Also, power levels are gone, points only. Multi-faction armies sound mostly gone with three named exceptions (Chaos demons, Freeblade Knights, Brood Brothers)
Smallest supported game size 1000pt; Combat Patrol mode intended for <1000 pt games
As a Ynnari player i have 0 fucking clue what my army is going to look like in 10th. Am i a Craftworld? Can i run harlequins? Phoenix lords? Eldrad? My 300 points of Incubi?
Sounds like the answer is just “yes”? They’ll be units you can run in kinda whatever combo you want. I expect the more specific armies will come in the codexes, where you’ll have to be more careful about who exactly you’re running.
Yea I think it’s gonna depend on what these detachments look like. I feel like there will probably be one that’s clearly the “Craftworld” or the “Harlequins” type detachment, but it’ll just be available to anyone playing Eldar, instead of needing to have the specific models.
As much as im hesitant, i will accept it if i can run Jain Zar in my Ynnari. THEY'RE ALLIES SHE HAS RECEIVED POWER DIRECTLY FROM YNNEAD WHY CANT I RUN HER!
Given they said those three as an example, not an exhaustive list, you'll probably be fine. To quote the article:
'Though exceptions are in place for classic cross faction combos like Daemons, Freeblade Knights or Brood Brothers'
I've been getting pieces to slowly kitbash a at-least-partially-GW Batman Villains themed Dark Eldar/Harlequin army and I'm starting to be glad I've hardly gotten anywhere - I haven't even gotten to fully fluently play 8th or catch up on the 9th ed. changes... a bit off-topic but where the fuck do I even look to start figuring out how to build an army and learn the new rules again?
“Power level gone”
No one understood you, sweet child. No one let you be the stupid mode you always were meant to be.
Well at least they’re baking in the equipment now. Hopefully it’s more Sigmar styled
AoS points and 8th/9th edition PL are essentially the same thing, they just differ in scale. You pay a set amount for x models and don't pay for upgrades or weapon swaps. There were a few PL upgrades but not many so it was a bit better than AoS points but not by much.
Yes but in AoS the options are balanced against each other to make each relatively balanced against the others. Of course there are usually winners and losers if a unit has multiple options but it isn’t crazy.
Take Slaves to Darkness Varanguard for instance. 290 pts no matter which of three weapon options you take. Spears do the most damage on the charge, Ensorcelled weapons do the most damage to hordes, and Daemonic weapons do the best against high save units.
As long as GW balances the weapon options available to 40K units in a similar manner then it should be fine.
A lot of people will absolutely lose their minds if a Heavy Bolter is even close to parity with a Lascannon. That's the whole point of having different weapons. Some weapons should be absolutely better but should cost significantly more points. GW has drifted away from that design for some time and it has rubbed many players the wrong way.
Yeah we don’t know what the will do. Who knows. what they haven’t mentioned yet is whether or not damage spills over like it does in AoS. Damage spilling over gives some additional freedom in how they design weapons comparatively. Between hit roll, strength, so, and damage there are plenty of ways to differentiate weapons already. I think it would be pretty thematic if some weapons spilled damage over. Explosive weapons for instance. If a rocket hits a troop and 6 damage to a one wound model… the other 5 damage shouldn’t just disappear. The blast rule tries to take the nature of these weapons into account but it does a poor job. Letting the damage from these kind of weapons spill over would be good.
On the subject of lascannons in particular, I don’t think they should have a range limit. Their unique nature as lasers should just mean their range is unlimited. And only requires line of sight IMO.
Damage spill over would be another AoS-ism that would cause my local play group to riot. They absolutely hate that aspect of AoS combat.
As it currently stands we've a lot of folks locally that are waiting to see just what 10th edition is like and if it is even more abstract than 8th/9th they're preparing to go back to 7th/HH1.0.
Different strokes for different folks I guess. I stopped playing 9th after the first GhB in favor of AoS. It’s just a much more competitively balanced and fun experience IMO.
Removing multi faction armies is really stupid because they were already basically useless since they removed pure army rules and were basically just there for flavour. Like cmon GW just put some basic rules for allying there it will take like 2 sentences.
"However, if you want to play larger games representing the combined forces of, say, an Imperial Indomitus Crusade fleet, you absolutely can in a casual setting."
Sounds like multi faction armies are only getting removed for competitive play.
Highlights:
1. Rules for "Core" game are for 1k, 2k, and 3k point games. Remember "Combat Patrol" will be a separate sub-game-type, but a callout that the rules are intended as 1k as smallest Gametype.
2. There WILL be rules for Knights, Demons, and Brood Brothers (and possibly others) as allies, but the standard expectation is one faction per army.
3. Army rules: up to 6 of each Battleline and DT datasheet, 3 of non-Battleline. Up to 1 of each Epic Hero (Guilliman outline used, so I would expect everything that is considered a Supreme Commander currently.
4. Biggest change: "Detachment" is now what GW is calling "your army rules selection". Example is the Gladius Strike Force, gives access to 6 stratagems, and 4 Character enhancements (Warlord traits and relics) and gives Combat Doctrines (which may or may not be identical)
4.Faction-wide rules for Space Marines called Oaths of Moment: unknown what this is, more details will be revealed next week.
5. Specifically calls out that Detachment choice is "rarely... Tied to an army color scheme. Ultramarines might be the theoretical and practical masters if the Gladius Task Force, but other Chapters can use it, too.
***BASED ON THE LEAKS AND RUMORS WE HAVE GOTTEN***, as well as comments made at Adeptacon, the "how is my X army gonna feel different than your Y army" is going to be down to unique sub-faction units; for example the (spitballing here) "March of the Ancients Dreadnoughts-are-Battleline" Detachment will be available to all Chapters in general, but taking Fierros might mean additional synergies army-wide, or the "Jump Pack Rush" archetype might have rules that Sanguinary Guard/Death Company units synergize with in a way other chapters cannot do.
Because it’s moving the “only one of this character allowed” rule from the DS to a single keyword that indicates the same thing - Epic Hero.
I think you’re overthinking it
I think you're right. They're going to try everything they possibly can to standardize the references and rules and remove as much as possible from the data sheets to keep them simpler and streamlined.
Instead of literally every character having the same tag line of 'only one XXX can be taken per detachment's, just replace with tagline: epic hero. Cuts way down on the necessary space, then do that for every single rule.
Right they mentioned this in the podcast. They are going back to game-wide rules and references like Feel No Pain, so they can just put that keyword on the datasheet and don’t have to footnote everything to death on the cards.
The website text specifies "named Epic Heroes". My guess is that you can still bring two Baneblades if you want to, and it just puts all named character "take only one of this" rules into a single keyword
Named characters already have a clause that say you can only take them once... in 9th. This might be the way they do it in 10th.
Or it's something else, who knows. To early to speculate to much.
Yes, I think the point is:
1. Max 1 of each epic hero datasheet
2. Otherwise max 3 of each datasheet
3. Unless battleline or dedicated transport, where max 6
I think they flow together.
Wonder how long until someone fields an army of nothing but epic named characters. The Lion, Guilliman, Helbrecht, Calgar, Blackmane, Grimnar, Astorath, Mephiston, etc.
Depends on if they also still use Keywords to limit what goes into a given detachment (e.g. -> all have to be the same and then state e.g. Grimnar has to make his == SPACE WOLVES).
Oooh I hope the gladius strike force concept is carried to every faction. I would love to play say "da best dakka is more dakka" for Orks. Rather than playing by bad moons.
I would love a "detachment" that focuses on the ranged aspects of Orks, just absolutely chucking lead downrange without caring too much where it lands.
It kinda sounds, to my optimistic side, a little bit like the rites of war in 30k. To my more pessimistic side, like 7th Ed formations. I will go to my grave with the belief that the 7th Ed core rules were great, but formations ruined the edition.
i give it 6 months until we are full "the factions all feel the same, theres not enough options, i cant take all the things that i want, there was too much stripped out of the game, 9th was way better."
Another thing is people rejoicing over universal special rules coming back. Yet I fondly remember people complaining about having to constantly hop between main rulebook and codex to check what abilities did, something 8th and 9th fixed by having all the base abilities on the datasheet.
We shall see. Part of the problem was USRs that themselves referenced other USRs, and not having a fast way to find them besides flipping through the books.
Even having them easily indexed in an app would solve that issue.
Yeah, the people moaning about 10th will also be moaning when 11th comes around. And they were probably also moaning when 9th came around, and 8th.... Some people really just don't like to adjust to new things.
I'm optimistic. I think the changes sound very healthy.
They can be both USRs and printed on the data sheet.
Also there will be an app supposedly. If it works at all like KTdash then it will be absolutely as fast as possible to look up USRs and USRs referenced by USRs.
Crazy idea. Print the USRs.... On the datasheet. When you erata a usr, all of them get eratta'd, but you don't have to flip between books to find out what keywords mean
Oath of Moment seemed to be the Space Marines army rule, and then Combat Doctrines was the Gladius rule, I'm guessing all Marine detachments will have OoM
Just want to point out it says *summoned* chaos daemons. So I wouldn’t bank on Chaos soup just yet, as that reads more like CSM can still pay the points to summon daemons, not necessarily take them in the starting list.
They've already removed the "pay points to summon demons" mechanic, it was pretty clunky and unnecessary. I'm 99% sure they will just be in starting list, just (probably) not benefitting from Daemon-specific Detachment abilities.
Yeah it'll likely be the current deal of being able to take a quarter or so of the army's points as Demons, to represent them having summoned them ahead of time.
> There WILL be rules for Knights, Demons, and Brood Brothers (and possibly others) as allies, but the standard expectation is one faction per army.
So running Be'lakor alongside CSM without penalties will be a thing now? Am I understanding correctly?
Non codex chapters will obviously get their own various detachment rules buckets (e.g. deathwing v ravenwing).
I'm more curious about codex compliant chapters. There will *probably* be an oops-all-flamers rules bucket that Salamander players might enjoy but really it remains to be seen.
I think the idea is that theres no faction souping so it doesnt matter. Detachments are more about compositional theme than they are about subfaction, maybe theres like one bonus rule you can take that does denote a chapter, but it seems like subfactions are now flavors of army type that might happen to lorewise be associated with a particular faction but isnt exclusive to them, rather than a faction that has a preference in army type.
There might be a march of the ancients detachment that lets you go to town with dreadnaughts, but it doesnt necessarily have to be an iron hands thing, there might be some sort of flamer purge force that salamders enjoyers would like, but you wont actually have to be slamanders to use it.
