-dreadnought and non-terminator elites.

[ZeroWolf]

4 hours ago, DesuVult said:

With terminators the new hot thing and if the WE codex is an indication of what formations might look like it is entirely possible for a marine formation that excludes non-dreadnought and non-terminator elites.

If there was, I'd try it out, who wouldn't love an all terminator list!

[Interrogator Stobz]

The Deathwing Approves this ^^^ message.

[WrathOfTheLion]

I don't know, I'm just not too worried or fussed about that stuff. For my faction, we went from 'your Deathwing will be Aggressors and Ravenwing will be Phobos infantry and you'll like it', to then obviously having bikes, speeders and now terminators later, to 'be ready to be Green UM' when we were reparented on the base SM codex, which we then had lots of flavor, etc. So I don't know, I just don't really care about any of the 'sky is falling' sort of stuff on that after years of weird nonsense like I mentioned. Wait and see what happens when the codex comes out.

[TheWarmaster]

On 3/23/2023 at 2:40 AM, Brother nathan said:

Emm... is it just me or is that gaunt different? Back vents and stuff? Not major differences but different. Tail poses too...

Yes. Nids are getting new kits. 

[Marshal Reinhard]

I dont see a reason to worry. Editions come and they go, but models are forever. BT had a lovely range refresh and they're not gonna make us unable to use it. Others will be following in the same tracks and be subject to the same conditions 

Edited April 2, 2023 by Marshal Reinhard

[Rain]

4 hours ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

I dont see a reason to worry. Editions come and they go, but models are forever. BT had a lovely range refresh and they're not gonna make us unable to use it. Others will be following in the same tracks and be subject to the same conditions 

They can pry my 10,000 year old legacy Chaos models from my cold, mutated hands.

[Lemondish]

14 hours ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

Given Deathwing doesn't take Vanguard or Sternguard Veterans, I think it's very likely they will make a separate detachment just to keep the rule design simple.

Well, those can't be taken in Terminator armour, so I suppose that helps if that's a key restriction to the Terminator focused 'Deathwing' style detachment. Just one way to avoid that.

14 hours ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

Ravenwing is still yet more divergent than a fast attack detachment would be, and is really the most divergent formation the DA run in reality.

How so? What part of this can only be achieved as a Dark Angels only detachment? I'm still not anywhere close to sold on there needing to be super special snowflake detachments for super special snowflake chapters, so that's the context of my inquiry.

Why make limited detachments when the way these forces fight isn't exactly unique to them outside their unique units. What obvious thing am I missing with this?

[tinpact]

I tend to agree that there are archetypes that could reasonably benefit more than one army - a bikers and speeders-focused detachment could be White Scars just as well as Ravenwing. Likewise, a 'rapid assault' detachment for CSM could work for Black Legion or Red Corsairs, and so on.

 

USRs are back in some capacity, so I imagine things like Jink and Intractable wouldn't be hard to stick into a datasheet or a short paragraph somewhere.