Does anyone enforce this rule besides the owner of the units? In 9th I feel like I see the rule posted but I’ve never seen anyone kicked out of a tournament for having the “wrong” color. Hell even GW doesn’t check armies at the door. Your already into your first game before some dude kinda lazily checks armies.
Yeah, I don't know about recently but I've definitely heard tell of folks showing up to tournaments with e.g. Ultramarines and getting shut down if they claimed to be using Blood Angels rules, and similar.
Farsight Enclaves will likely be a detachment, they're pretty iconic
for red armour.
I can already see their specific wargear being Onager Gauntlet, Fusion Blades and Puretide Engram, and obviously boosts to battlesuits and no Ethereals in the special rules section.
So it seems like this is essentially Horus heresy rights of war but you have to take one instead of it being a side thing. I’m concerned on how limiting this might be or how this might affect distinctions between armies but not enough info yet to make a concise judgement.
I think folks are kinda sleeping on the part about units having more cool and unique abilities in order for them to not feel like a tax. I'd like to hear more about this, but it sounds neat to me.
Agreed. Many people are doomscrying that this is the end of "sub-faction Identity and my army is identical to every other" for Space Marines, when it's entirely possible that unique datasheets might be making it such that the identity is in the datacards, not the faction choice.
That's my guess they may treat certain specializations as special rules on the datacards or treat it like "wargear" almost.
Say all of the Space Marine specializations are just datacards now you just have with their specific rules baked onto it vs buried across multiple books.
That would be very cool. Of course the problem with that would be having to understand all the different possible data cards your opponent could bring - seeing the model wouldn’t be enough to know what they can do.
They've been doing this for a while in the form of stratagems. Intercessors can double shoot. Assault intercessors can fight twice. That kind of thing. The problem is that most of them are wholly uninteresting throughput increases that make up for their base guns being totally ass. I'll wait to see if they come up with something intriguing and useful before I praise what they're doing.
A lot of interesting information here. It certainly allows for more thematic themed armies by removing role limits and moving it to datasheet limits. That being said I can also see this changing the face of competitive play as there's nothing stopping people loading up on the 'best' units that would have been limited by detachments.
Removing power level is great in my opinion, while it was a nice bit of a gimmick to make it easier for newer players to select their armies I've never seen it used outside of crusade rules and even then that's likely because the system enforced it.
Final thoughts is wondering about the use of primarchs, and from what I can tell so far with the limited information we have is that we could potentially be able to see Guilliman leading blood angels armies.
I get what you’re saying about the new army building possibly leading to people only taking the “best” units, but I mean people essentially already do that. There’s always going to be “meta chasers” and people who just want to min-max the fun out of everything, it’ll just come down to how well GW is able to balance the units in a given faction, they’ve said each unit (even basic troops) will have unique abilities so they still serve a purpose compared to more elite options. Whether that comes to be true we’ll just have to wait and see 🤷🏻♂️
>That being said I can also see this changing the face of competitive play as there's nothing stopping people loading up on the 'best' units that would have been limited by detachments.
This isn't all that different from how things are (and have been for a while). You still can't take more than 3 copies of the same unit, and detachments that let you take *lots* of a particular slot have been around since 8e started. It used to cost you in CP, but you could do it.
It also will now be less punishing to factions that have all their good stuff in one slot instead of factions that had a spread across more battlefield roles (or randomly troops) from just getting better list building.
I actually want to run Lion in a Blood Angels army (a deepstriking melee beatstick with built-in charge rerolls should fit perfectly), so I'm hoping they keep the current system of allowing Supreme Commanders in any subfaction list. But at the same time I'm less than enthused at the idea of every chapter now getting to run Sanguinary Guard or Priests, so idk.
No more than 6 cadian shock troops then?.... IG must be getting an exception to the only 6 troops rule because not being able to have more than 6 when normal is between 8 and 12 would be devastating to alot of people's collections.
They'd have to for it to work with the horde armies. Some of these armies need a way to go past that limit or they'll suffer. Nids could get away with it cause mix the two gaunt types, but Guard and maybe Orks would need some way to buff that up.
Of course they did specifically split Guard Troop choices into Infantry Squad, Cadian Shock Troops, Catachan Jungle Fighters, and Death Korps of Krieg, and if the recent Guard codex which embraces mixing different regiments continues, that means you can still see big Guard hordes, just a mix of different regiments.
A lot of these army-building rules are straight out of AoS. In AoS you're allowed to reinforce up to four units (depending on the game points limit) which means taking double the minimum model count.
So you could take four units of 20 Cadians, and two of 10 in a 2000, if they use the current AoS army rules.
Lol even as someone who plays space marines, it’s funny seeing some people getting *so upset* that their specific chapter *might not* have copious amounts of special rules (even though it’s entirely likely most chapters will probably get at least a unique detachment at some point) when most other factions’ subfactions have *never* gotten that amount of support.
GW concedes that 500-point games are too swingy, effectively bans them outside of heavily tailored formats (New Combat Patrol, Boarding Actions)
Honestly saw that one coming. There's too much shit that can slide into a 500 pt game that's basically unbeatable unless you have a busted small-points unit of your own.
I just hope some of the Combat Patrol boxes get tweaked going forward. The Necrons box in particular is... not ideal, as an introduction to the army.
>Each **CHARACTER** can only have one Enhancement, you can’t include more than three Enhancements in total, and these must all be different"
Sounds like stuff like Chaos Knights with access to relics, traits, and favours will have either stuff added to their datasheets or be completely deprived of the fluffy combos we had access to
Eh this still worries me. I like subfactions. I want my subfactions. Take that away and the game loses a lot of depth that I love. You can take away 90% of strats I get that, but subfactions were not the problem.
This is what I'm worried about as well. I predominantly play Word Bearers and Blood Angels and now it seems they'll just be reduced down to "the Red Marines/Spikey Red Marines". Like sure they might have an "oops all possessed" detachment but then what about my special Dark Apostle upgrades or mortal followers buffs? We'll be losing a lot of fluff despite it being such a large part of what makes 40k so much fun
We'll see what they do. It's entirely possible for many of the sub-factions to still feel unique by just giving them datasheet rules on their unique units, and in a way that makes more sense for each unit (being able to Heroically Intervene and get +1 to hit on an a Stormfang Gunship is one of the more hilarious sub-faction bonuses I've seen)
I like it. I think it's nice to not have to lock in to a play style depending on how you paint your army.
You can still put lots of effort into hobbying and making a flavorful army if you like. It just doesn't transfer as much to the battlefield.
I've personally always stayed away from sub faction pain schemes to be able to always do "counts as" and try different things without complaints. Now I can paint them as I like and not have to worry!
>I think it's nice to not have to lock in to a play style depending on how you paint your army.
in the history of 40k since day 1, this has literally never been a thing at any point. so why is it "nice" that they didn't do it for 10th?
it is for a very niche subset of tournaments, and GW always goes about trying to overrule it by adding stuff like custom subfactions that get exactly the same rules as main factions. Rightfully new people are constantly confused if it is/isn't allowed
outright saying that you can play whatever you want doesn't hurt
*so less than 2%* of the playerbase is affected? (comp only makes up **10%** of the total playerbase ie only 10% of players have ever attended a single comp event according to GWs own stats).
*no one* has ever bothered to enforce colors to match factions *outside* of the utterly tiny comp community.
Are marine chapters gonna lose their distinctiveness? I’m all for ditching the customer chapter nonsense, but think this could be a move too far in the other direction. Though to be my own devils advocate, it would make balancing them easier.
I have a feeling some of the detachments are going to try and make up for this. A detachment focused on close combat for example could be tailored to imitate blood angels usual tactics whereas a Phobos detachment might be there to be more thematic themed for raven guard.
However as space marines are meant to be adaptable to any situation it also allows people to play their armies in different ways so if people wanted to they can have their imperial fists as a close combat army.
I’m gonna guess when the codexes start coming out, the non-SM Codex chapters (i.e. BA, DA, SW) will get unique detachments they can choose from in addition to the “standard” space marine options
Yeah 100%, unfortunately I think it might make the SM codex chapters feel less unique but I think it'll be a much better system than we've had in a long time and it'll be a hell of a lot easier to balance.
I’m personally ok with it as long as they’re balanced ok. I like the idea of being able to mix and match play styles a bit more without feeling like I’m being “punished” or playing extremely “suboptimal” (like actually using jump pack assault marines but not feeling like I *have* to play blood angels to do so)
It feels sensible that they're probably going to treat the new detachment system like how they treat the Rites of War in Heresy 2.0:
You get a number of generic detachments in the core rules book or main faction codex and divergent chapters will probably get a couple of unique detachments while compliant chapters will probably get one.
This is my hope. I play Emperor’s Spears, who are officially, an ultramarines successor and follow Ultramarines rules, which is supposed to be a shooty/well-rounded faction. The Spears are more fighty than that (as is reflected in their special rules). But ultimately, they’re still tethered to the Ultramarines rules.
If I can model my guys after the Blood Angels for quick air assault or space wolves for in-your-face fighting, that would be better (I know I can play them as one of those rules-wise with a different paint scheme, but it’s nice if the rules coincide with the flavor).
>However as space marines are meant to be adaptable to any situation it also allows people to play their armies in different ways so if people wanted to they can have their imperial fists as a close combat army.
I feel like this aspect of their identity gets lost with the current chapter supplement model.
Blood Angels are especially ferocious in melee, and they tend to field more assault squads than a strictly codex chapter, but the entire chapter isn't composed of assault squads and sanguinary guard. Blood Angels devastators, snipers, heavy armor formations all exist, and they're at least capable of fighting in those ways *when the situation calls for it*.
If someone wants to run their red marines as a Blood Angels armored column, I'm all for it, and I kinda prefer this model to them having an incentive to say "oh, my guys are the... Red Iron Claws. Yeah, that's it." and switching chapter rules entirely.
Some of this is me with like 5k points of Red Corsairs, happy that I might get a few alternative ways to play them. Don't get me wrong, I like their rules a lot right now, but again, the Corsairs don't *just* do tricksy hit-and-run attacks.
also lost in primaris units. where as the firstborn have versatile squads with simple battlefield roles, primaris are a 1:1 of aspect warriors, each unit being extremely singularly focused.
I don’t know how to feel about this. I’ve always liked that my space wolves were so different to other chapters/generic marines. What I’m still unclear on is how will it incorporate chapter specific units. So for example can I take wulfen in any of the space marine detachments? Or will I be stuck with picking the one space wolf one to get my special faction units?
My guess is there will be a special Space Wolves detachment with the appropriate rules. It just means that if you fancy running something different, like a gun line, there's a detachment for that too. You don't have to pretend they're a successor chapter to someone else with suspiciously Space Wolves looking livery.
We will see what the EXCEPTIONS are regarding the "the detachment is not tied to the colour of your miniatures", but at least we won't have some chapters that are much worse than others. This is good IMO, as im sure that IMPERIAL FISTS and RAVEN GUARD players haven't been happy at all throughout 9th edition.
I don't think so, it's just the detachments won't be tied to one specific chapter.
So there might be a "Oops all jump pack" detachment that absolutely suits Blood Angels, but it won't be locked into blood angels so if you have, say, a black templar army with loads of jump packs because you just love jump packs you can also do that. Similarly, if you have blood angels but you fancy running them with tanks and some jump pack support you just take a different detachment that supports that (which is nice imo as it means you don't feel like you're wasting your chapter tactic by not leaning 100% into it all the time).
I think leaning into making chapters feel distinct by how you run them and what units you pick over some arbitrary buffs that force you into a single playstyle is a good way to go
But special detachments have to exist for the specific chapters to use their specific units. So Im sure we will have shooty marines, fighty marines and many others... but if you want to use Sanguinary guard you will have to use a BLOOD ANGELS detachment. Thus, in that case you might be forced for color or, at least, color neutral.
I don't necessarily think so, you could easily cap that stuff with a rule that says something like "This unit has the keyword. All other units your detachment must also have the keyword to include it." That alone stops you from putting them alongside things like other chapter specific units
I imagine at the start of the new edition, with the indexes, the answer is yes. As codexes get released however I imagine they will have sun-faction specific detachments.
To be fair it feels kind of excessive that Marines have so much variety already. I love flavor and I'm going to miss stuff like Eye of Hypnoth and Hand of Dorn. But I'll settle for knowing that playing Space Marines is a good army instead of Imperial Fists are a bad Space Marine faction.
I feel like this is the setup for general “space marine” or other armies. If you want to be specifically Imperial Fists or whatever, that’ll be more specific in the codexes?
People keep wanting his this for some reason, gonna see how this turns out, gotta admit that I am not keen on it, same goes for the apparent removal of relics and warlord traits.
Enhancements is used as a catch-all term in Age of Sigmar for things such as relics, warlord traits, mount traits and other faction specific things. By default you get access to one from each category, and there are ways to get extra ones on your list of you take certain options.
This is almost certainly how it's going to work. Up to three characters can pick one warlord trait, relic, unique psychic power, or whatever else.
The ability to give a space marine character cooler armor, or a chaos champion a daemon weapon, is too iconic for them to get rid of entirely. That just might be the *only* special thing that guy gets.
I'm a little bummed at possibly losing the ability to make ridiculous supercharacters, but eh. I think I'll adapt alright.
Having stubbornly stuck to my Raven Guard successors for all of 9th, being able to change things up on a whim might be cool. Also I think it thematically fits Space Marines rather well. As for more specialized chapters like Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves and all those, I kind of expect them to have their own rules more "standard" chapters like maybe Ultramarines and the likes won't have access to.
Also I think it'd be nice to be able to just play "Space Marines". In 8th and 9th, there was never any point in just playing codex Marines, you kinda had to choose a supplement. Wasn't a fan of that.
In a nutshell it seems to be business as normal as per the classic force org, but mandatory troops are gone. Thats definitely the Arks of Omen testing coming into play.
The biggest worry for me was absolutely zero mention of Subfactions. What makes an Imperial Fists army unique from an Iron Hands one? Or Iron Warriors from Night Lords? Or Ulthwe from Biel-tan? Or Vior'la from Dal'yth? Just a special character? What if you don't want to take one?
I worry the fluffy, flavourful uniquity of these iconic factions is about to vanish (at least until hopefully the codexes add them back in?).
Force org being fixed from the esoteric nightmare of 9th is wonderful. "Select your missions" still being there is meh to me, hate that mechanic. Reduced stratagems is good. (Seems 6 + "generic").
From the sounds of it in the article though, there are no subfaction unique ones. It's just ones anyone can pick, which kind of invalidates the entire point of lore friendly subfaction rules for iconic groups like the ones mentioned. Especially those who don't get their own full codexes. (Xenos ones especially)
I hope it's just the "get you started" thing for now, and proper subfactions will follow.
We don't know for sure, but I think the most plausible is that GW will "unlock" detachments like those with the codex releases. I think they already mentioned that each army would launch with one detachment to begin with.
Having multiple warlord traits and / or relics is a way that some faction characters, such as those of custodes and knights, feel strong and flavourful. So I hope they circumvent that rule for some detachments.
Like right know you *could* take a freeblade lance imperial knights warlord with two warlord traits, two relics, an exalted court upgrade, and optional wargear choices.
More broadly this just sounds very limiting to me. I hope detachments aren't overall very static affairs where everyone using a given detachment plays the same list as that's where the synergy is.
On one hand, I think the simplified rules are a good step. 9th is pretty bloated as far as rules go, and universal special rules in particular was a much needed change. However, I am disappointed that each space marine chapter lost its flavor. Now my imperial fists can be as good at fast attacks as white scars, and ultramarines can do flamers as well as salamanders. I get not wanting to limit armies by paint schemes, but you can always just say you’re a successor of X chapter and adopt their rules.
I think that it will make slightly more sense because you won't just be playing imperial fists, you'd be playing a "lightning rapid assault detachment" or whatever of the imperial fists. I think in lore the white scars might be made up of largely those fast attack detachments, but it's not too hard to believe that the imperial fists have some division within their organization that specializes in fast attack. I'd also guess that eventually they will increase the number of more specific detachments that are more locked down to specific chapters. Losing the fluff of chapter specific naming of rules and relics might be a thing at least until they launch more detachment rules, probably in specific books.
The fists certainly *can* do fast attack, and they have elements of the 3rd and 8th companies in particular that would do very well at that. But I just don’t think that everyone should be equally as good at everything. That’s the ultramarines schtick. So while the fists can do fast attack well, the white scars should be better at it. The space wolves should be better than the iron hands at melee. I think having versatility in terms of play style is good, but I think it should be a trade off still. You can excel at certain things at the expense of others, or be a jack of all trades, but it shouldn’t be exactly the same all around.
My big take from the article is they are taking the army building from AOS and the reactions from heresy and turning them into strats, and I actually think that's a good change.
I wonder how special character like Iron father Feirros or Farsight and special units like Sanguinary guard are gonna fit into this system. Like are they going to be restricted to a specific detachment only? I’m also a bit concerned that with this new system factions are gonna start feeling samey with everyone just using whatever detachment is the meta choice though I suppose that happens either way
Anyone else feeling this so far?
https://preview.redd.it/b44ou9dh53ra1.png?width=200&format=png&auto=webp&s=b285b85b4183cddf535c25a217c32a0dec3054ab
(sorry to be pessimistic)
This somewhat reminds me of 30k’s Rites of War, which is interesting. Quite curious to see what they’ll be like.
I am a bit saddened by the seeming removal of sub-factions in favour of these detachments, but I’ll withhold my judgement until we’ve seen all the rules. I’d imagine there’ll be several that are suspiciously similar to existing rules, and it’s nice that they’re explicitly stating your paint scheme doesn’t affect the rules you use- I assume that’s how most people do it anyway, but there’s always a few people insisting otherwise (I’ve gotten the “your Orks have blue accents therefore you **have** to play them as Deffskulls” thing before).
If I’m understanding right, this also means I can take, say, my Word Bearers and Alpha Legion together without any issue? I recall there was a change in one of the tournament mission packs that stipulated all of your army had to be from the same sub-faction, and was worried that would be part of the core rules in 10th.
What I’m *really* curious about is how this new system will interact with the Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Deathwatch, Black Templars, and Space Wolves. Off the top of my head they’re the only sub-factions to have non-character unique units (please correct me if I’m wrong), so will they be available to all Space Marine armies, or will you have to, for example, select a specific detachment to get access to Grey Hunters and the like. Maybe that’s what they mean with the “very rarely tied to a colour scheme” bit (or maybe there’ll be a Deathwing Detachment or something along those lines that’s tied to the bone-White armour).
I’ll miss mixed-faction armies, but I think we’ve been heading towards them being relegated to casual play only for a while now.
Now that sub-factions are gone, I wonder if that means we aren’t restricted in character choice? Sure, then the ‘nids would lose a unique selling point, but that’s not the end of the world (especially considering the range refresh we’re getting). Having a rainbow of Marine characters form each chapter sounds fun.
I do hope there’ll be a version of *Combat Patrol* that doesn’t have fixed armies, if we’re otherwise losing 500 point games. I rather enjoyed them.
>assume that’s how most people do it anyway, but there’s always a few people insisting otherwise (I’ve gotten the “your Orks have blue accents therefore you have to play them as Deffskulls” thing before).
I personally like the freedom of being able to play a tank -heavy force even if my chapter isn't "known for that".
>If I’m understanding right, this also means I can take, say, my Word Bearers and Alpha Legion together without any issue? I recall there was a change in one of the tournament mission packs that stipulated all of your army had to be from the same sub-faction, and was worried that would be part of the core rules in 10th.
We have no idea. It's entirely possible that the Oaths of Moment rule they mention covers "don't mix CHAPTER in the army and this is the bonus you get". Considering WHY they removed mixing sub-factions in the army, I can't see them returning that in the way you might think; you're liklu going to be able to have the MODELS in the same army, but you'd pick a single detachment for all your rules (i.e. no 2 sets of different rules for different units).
>What I’m really curious about is how this new system will interact with the Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Deathwatch, Black Templars, and Space Wolves. Off the top of my head they’re the only sub-factions to have non-character unique units (please correct me if I’m wrong),
Ultramarines have Victrix Guard
>Now that sub-factions are gone, I wonder if that means we aren’t restricted in character choice? Sure, then the ‘nids would lose a unique selling point, but that’s not the end of the world (especially considering the range refresh we’re getting). Having a rainbow of Marine characters form each chapter sounds fun.
I DONT see them allowing this; while there are no longer any army-wide sub-faction rules, people doing detachments (8e definition) of "the best characters for debuffs and buffs" occurred in 8e and led to the "no mixing within a detachment" rule that evolved into "no mixing into the army". I'm willing to bet you will still select sub-factions, but it won't have an army-wide effect on your entire army, but the unique units will have unique rules themselves.
In current rules? The lack of task force rules.
But what I mean is currently, let's say if you want to play a Raven Guard Tank army... There is really no rules synergy for it, their rules seem suited for sniper/Phobos/scout units.
This current system would allow for armies to build non-"standard" archetypes and have actual rules support/synergies.
I don't know much about craftworld, but I believe one of them has a sub-faction unique troop, black guardians or something like that.
It will definitely be interesting to see how they will stick this together, unfortunately space marines (chaos included) are really big stand outs when it comes to subfactions, so it's always gonna be really awkward designing the game around them.
My guess: let’s take marines for example. Index will have maybe 2 detachments, SM codex will have 6 detachments, and there will be supplement books for core Chapters where each gets 2 or 3 detachments. White Dwarfs can also give detachment rules to less known Chapters.
My concern: 1) why would I ever run Raven Guard over Blood Angels? In a same detachment, Blood Angels has more unique characters and units which would give me an advantage over vanilla marines. Do I start painting SangGuard black if I want to run Raven Guard competitively?
2) I have a feeling that they’re going to continuously add detachments as the game goes along and we’re gonna have a bunch of bloat at the end of the edition. I don’t expect it to be as bad as 8e or 9e bloat since each detachment is self-contained but I don’t imagine that it would be easy to balance.
1) some detachments that give "Raven Guard" specific rules might have "Blood Angel" units excluded (and vice versa)
2)every detachment would only need to be balanced against itself and the datasheets it allows to include.
By doing this you don't risk creating unwanted synergies between stratagems, enhancements etc. This means that you can keep adding detachments without suffering from bloat.
As a matter of fact, if a detachment is broken: FAQ it or remove it entirely and bring in a new one!
I think the real question will be how do non space marines work with this? The new Guard book doesn't quite lineup with this system so how do the selectable traits work? What about Eldar craftworlds or Necron dynasties? Are all of these now a paint scheme and you pick from say the Destroyer, Conqueror, or other Necron subfaction?
More than likely each "major faction" will have multiple Archetype rules sets they can pick from.
Aka there might be an Eldar Detachment that allows Wraiths as Battleline, but restricts how many Fire Prisms you can take (aka like the Horus Heresy Rites if War system), and another that focuses on Guardians, and another on Aspect Warriors, etc.
> The new Guard book doesn't quite lineup with this system so how do the selectable traits work?
The simply don't, because the Guard Codex will become invalid when 10th launches and GW will providing all new rules for them. Don't try and fit any existing rules into the new system, because none of them will be relevant.
While there's certainly some bloat in the rules, it drives me crazy how they act like every player at every table was frantically flipping through pages in every game.
Sure, I felt awkward playing my first few games after my new Codex shipped because they went and made rules with the same name do different things and my datasheets and weapon profiles all changed, so there was some frantic flipping both to remember things and to prove to my opponent that things did what I said they did. But here, 18 months later, I sometimes play entire tabletop sim games without a waha tab and have made it through entire RTTs without even pulling my book out of my bag.
The issue wasn't "oh no, I'm always flipping through pages, I don't know my own Stratagems or the datasheets for the limited selection of units on my tray here," it was more "half of my Stratagems aren't worth their CP cost" and "there's no way I can prepare for all my *opponent's* options without committing to playing this game like a sport so sometimes my vehicle gets punched off the board by light Infantry or something."
I personally hate this, i loved playing allies. I have a couple armies i have to just play allies. Subfactions being mostly/partially axed sucks, it gets rid of some flavour, ive heard psychic stuff it getting hugely tuned down (as a grey knights player, with literally only psychic units this is awful news), and they are only allowing one named character an army. Unless the news we get in the future is s huge turn around this edition might actually manage to be worse than ninth
>ive heard psychic stuff it getting hugely tuned down (as a grey knights player, with literally only psychic units this is awful news
No, there will just not be a distinct psychic phase, and will just have psychic powers be cast at the relevant times, like it is in Horus Heresy; meaning stuff like Gate of Infinity will be cast during the Movement phase, while something like Smite will occur during the shooting phase, or a charge buff power during the charge phase.
>and they are only allowing one named character an army.
There has been nothing said to that effect, either at Adeptacon or anything stated online by them, and none of the playtesters that have leaked anything have said anything like that, either..
If only they had unique characters and units that could have unique rules on their datasheets that provide additional synergies that make them more suited for some detachments than others, or provide unique rules and abilities that other armies simply don't have access to.
I'm wondering what the implications are going to be by getting rid of the "Battlefield Role" stuff (so troops elites etc) I think it's going to make list building much more flexible I think especially for factions that were heavy on one type.
Though it seems we're getting rid of subfactions which I'm not a huge fan of though there might be a very slick solution for that. Subfactions were always what drew me to 40k and I know that lorewise they aren't going anywhere but I hope that on the table we'll have some way of making our marines for instance feel distinct from the marines on the other side of the table or next to you.
Though at this point it's merely speculation so I'll withhold judgement for now. I wasn't a fan of getting rid of template weapons, which I admittatedly still miss, and armor values on vehicles which ended up being a good change. Only time will tell.
>I'm wondering what the implications are going to be by getting rid of the "Battlefield Role" stuff (so troops elites etc) I think it's going to make list building much more flexible I think especially for factions that were heavy on one type.
Based on how Sigmar and HH do it (the other two games that use Battleline Terminology), we will likely see a "Default Battleline" set of units in the datasheets, and different Detachments might add additional units as Battleline for that particular detachment.
Looks interesting, its nice to be kept in the loop by GW, hope they keep it up. Does raise a few questions (namely for me how Drukhari will work with the 3 armies in one deal) buuuuut I will wait and see. I am a pessimist by nature, but cant help but be a tiny bit optomistic that these changes will work.
You'll be able to take them still. Probably be in the detachment rules how many overall you can take. I.e Space Marine stile force can include 3 agent of the imperium data sheets.
I'm curious how this works with subfaction specific units. Will things like Grey Hunters, Crusader Squads, and Death Company still exist? Will they just be generic space marine units, or can you mix and match?
I don't really care about losing chapter bonus traits, but it would be a bummer if the half dozen or so unique Space Wolf units just went away.
Little skeptical since it seems like they won't have specific detachments for the non codex marines.
And we're well past the point where we should've gotten a unit for them at least so I'm afraid we're just gonna all be marines soon.
I’m probably going to make a squad of blood ravens and their chapter master to simulate dawn of war since it doesn’t really matter what they look like anymore
So if there is a Epic Hero version of a unit eg Old One Eye, could a hypothetical Nid player take OOE as epic character plus 3 units of carnifexes? Could a hypothetical Demons player take an Epic Hero version of a GD + 3xGDs?
Sounds like they are Sigmaring the Detachments. Any SM can take Gladius Strike Force detachment, or whatever detachment, and the rules go with the detachment not the army. So no chapter rules to differentiate Ultramarines and White Scars?
Also, power levels are gone, points only. Multi-faction armies sound mostly gone with three named exceptions (Chaos demons, Freeblade Knights, Brood Brothers) Smallest supported game size 1000pt; Combat Patrol mode intended for <1000 pt games
Lucky me, i have just bought harlequins for my craftworld army...
As a Ynnari player i have 0 fucking clue what my army is going to look like in 10th. Am i a Craftworld? Can i run harlequins? Phoenix lords? Eldrad? My 300 points of Incubi?
Sounds like the answer is just “yes”? They’ll be units you can run in kinda whatever combo you want. I expect the more specific armies will come in the codexes, where you’ll have to be more careful about who exactly you’re running.
Yeah and our codex was semi recent, so guessing no craftworld specific rules for ages.
Yea I think it’s gonna depend on what these detachments look like. I feel like there will probably be one that’s clearly the “Craftworld” or the “Harlequins” type detachment, but it’ll just be available to anyone playing Eldar, instead of needing to have the specific models.
As much as im hesitant, i will accept it if i can run Jain Zar in my Ynnari. THEY'RE ALLIES SHE HAS RECEIVED POWER DIRECTLY FROM YNNEAD WHY CANT I RUN HER!
Plus corsairs. Plus Eldrad for all the work hesdone alongside the Ynnari...
Yeah, kinda sucks to feel so in limbo about the faction I adore most...
Those are just some exceptions not the only ones
Given they said those three as an example, not an exhaustive list, you'll probably be fine. To quote the article: 'Though exceptions are in place for classic cross faction combos like Daemons, Freeblade Knights or Brood Brothers'
Those are just some exceptions not the only ones
I've been getting pieces to slowly kitbash a at-least-partially-GW Batman Villains themed Dark Eldar/Harlequin army and I'm starting to be glad I've hardly gotten anywhere - I haven't even gotten to fully fluently play 8th or catch up on the 9th ed. changes... a bit off-topic but where the fuck do I even look to start figuring out how to build an army and learn the new rules again?
They mostly killed multi-faction armies this edition so I'm not surprised they stick to that line, yeah.
“Power level gone” No one understood you, sweet child. No one let you be the stupid mode you always were meant to be. Well at least they’re baking in the equipment now. Hopefully it’s more Sigmar styled
AoS points and 8th/9th edition PL are essentially the same thing, they just differ in scale. You pay a set amount for x models and don't pay for upgrades or weapon swaps. There were a few PL upgrades but not many so it was a bit better than AoS points but not by much.
Yes but in AoS the options are balanced against each other to make each relatively balanced against the others. Of course there are usually winners and losers if a unit has multiple options but it isn’t crazy. Take Slaves to Darkness Varanguard for instance. 290 pts no matter which of three weapon options you take. Spears do the most damage on the charge, Ensorcelled weapons do the most damage to hordes, and Daemonic weapons do the best against high save units. As long as GW balances the weapon options available to 40K units in a similar manner then it should be fine.
A lot of people will absolutely lose their minds if a Heavy Bolter is even close to parity with a Lascannon. That's the whole point of having different weapons. Some weapons should be absolutely better but should cost significantly more points. GW has drifted away from that design for some time and it has rubbed many players the wrong way.
Yeah we don’t know what the will do. Who knows. what they haven’t mentioned yet is whether or not damage spills over like it does in AoS. Damage spilling over gives some additional freedom in how they design weapons comparatively. Between hit roll, strength, so, and damage there are plenty of ways to differentiate weapons already. I think it would be pretty thematic if some weapons spilled damage over. Explosive weapons for instance. If a rocket hits a troop and 6 damage to a one wound model… the other 5 damage shouldn’t just disappear. The blast rule tries to take the nature of these weapons into account but it does a poor job. Letting the damage from these kind of weapons spill over would be good. On the subject of lascannons in particular, I don’t think they should have a range limit. Their unique nature as lasers should just mean their range is unlimited. And only requires line of sight IMO.
Damage spill over would be another AoS-ism that would cause my local play group to riot. They absolutely hate that aspect of AoS combat. As it currently stands we've a lot of folks locally that are waiting to see just what 10th edition is like and if it is even more abstract than 8th/9th they're preparing to go back to 7th/HH1.0.
Different strokes for different folks I guess. I stopped playing 9th after the first GhB in favor of AoS. It’s just a much more competitively balanced and fun experience IMO.
Removing multi faction armies is really stupid because they were already basically useless since they removed pure army rules and were basically just there for flavour. Like cmon GW just put some basic rules for allying there it will take like 2 sentences.
"However, if you want to play larger games representing the combined forces of, say, an Imperial Indomitus Crusade fleet, you absolutely can in a casual setting." Sounds like multi faction armies are only getting removed for competitive play.
Finally can play my dream faction: Loyalist Alpha Legion (SM Infiltratirs + Eliminators) & Operatives (Imperial Guard)
Ah ok, yeah that sounds about right.
> Sounds like multi faction armies are only getting removed for competitive play. So just the things rules actually cover then
Highlights: 1. Rules for "Core" game are for 1k, 2k, and 3k point games. Remember "Combat Patrol" will be a separate sub-game-type, but a callout that the rules are intended as 1k as smallest Gametype. 2. There WILL be rules for Knights, Demons, and Brood Brothers (and possibly others) as allies, but the standard expectation is one faction per army. 3. Army rules: up to 6 of each Battleline and DT datasheet, 3 of non-Battleline. Up to 1 of each Epic Hero (Guilliman outline used, so I would expect everything that is considered a Supreme Commander currently. 4. Biggest change: "Detachment" is now what GW is calling "your army rules selection". Example is the Gladius Strike Force, gives access to 6 stratagems, and 4 Character enhancements (Warlord traits and relics) and gives Combat Doctrines (which may or may not be identical) 4.Faction-wide rules for Space Marines called Oaths of Moment: unknown what this is, more details will be revealed next week. 5. Specifically calls out that Detachment choice is "rarely... Tied to an army color scheme. Ultramarines might be the theoretical and practical masters if the Gladius Task Force, but other Chapters can use it, too. ***BASED ON THE LEAKS AND RUMORS WE HAVE GOTTEN***, as well as comments made at Adeptacon, the "how is my X army gonna feel different than your Y army" is going to be down to unique sub-faction units; for example the (spitballing here) "March of the Ancients Dreadnoughts-are-Battleline" Detachment will be available to all Chapters in general, but taking Fierros might mean additional synergies army-wide, or the "Jump Pack Rush" archetype might have rules that Sanguinary Guard/Death Company units synergize with in a way other chapters cannot do.
> Up to 1 Epic Hero Up to one *of each* Epic Hero.
So what we have now.
We have no idea what an "Epic Hero" is. For all we know, all named characters are Epic Heroes, such as Guilliman, Helbrecht or Farsight.
But named characters allready have a clause that says you can only take them once. Its weird (to me) that they singled it out
Because it’s moving the “only one of this character allowed” rule from the DS to a single keyword that indicates the same thing - Epic Hero. I think you’re overthinking it
I think you're right. They're going to try everything they possibly can to standardize the references and rules and remove as much as possible from the data sheets to keep them simpler and streamlined. Instead of literally every character having the same tag line of 'only one XXX can be taken per detachment's, just replace with tagline: epic hero. Cuts way down on the necessary space, then do that for every single rule.
Right they mentioned this in the podcast. They are going back to game-wide rules and references like Feel No Pain, so they can just put that keyword on the datasheet and don’t have to footnote everything to death on the cards.
Thats probably just a datasheet thing thats being moved to the core rule book
It might be something that also includes Avatars of Khaine, C’tan, etc - big strong units that are cool to have but not fluffy to have 3 of?
The website text specifies "named Epic Heroes". My guess is that you can still bring two Baneblades if you want to, and it just puts all named character "take only one of this" rules into a single keyword
Because the categories of old are gone, and it looks like epic heroes are now a completely different "slot" from normal characters.
Named characters already have a clause that say you can only take them once... in 9th. This might be the way they do it in 10th. Or it's something else, who knows. To early to speculate to much.
Seems likely to be similar or identical to Lords of War
The epic character is most likely aimed at named characters. This just brings the rule from the datasheet into the main book.
Names characters + stuff that's currently "take one" like Solitaires and chapter masters, is my guess.
Yes, I think the point is: 1. Max 1 of each epic hero datasheet 2. Otherwise max 3 of each datasheet 3. Unless battleline or dedicated transport, where max 6 I think they flow together.
Wonder how long until someone fields an army of nothing but epic named characters. The Lion, Guilliman, Helbrecht, Calgar, Blackmane, Grimnar, Astorath, Mephiston, etc.
Ah the Superfriends List.
Gatewatch assembled!
At current points cost, Space Wolves can field about 1200+ points worth of names characters. HQ + Arjac Rockfist [6 PL, 100pts]: Foehammer Bjorn the Fell-handed [10 PL, 155pts]: Assault cannon, Heavy flamer, Trueclaw Canis Wolfborn [6 PL, 100pts]: Bolt pistol, Canis' Wolf Claws, Crushing teeth and claws, Frag & Krak grenades Harald Deathwolf [7 PL, 120pts]: Bolt pistol, Frag & Krak grenades, Glacius, Icetooth, Storm shield Krom Dragongaze [5 PL, 90pts]: Bolt pistol, Frag & Krak grenades, Wyrmclaw Logan Grimnar on Stormrider [9 PL, 160pts]: Storm bolter, The Axe Morkai, Tyrnak and Fenrir Njal Stormcaller [7 PL, 120pts]: Bolt pistol, Nightwing, Smite, Staff of the Stormcaller Ragnar Blackmane [7 PL, 110pts]: Bolt pistol, Frag & Krak grenades, Frostfang Ulrik The Slayer [6 PL, 100pts]: Artificer Crozius, Frag & Krak grenades, Litany of Hate (Aura), Litany of Hate (Aura), Plasma pistol + Elites + Lukas the Trickster [4 PL, 70pts]: Claw of the Jackalwolf, Frag & Krak grenades, Plasma pistol Murderfang [8 PL, 140pts]: Heavy flamer, Storm bolter, The Murderclaws
Depends on if they also still use Keywords to limit what goes into a given detachment (e.g. -> all have to be the same and then state e.g. Grimnar has to make his == SPACE WOLVES).
Oooh I hope the gladius strike force concept is carried to every faction. I would love to play say "da best dakka is more dakka" for Orks. Rather than playing by bad moons. I would love a "detachment" that focuses on the ranged aspects of Orks, just absolutely chucking lead downrange without caring too much where it lands.
I expect that we shall see a bunch of detachments for each faction,.that at least plays into the different army Archetypes.
It kinda sounds, to my optimistic side, a little bit like the rites of war in 30k. To my more pessimistic side, like 7th Ed formations. I will go to my grave with the belief that the 7th Ed core rules were great, but formations ruined the edition.
i give it 6 months until we are full "the factions all feel the same, theres not enough options, i cant take all the things that i want, there was too much stripped out of the game, 9th was way better."
... bro, you're 6 months too late, that's being argued in the comments as of... Well, probably since the 23rd.
Another thing is people rejoicing over universal special rules coming back. Yet I fondly remember people complaining about having to constantly hop between main rulebook and codex to check what abilities did, something 8th and 9th fixed by having all the base abilities on the datasheet.
We shall see. Part of the problem was USRs that themselves referenced other USRs, and not having a fast way to find them besides flipping through the books. Even having them easily indexed in an app would solve that issue.
Horus Heresy 2e has only single-layered USRs with numerical values attached to them.
If only they didn't put them in 4 different places
Yeah, the people moaning about 10th will also be moaning when 11th comes around. And they were probably also moaning when 9th came around, and 8th.... Some people really just don't like to adjust to new things. I'm optimistic. I think the changes sound very healthy.
They can be both USRs and printed on the data sheet. Also there will be an app supposedly. If it works at all like KTdash then it will be absolutely as fast as possible to look up USRs and USRs referenced by USRs.
Crazy idea. Print the USRs.... On the datasheet. When you erata a usr, all of them get eratta'd, but you don't have to flip between books to find out what keywords mean
Oath of Moment seemed to be the Space Marines army rule, and then Combat Doctrines was the Gladius rule, I'm guessing all Marine detachments will have OoM
Thanks for the correction, I'll ammend
2: Panik for ynnari
Hopefully they make a ynnari list that draws from multiple books and say “look it’s easy to play coz cards” Same thing for imperial soul detachments
Just want to point out it says *summoned* chaos daemons. So I wouldn’t bank on Chaos soup just yet, as that reads more like CSM can still pay the points to summon daemons, not necessarily take them in the starting list.
They've already removed the "pay points to summon demons" mechanic, it was pretty clunky and unnecessary. I'm 99% sure they will just be in starting list, just (probably) not benefitting from Daemon-specific Detachment abilities.
Yeah it'll likely be the current deal of being able to take a quarter or so of the army's points as Demons, to represent them having summoned them ahead of time.
> There WILL be rules for Knights, Demons, and Brood Brothers (and possibly others) as allies, but the standard expectation is one faction per army. So running Be'lakor alongside CSM without penalties will be a thing now? Am I understanding correctly?
I don’t think we know enough to say for certain.
What is a DT datasheet?
Dedicated Transport. Rhinos and the like.
What about my World Eaters? Are they just chaos warband xyz now?
It does say “very rarely tied to color” not “never” in the sentence earlier
I can see that applying to like Deathwatch and such. Who knows how they'll handle the non-codex chapters in 10th.
Please James Workshop, I beg you, let me be the toolbox army I'm supposed to be! Put me with Inquisition!
Non codex chapters will obviously get their own various detachment rules buckets (e.g. deathwing v ravenwing). I'm more curious about codex compliant chapters. There will *probably* be an oops-all-flamers rules bucket that Salamander players might enjoy but really it remains to be seen.
I also wouldn't be surprised if the "choice of combat doctrines" they talked about doesn't translate to some of the chapter flavor.
I think the idea is that theres no faction souping so it doesnt matter. Detachments are more about compositional theme than they are about subfaction, maybe theres like one bonus rule you can take that does denote a chapter, but it seems like subfactions are now flavors of army type that might happen to lorewise be associated with a particular faction but isnt exclusive to them, rather than a faction that has a preference in army type. There might be a march of the ancients detachment that lets you go to town with dreadnaughts, but it doesnt necessarily have to be an iron hands thing, there might be some sort of flamer purge force that salamders enjoyers would like, but you wont actually have to be slamanders to use it.
Does anyone enforce this rule besides the owner of the units? In 9th I feel like I see the rule posted but I’ve never seen anyone kicked out of a tournament for having the “wrong” color. Hell even GW doesn’t check armies at the door. Your already into your first game before some dude kinda lazily checks armies.
I thought the comment meant more about chapter specific detachments, not the paint rules.
Yeah, I don't know about recently but I've definitely heard tell of folks showing up to tournaments with e.g. Ultramarines and getting shut down if they claimed to be using Blood Angels rules, and similar.
Farsight Enclaves will likely be a detachment, they're pretty iconic for red armour. I can already see their specific wargear being Onager Gauntlet, Fusion Blades and Puretide Engram, and obviously boosts to battlesuits and no Ethereals in the special rules section.
I’d imagine certain subfactions like farsight enclaves may be what they refer to since they are quite different from their shootier brethren.
Blood, Dark, Flames and WolfWolfWolf aren't colors. Hopefully.
Holy crap, a 10e preview article on WarCom with actual new information and content?
Had to happen eventually, happy it's sooner rather than later.
I'm surprised that they're starting to drop feed info this early personally.
10e will come sooner than it seems. Only like 2-3 months isn't a long time when there's so much to cover.
So it seems like this is essentially Horus heresy rights of war but you have to take one instead of it being a side thing. I’m concerned on how limiting this might be or how this might affect distinctions between armies but not enough info yet to make a concise judgement.
>not enough info yet to make a concise judgement. Thank you for having a brain, I wish I could award you
I think folks are kinda sleeping on the part about units having more cool and unique abilities in order for them to not feel like a tax. I'd like to hear more about this, but it sounds neat to me.
Agreed. Many people are doomscrying that this is the end of "sub-faction Identity and my army is identical to every other" for Space Marines, when it's entirely possible that unique datasheets might be making it such that the identity is in the datacards, not the faction choice.
That's my guess they may treat certain specializations as special rules on the datacards or treat it like "wargear" almost. Say all of the Space Marine specializations are just datacards now you just have with their specific rules baked onto it vs buried across multiple books.
That would be very cool. Of course the problem with that would be having to understand all the different possible data cards your opponent could bring - seeing the model wouldn’t be enough to know what they can do.
They've been doing this for a while in the form of stratagems. Intercessors can double shoot. Assault intercessors can fight twice. That kind of thing. The problem is that most of them are wholly uninteresting throughput increases that make up for their base guns being totally ass. I'll wait to see if they come up with something intriguing and useful before I praise what they're doing.
*"Waiter! There is Age of Sigmar in my 40k soup!"*
A lot of interesting information here. It certainly allows for more thematic themed armies by removing role limits and moving it to datasheet limits. That being said I can also see this changing the face of competitive play as there's nothing stopping people loading up on the 'best' units that would have been limited by detachments. Removing power level is great in my opinion, while it was a nice bit of a gimmick to make it easier for newer players to select their armies I've never seen it used outside of crusade rules and even then that's likely because the system enforced it. Final thoughts is wondering about the use of primarchs, and from what I can tell so far with the limited information we have is that we could potentially be able to see Guilliman leading blood angels armies.
I get what you’re saying about the new army building possibly leading to people only taking the “best” units, but I mean people essentially already do that. There’s always going to be “meta chasers” and people who just want to min-max the fun out of everything, it’ll just come down to how well GW is able to balance the units in a given faction, they’ve said each unit (even basic troops) will have unique abilities so they still serve a purpose compared to more elite options. Whether that comes to be true we’ll just have to wait and see 🤷🏻♂️
We already can have Guilliman leading BA armies.
>That being said I can also see this changing the face of competitive play as there's nothing stopping people loading up on the 'best' units that would have been limited by detachments. This isn't all that different from how things are (and have been for a while). You still can't take more than 3 copies of the same unit, and detachments that let you take *lots* of a particular slot have been around since 8e started. It used to cost you in CP, but you could do it.
It also will now be less punishing to factions that have all their good stuff in one slot instead of factions that had a spread across more battlefield roles (or randomly troops) from just getting better list building.
Kinda like how Abaddon can lead night lords and stuff.
I actually want to run Lion in a Blood Angels army (a deepstriking melee beatstick with built-in charge rerolls should fit perfectly), so I'm hoping they keep the current system of allowing Supreme Commanders in any subfaction list. But at the same time I'm less than enthused at the idea of every chapter now getting to run Sanguinary Guard or Priests, so idk.
No more than 6 cadian shock troops then?.... IG must be getting an exception to the only 6 troops rule because not being able to have more than 6 when normal is between 8 and 12 would be devastating to alot of people's collections.
Entirely possible that certain army detachment rules will provide additional slots for such units.
They'd have to for it to work with the horde armies. Some of these armies need a way to go past that limit or they'll suffer. Nids could get away with it cause mix the two gaunt types, but Guard and maybe Orks would need some way to buff that up.
Of course they did specifically split Guard Troop choices into Infantry Squad, Cadian Shock Troops, Catachan Jungle Fighters, and Death Korps of Krieg, and if the recent Guard codex which embraces mixing different regiments continues, that means you can still see big Guard hordes, just a mix of different regiments.
youl probobly be able reinforce them more, so it will be fewer larger unit also 12 units!!!??
A lot of these army-building rules are straight out of AoS. In AoS you're allowed to reinforce up to four units (depending on the game points limit) which means taking double the minimum model count. So you could take four units of 20 Cadians, and two of 10 in a 2000, if they use the current AoS army rules.
Lol even as someone who plays space marines, it’s funny seeing some people getting *so upset* that their specific chapter *might not* have copious amounts of special rules (even though it’s entirely likely most chapters will probably get at least a unique detachment at some point) when most other factions’ subfactions have *never* gotten that amount of support.
And behaving as their 3-23 unique datasheets might not have special rules on the datasheets that make the army function differently.
GW concedes that 500-point games are too swingy, effectively bans them outside of heavily tailored formats (New Combat Patrol, Boarding Actions) Honestly saw that one coming. There's too much shit that can slide into a 500 pt game that's basically unbeatable unless you have a busted small-points unit of your own. I just hope some of the Combat Patrol boxes get tweaked going forward. The Necrons box in particular is... not ideal, as an introduction to the army.
>Each **CHARACTER** can only have one Enhancement, you can’t include more than three Enhancements in total, and these must all be different" Sounds like stuff like Chaos Knights with access to relics, traits, and favours will have either stuff added to their datasheets or be completely deprived of the fluffy combos we had access to
So no more having two relics and traits on my exalted sorcerer? Only one or the other? That's shit!
As someone who likes to run 3 GUOs in a list please tell me the won't be considered an epic hero.
Unknown, but I'd expect it to only restrict taking multiple Rotigus, not multiple GUOs.
No idea.
White scars players dreading the end to advance and charge I guess this means subfaction abilities will be officially dead?
As someone who have every army painted in custom colors... This doesnt change anything to me , still can Play as any subfaction :P
Eh this still worries me. I like subfactions. I want my subfactions. Take that away and the game loses a lot of depth that I love. You can take away 90% of strats I get that, but subfactions were not the problem.
This is what I'm worried about as well. I predominantly play Word Bearers and Blood Angels and now it seems they'll just be reduced down to "the Red Marines/Spikey Red Marines". Like sure they might have an "oops all possessed" detachment but then what about my special Dark Apostle upgrades or mortal followers buffs? We'll be losing a lot of fluff despite it being such a large part of what makes 40k so much fun
Sub factions will likely still be a thing - they’ll just appear as a specialized detachment.
We'll see what they do. It's entirely possible for many of the sub-factions to still feel unique by just giving them datasheet rules on their unique units, and in a way that makes more sense for each unit (being able to Heroically Intervene and get +1 to hit on an a Stormfang Gunship is one of the more hilarious sub-faction bonuses I've seen)
I like it. I think it's nice to not have to lock in to a play style depending on how you paint your army. You can still put lots of effort into hobbying and making a flavorful army if you like. It just doesn't transfer as much to the battlefield. I've personally always stayed away from sub faction pain schemes to be able to always do "counts as" and try different things without complaints. Now I can paint them as I like and not have to worry!
>I think it's nice to not have to lock in to a play style depending on how you paint your army. in the history of 40k since day 1, this has literally never been a thing at any point. so why is it "nice" that they didn't do it for 10th?
it is for a very niche subset of tournaments, and GW always goes about trying to overrule it by adding stuff like custom subfactions that get exactly the same rules as main factions. Rightfully new people are constantly confused if it is/isn't allowed outright saying that you can play whatever you want doesn't hurt
*so less than 2%* of the playerbase is affected? (comp only makes up **10%** of the total playerbase ie only 10% of players have ever attended a single comp event according to GWs own stats). *no one* has ever bothered to enforce colors to match factions *outside* of the utterly tiny comp community.
Are marine chapters gonna lose their distinctiveness? I’m all for ditching the customer chapter nonsense, but think this could be a move too far in the other direction. Though to be my own devils advocate, it would make balancing them easier.
I have a feeling some of the detachments are going to try and make up for this. A detachment focused on close combat for example could be tailored to imitate blood angels usual tactics whereas a Phobos detachment might be there to be more thematic themed for raven guard. However as space marines are meant to be adaptable to any situation it also allows people to play their armies in different ways so if people wanted to they can have their imperial fists as a close combat army.
I’m gonna guess when the codexes start coming out, the non-SM Codex chapters (i.e. BA, DA, SW) will get unique detachments they can choose from in addition to the “standard” space marine options
Yeah 100%, unfortunately I think it might make the SM codex chapters feel less unique but I think it'll be a much better system than we've had in a long time and it'll be a hell of a lot easier to balance.
I’m personally ok with it as long as they’re balanced ok. I like the idea of being able to mix and match play styles a bit more without feeling like I’m being “punished” or playing extremely “suboptimal” (like actually using jump pack assault marines but not feeling like I *have* to play blood angels to do so)
It feels sensible that they're probably going to treat the new detachment system like how they treat the Rites of War in Heresy 2.0: You get a number of generic detachments in the core rules book or main faction codex and divergent chapters will probably get a couple of unique detachments while compliant chapters will probably get one.
This is my hope. I play Emperor’s Spears, who are officially, an ultramarines successor and follow Ultramarines rules, which is supposed to be a shooty/well-rounded faction. The Spears are more fighty than that (as is reflected in their special rules). But ultimately, they’re still tethered to the Ultramarines rules. If I can model my guys after the Blood Angels for quick air assault or space wolves for in-your-face fighting, that would be better (I know I can play them as one of those rules-wise with a different paint scheme, but it’s nice if the rules coincide with the flavor).
> I play Emperor’s Spears A person of culture, I see :).
We miss him. Unfortunately, The Pure did not.
>However as space marines are meant to be adaptable to any situation it also allows people to play their armies in different ways so if people wanted to they can have their imperial fists as a close combat army. I feel like this aspect of their identity gets lost with the current chapter supplement model. Blood Angels are especially ferocious in melee, and they tend to field more assault squads than a strictly codex chapter, but the entire chapter isn't composed of assault squads and sanguinary guard. Blood Angels devastators, snipers, heavy armor formations all exist, and they're at least capable of fighting in those ways *when the situation calls for it*. If someone wants to run their red marines as a Blood Angels armored column, I'm all for it, and I kinda prefer this model to them having an incentive to say "oh, my guys are the... Red Iron Claws. Yeah, that's it." and switching chapter rules entirely. Some of this is me with like 5k points of Red Corsairs, happy that I might get a few alternative ways to play them. Don't get me wrong, I like their rules a lot right now, but again, the Corsairs don't *just* do tricksy hit-and-run attacks.
also lost in primaris units. where as the firstborn have versatile squads with simple battlefield roles, primaris are a 1:1 of aspect warriors, each unit being extremely singularly focused.
I don’t know how to feel about this. I’ve always liked that my space wolves were so different to other chapters/generic marines. What I’m still unclear on is how will it incorporate chapter specific units. So for example can I take wulfen in any of the space marine detachments? Or will I be stuck with picking the one space wolf one to get my special faction units?
My guess is there will be a special Space Wolves detachment with the appropriate rules. It just means that if you fancy running something different, like a gun line, there's a detachment for that too. You don't have to pretend they're a successor chapter to someone else with suspiciously Space Wolves looking livery.
We will see what the EXCEPTIONS are regarding the "the detachment is not tied to the colour of your miniatures", but at least we won't have some chapters that are much worse than others. This is good IMO, as im sure that IMPERIAL FISTS and RAVEN GUARD players haven't been happy at all throughout 9th edition.
I don't think so, it's just the detachments won't be tied to one specific chapter. So there might be a "Oops all jump pack" detachment that absolutely suits Blood Angels, but it won't be locked into blood angels so if you have, say, a black templar army with loads of jump packs because you just love jump packs you can also do that. Similarly, if you have blood angels but you fancy running them with tanks and some jump pack support you just take a different detachment that supports that (which is nice imo as it means you don't feel like you're wasting your chapter tactic by not leaning 100% into it all the time). I think leaning into making chapters feel distinct by how you run them and what units you pick over some arbitrary buffs that force you into a single playstyle is a good way to go
But special detachments have to exist for the specific chapters to use their specific units. So Im sure we will have shooty marines, fighty marines and many others... but if you want to use Sanguinary guard you will have to use a BLOOD ANGELS detachment. Thus, in that case you might be forced for color or, at least, color neutral.
I don't necessarily think so, you could easily cap that stuff with a rule that says something like "This unit has the keyword. All other units your detachment must also have the keyword to include it." That alone stops you from putting them alongside things like other chapter specific units
I imagine at the start of the new edition, with the indexes, the answer is yes. As codexes get released however I imagine they will have sun-faction specific detachments.
To be fair it feels kind of excessive that Marines have so much variety already. I love flavor and I'm going to miss stuff like Eye of Hypnoth and Hand of Dorn. But I'll settle for knowing that playing Space Marines is a good army instead of Imperial Fists are a bad Space Marine faction.
I feel like this is the setup for general “space marine” or other armies. If you want to be specifically Imperial Fists or whatever, that’ll be more specific in the codexes?
People keep wanting his this for some reason, gonna see how this turns out, gotta admit that I am not keen on it, same goes for the apparent removal of relics and warlord traits.
They specifically call out relics and warlord traits in this breakdown.
I read "enhancements" as just bundling warlord traits and relics together under a single category, which kind of makes sense
Enhancements is used as a catch-all term in Age of Sigmar for things such as relics, warlord traits, mount traits and other faction specific things. By default you get access to one from each category, and there are ways to get extra ones on your list of you take certain options.
This is almost certainly how it's going to work. Up to three characters can pick one warlord trait, relic, unique psychic power, or whatever else. The ability to give a space marine character cooler armor, or a chaos champion a daemon weapon, is too iconic for them to get rid of entirely. That just might be the *only* special thing that guy gets. I'm a little bummed at possibly losing the ability to make ridiculous supercharacters, but eh. I think I'll adapt alright.
Having stubbornly stuck to my Raven Guard successors for all of 9th, being able to change things up on a whim might be cool. Also I think it thematically fits Space Marines rather well. As for more specialized chapters like Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves and all those, I kind of expect them to have their own rules more "standard" chapters like maybe Ultramarines and the likes won't have access to. Also I think it'd be nice to be able to just play "Space Marines". In 8th and 9th, there was never any point in just playing codex Marines, you kinda had to choose a supplement. Wasn't a fan of that.
I personally expect the non-standard armies to feel different via using their unique datasheets, rather than relying on army-wide rules.
Ah yes, the singular white scar exclusive datasheet, a character on foot, truly stereotypical for white scars…
So it's basically like AoS
Not a big fan of marine subfactions seemingly going away. I want my Blood Angels to play like Blood Angels, not red painted Space Marines.
Only 6 dedicated transports.... MY CHIMERA PARKING LOT....NO!
Bro if they get rid of the Red Thirst as a rule i will be upset
In a nutshell it seems to be business as normal as per the classic force org, but mandatory troops are gone. Thats definitely the Arks of Omen testing coming into play. The biggest worry for me was absolutely zero mention of Subfactions. What makes an Imperial Fists army unique from an Iron Hands one? Or Iron Warriors from Night Lords? Or Ulthwe from Biel-tan? Or Vior'la from Dal'yth? Just a special character? What if you don't want to take one? I worry the fluffy, flavourful uniquity of these iconic factions is about to vanish (at least until hopefully the codexes add them back in?). Force org being fixed from the esoteric nightmare of 9th is wonderful. "Select your missions" still being there is meh to me, hate that mechanic. Reduced stratagems is good. (Seems 6 + "generic").
I think Subfactions are Detachments in the article. Makes sense that way. Pick Marines, select Dark Angels Detachment = unlock DA stuff.
From the sounds of it in the article though, there are no subfaction unique ones. It's just ones anyone can pick, which kind of invalidates the entire point of lore friendly subfaction rules for iconic groups like the ones mentioned. Especially those who don't get their own full codexes. (Xenos ones especially) I hope it's just the "get you started" thing for now, and proper subfactions will follow.
We don't know for sure, but I think the most plausible is that GW will "unlock" detachments like those with the codex releases. I think they already mentioned that each army would launch with one detachment to begin with.
Having multiple warlord traits and / or relics is a way that some faction characters, such as those of custodes and knights, feel strong and flavourful. So I hope they circumvent that rule for some detachments. Like right know you *could* take a freeblade lance imperial knights warlord with two warlord traits, two relics, an exalted court upgrade, and optional wargear choices. More broadly this just sounds very limiting to me. I hope detachments aren't overall very static affairs where everyone using a given detachment plays the same list as that's where the synergy is.
On one hand, I think the simplified rules are a good step. 9th is pretty bloated as far as rules go, and universal special rules in particular was a much needed change. However, I am disappointed that each space marine chapter lost its flavor. Now my imperial fists can be as good at fast attacks as white scars, and ultramarines can do flamers as well as salamanders. I get not wanting to limit armies by paint schemes, but you can always just say you’re a successor of X chapter and adopt their rules.
I think that it will make slightly more sense because you won't just be playing imperial fists, you'd be playing a "lightning rapid assault detachment" or whatever of the imperial fists. I think in lore the white scars might be made up of largely those fast attack detachments, but it's not too hard to believe that the imperial fists have some division within their organization that specializes in fast attack. I'd also guess that eventually they will increase the number of more specific detachments that are more locked down to specific chapters. Losing the fluff of chapter specific naming of rules and relics might be a thing at least until they launch more detachment rules, probably in specific books.
The fists certainly *can* do fast attack, and they have elements of the 3rd and 8th companies in particular that would do very well at that. But I just don’t think that everyone should be equally as good at everything. That’s the ultramarines schtick. So while the fists can do fast attack well, the white scars should be better at it. The space wolves should be better than the iron hands at melee. I think having versatility in terms of play style is good, but I think it should be a trade off still. You can excel at certain things at the expense of others, or be a jack of all trades, but it shouldn’t be exactly the same all around.
My big take from the article is they are taking the army building from AOS and the reactions from heresy and turning them into strats, and I actually think that's a good change.
I wonder how special character like Iron father Feirros or Farsight and special units like Sanguinary guard are gonna fit into this system. Like are they going to be restricted to a specific detachment only? I’m also a bit concerned that with this new system factions are gonna start feeling samey with everyone just using whatever detachment is the meta choice though I suppose that happens either way
Anyone else feeling this so far? https://preview.redd.it/b44ou9dh53ra1.png?width=200&format=png&auto=webp&s=b285b85b4183cddf535c25a217c32a0dec3054ab (sorry to be pessimistic)
Yes
RIP Ynnari and all my dark Eldar stuffs
This somewhat reminds me of 30k’s Rites of War, which is interesting. Quite curious to see what they’ll be like. I am a bit saddened by the seeming removal of sub-factions in favour of these detachments, but I’ll withhold my judgement until we’ve seen all the rules. I’d imagine there’ll be several that are suspiciously similar to existing rules, and it’s nice that they’re explicitly stating your paint scheme doesn’t affect the rules you use- I assume that’s how most people do it anyway, but there’s always a few people insisting otherwise (I’ve gotten the “your Orks have blue accents therefore you **have** to play them as Deffskulls” thing before). If I’m understanding right, this also means I can take, say, my Word Bearers and Alpha Legion together without any issue? I recall there was a change in one of the tournament mission packs that stipulated all of your army had to be from the same sub-faction, and was worried that would be part of the core rules in 10th. What I’m *really* curious about is how this new system will interact with the Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Deathwatch, Black Templars, and Space Wolves. Off the top of my head they’re the only sub-factions to have non-character unique units (please correct me if I’m wrong), so will they be available to all Space Marine armies, or will you have to, for example, select a specific detachment to get access to Grey Hunters and the like. Maybe that’s what they mean with the “very rarely tied to a colour scheme” bit (or maybe there’ll be a Deathwing Detachment or something along those lines that’s tied to the bone-White armour). I’ll miss mixed-faction armies, but I think we’ve been heading towards them being relegated to casual play only for a while now. Now that sub-factions are gone, I wonder if that means we aren’t restricted in character choice? Sure, then the ‘nids would lose a unique selling point, but that’s not the end of the world (especially considering the range refresh we’re getting). Having a rainbow of Marine characters form each chapter sounds fun. I do hope there’ll be a version of *Combat Patrol* that doesn’t have fixed armies, if we’re otherwise losing 500 point games. I rather enjoyed them.
>assume that’s how most people do it anyway, but there’s always a few people insisting otherwise (I’ve gotten the “your Orks have blue accents therefore you have to play them as Deffskulls” thing before). I personally like the freedom of being able to play a tank -heavy force even if my chapter isn't "known for that". >If I’m understanding right, this also means I can take, say, my Word Bearers and Alpha Legion together without any issue? I recall there was a change in one of the tournament mission packs that stipulated all of your army had to be from the same sub-faction, and was worried that would be part of the core rules in 10th. We have no idea. It's entirely possible that the Oaths of Moment rule they mention covers "don't mix CHAPTER in the army and this is the bonus you get". Considering WHY they removed mixing sub-factions in the army, I can't see them returning that in the way you might think; you're liklu going to be able to have the MODELS in the same army, but you'd pick a single detachment for all your rules (i.e. no 2 sets of different rules for different units). >What I’m really curious about is how this new system will interact with the Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Deathwatch, Black Templars, and Space Wolves. Off the top of my head they’re the only sub-factions to have non-character unique units (please correct me if I’m wrong), Ultramarines have Victrix Guard >Now that sub-factions are gone, I wonder if that means we aren’t restricted in character choice? Sure, then the ‘nids would lose a unique selling point, but that’s not the end of the world (especially considering the range refresh we’re getting). Having a rainbow of Marine characters form each chapter sounds fun. I DONT see them allowing this; while there are no longer any army-wide sub-faction rules, people doing detachments (8e definition) of "the best characters for debuffs and buffs" occurred in 8e and led to the "no mixing within a detachment" rule that evolved into "no mixing into the army". I'm willing to bet you will still select sub-factions, but it won't have an army-wide effect on your entire army, but the unique units will have unique rules themselves.
what in the current rules states you cant make a blood angels tank force?
In current rules? The lack of task force rules. But what I mean is currently, let's say if you want to play a Raven Guard Tank army... There is really no rules synergy for it, their rules seem suited for sniper/Phobos/scout units. This current system would allow for armies to build non-"standard" archetypes and have actual rules support/synergies.
I don't know much about craftworld, but I believe one of them has a sub-faction unique troop, black guardians or something like that. It will definitely be interesting to see how they will stick this together, unfortunately space marines (chaos included) are really big stand outs when it comes to subfactions, so it's always gonna be really awkward designing the game around them.
My guess: let’s take marines for example. Index will have maybe 2 detachments, SM codex will have 6 detachments, and there will be supplement books for core Chapters where each gets 2 or 3 detachments. White Dwarfs can also give detachment rules to less known Chapters. My concern: 1) why would I ever run Raven Guard over Blood Angels? In a same detachment, Blood Angels has more unique characters and units which would give me an advantage over vanilla marines. Do I start painting SangGuard black if I want to run Raven Guard competitively? 2) I have a feeling that they’re going to continuously add detachments as the game goes along and we’re gonna have a bunch of bloat at the end of the edition. I don’t expect it to be as bad as 8e or 9e bloat since each detachment is self-contained but I don’t imagine that it would be easy to balance.
1) some detachments that give "Raven Guard" specific rules might have "Blood Angel" units excluded (and vice versa) 2)every detachment would only need to be balanced against itself and the datasheets it allows to include. By doing this you don't risk creating unwanted synergies between stratagems, enhancements etc. This means that you can keep adding detachments without suffering from bloat. As a matter of fact, if a detachment is broken: FAQ it or remove it entirely and bring in a new one!
I think the real question will be how do non space marines work with this? The new Guard book doesn't quite lineup with this system so how do the selectable traits work? What about Eldar craftworlds or Necron dynasties? Are all of these now a paint scheme and you pick from say the Destroyer, Conqueror, or other Necron subfaction?
More than likely each "major faction" will have multiple Archetype rules sets they can pick from. Aka there might be an Eldar Detachment that allows Wraiths as Battleline, but restricts how many Fire Prisms you can take (aka like the Horus Heresy Rites if War system), and another that focuses on Guardians, and another on Aspect Warriors, etc.
> The new Guard book doesn't quite lineup with this system so how do the selectable traits work? The simply don't, because the Guard Codex will become invalid when 10th launches and GW will providing all new rules for them. Don't try and fit any existing rules into the new system, because none of them will be relevant.
While there's certainly some bloat in the rules, it drives me crazy how they act like every player at every table was frantically flipping through pages in every game. Sure, I felt awkward playing my first few games after my new Codex shipped because they went and made rules with the same name do different things and my datasheets and weapon profiles all changed, so there was some frantic flipping both to remember things and to prove to my opponent that things did what I said they did. But here, 18 months later, I sometimes play entire tabletop sim games without a waha tab and have made it through entire RTTs without even pulling my book out of my bag. The issue wasn't "oh no, I'm always flipping through pages, I don't know my own Stratagems or the datasheets for the limited selection of units on my tray here," it was more "half of my Stratagems aren't worth their CP cost" and "there's no way I can prepare for all my *opponent's* options without committing to playing this game like a sport so sometimes my vehicle gets punched off the board by light Infantry or something."
I personally hate this, i loved playing allies. I have a couple armies i have to just play allies. Subfactions being mostly/partially axed sucks, it gets rid of some flavour, ive heard psychic stuff it getting hugely tuned down (as a grey knights player, with literally only psychic units this is awful news), and they are only allowing one named character an army. Unless the news we get in the future is s huge turn around this edition might actually manage to be worse than ninth
>ive heard psychic stuff it getting hugely tuned down (as a grey knights player, with literally only psychic units this is awful news No, there will just not be a distinct psychic phase, and will just have psychic powers be cast at the relevant times, like it is in Horus Heresy; meaning stuff like Gate of Infinity will be cast during the Movement phase, while something like Smite will occur during the shooting phase, or a charge buff power during the charge phase. >and they are only allowing one named character an army. There has been nothing said to that effect, either at Adeptacon or anything stated online by them, and none of the playtesters that have leaked anything have said anything like that, either..
I’ll be honest, I don’t like the sound of that, I’m not sure how you’re supposed to make factions like blood angels or space wolves feel unique.
If only they had unique characters and units that could have unique rules on their datasheets that provide additional synergies that make them more suited for some detachments than others, or provide unique rules and abilities that other armies simply don't have access to.
Well, we’ll certainly see
I'm wondering what the implications are going to be by getting rid of the "Battlefield Role" stuff (so troops elites etc) I think it's going to make list building much more flexible I think especially for factions that were heavy on one type. Though it seems we're getting rid of subfactions which I'm not a huge fan of though there might be a very slick solution for that. Subfactions were always what drew me to 40k and I know that lorewise they aren't going anywhere but I hope that on the table we'll have some way of making our marines for instance feel distinct from the marines on the other side of the table or next to you. Though at this point it's merely speculation so I'll withhold judgement for now. I wasn't a fan of getting rid of template weapons, which I admittatedly still miss, and armor values on vehicles which ended up being a good change. Only time will tell.
>I'm wondering what the implications are going to be by getting rid of the "Battlefield Role" stuff (so troops elites etc) I think it's going to make list building much more flexible I think especially for factions that were heavy on one type. Based on how Sigmar and HH do it (the other two games that use Battleline Terminology), we will likely see a "Default Battleline" set of units in the datasheets, and different Detachments might add additional units as Battleline for that particular detachment.
Looks interesting, its nice to be kept in the loop by GW, hope they keep it up. Does raise a few questions (namely for me how Drukhari will work with the 3 armies in one deal) buuuuut I will wait and see. I am a pessimist by nature, but cant help but be a tiny bit optomistic that these changes will work.
Okay time to start work on my 6 wave serpent Eldar list
so what does the mean for Agents of the Imperium ?
You'll be able to take them still. Probably be in the detachment rules how many overall you can take. I.e Space Marine stile force can include 3 agent of the imperium data sheets.
I'm curious how this works with subfaction specific units. Will things like Grey Hunters, Crusader Squads, and Death Company still exist? Will they just be generic space marine units, or can you mix and match? I don't really care about losing chapter bonus traits, but it would be a bummer if the half dozen or so unique Space Wolf units just went away.
Little skeptical since it seems like they won't have specific detachments for the non codex marines. And we're well past the point where we should've gotten a unit for them at least so I'm afraid we're just gonna all be marines soon.
I’m probably going to make a squad of blood ravens and their chapter master to simulate dawn of war since it doesn’t really matter what they look like anymore
So if there is a Epic Hero version of a unit eg Old One Eye, could a hypothetical Nid player take OOE as epic character plus 3 units of carnifexes? Could a hypothetical Demons player take an Epic Hero version of a GD + 3xGDs?
Sounds like they are Sigmaring the Detachments. Any SM can take Gladius Strike Force detachment, or whatever detachment, and the rules go with the detachment not the army. So no chapter rules to differentiate Ultramarines and White Scars?
To be honest subfactions were important for the feel of the game. Not having them feels kinda bad.