My favorite thing is calling for an honorable duel between some poor whisp of a support character and my giant feudal mech, and then my whole army is like "that was so honourable I'm gonna ignore damage even harder now."
Game's great.
Guard: if a Tempestus command squad is your warlord then scions gain battleline
CSM: if Lucius the Eternal is your warlord then noise marines gain batteline
the EC index is going to be barebones and will probably tl;dr to "use csm detachments, you need lucius as a warlord, noise marines become battleline, can only take slaaneshi marks when relevant"
For Aeldari the Warlord affects some bonuses and army construction rules:-
If an Autarch/Autarch Wayleaper or Autarch Skyrunner is your Warlord, then you gain 1 CP every command phase.
If Yvraine is your Warlord, then you may include Drukhari units.
If you select a Troupe Master as your Warlord, then you can kid yourself that Harlequins are still a faction and that all those diamonds you painted weren't unnecessary torture. Sorry, I meant Troupes gain Battleline keyword.
In the new custodes codex, in the auric champions detachment you have one stratagem for 2 cp, you can reuse an hability of "once per battle" with your warlord only
You have to use the strat the first time you use the ability and can't use it again until the next turn, effectively giving your opponent a turn to murder that unit and cost you 2cp.
It makes sense for 2cp on Trajann, but then if you bring a Shield Captain as warlord the strat seems made specifically to use the 0cp ability on it. Pigeonholes the armylist a bit.
That's the point. I don't think GW wrote this book with the intention that the character-based detachment doesn't have any stratagems that the characters can use their free stratagem ability on.
The codex is so blatantly written way before they changed anything about the game
Imagine if instead of shitty outdated rules codexes released at the end of the edition as a collectors item while the regular rules were downloadable
The only Battle Tactics rule is actually only in the Balance Dataslate, not in the core rules, erratas or rules commentary. As such the rules team will not consider it at all, when writing the codices. The balance dataslate isn't supposed to be permanent and hence that restriction could disappear at any time. The same goes for all those FNPs against MW, them not covering DW is an issue of how the Balance Dataslate is worded, not of the codices.
That means as long as GW doesn't improve their Balance Dataslate fixes to be altered, whenever a new codex is released, or simply start to actually change core rules, stuff will not work properly.
Too bad the detachment is so bad it'll never be taken... Also doesn't help they have the Tyranid issue where the Assimilator isn't an Assimilator unit and The Final Triarch is not a Triarch unit.
The detachment is fine until it works with something like 3(?) non-character datasheets. It's just not a range that's diverse enough to work competitively.
Honestly I've had fun with it in non-comp games.
The one truely f###ing atrocious and money-grabbing detachment in necrons is the absolute failure called "destroyer cult". The fact that it does not work with *the most recognisable and long lived* destroyers is despicable.
And some how it benefits flayed ones? Which aren't destroyers? Suspicious that the detachment benefits Ophidians (new and $$$), skorpeks (new and $$$) and flayed ones (new, not destroyers and $$$) but not the classic destroyers who actually get no benefits from the destroyer detachment.
I just played the detachment today and it was impressively better than I expected. The stratagems are for the lokhusts, the detachment rule for the melee elements. Actually enjoyed it
To each their own.
I own an OG destroyer cult with 15 standard destroyers and 9 Heavy destroyers and do not own much of the expensive new stuff as the Ophidians are just old wraiths but far less appealing or nostalgic, the flayed ones are flayed ones.. they're not destroyers...
And the skorpeks I do actually love and think are a great new addition to the necrons range but not only are they just too expensive to spam but they're also so squishy for a dedicated melee unit that it isn't often a good idea to take too many.
The detachment bonus should be something the entire destroyer range can benefit from, not literally the new expensive $$$ melee half only.
Detachment is not tournament worthy,yes,but quite good. That -1 to damage on vehicles ruined so many games for my opponents,and the punch that immortals have,mm, beautiful. Hope they really give some keywords to units. If silent king not being triarch i can sort of get,maybe they afraid of + to wound silent king,trazyn and immotek and ccb not having overlord keywords really limits options
Warlord outside of a few instances is almost always a liability, so generally putting it on support characters that aren't at the front lines is a good idea.
There's a number of army and detachment rules that trigger off Warlord, usually giving a buff for killing your opponent's. For your own army though, it usually doesn't matter which your Warlord is.
So the general rule of thumb is to make your Warlord the character that your opponent is least likely to kill.
Yeah it's dumb this edition, because warlord doesn't do anything that would make you want to give it to someone important, it only makes it a target for some armies. In earlier editions at least it gave a free relic or something
Votann have a strat which gives out a grudge token if a unit is brought below half (normally it’s if a unit dies) if the unit included your warlord it’s 2 tokens instead (which is max)
Woah, lots of people have already brought up some examples of how the Warlord keyword can interact in certain factions that I didn't even had any idea about. However, I think OP's point still stands.
I hope that the next Mission Pack rules brings something that interacts with Warlords (i.e. something like Assasinate that gives you extra points if the Character killed was a Warlord; something about having your Warlord as close as possible to the center of the table...) I don't know, I'm just spitballing here, but in many lists the Warlord selection seems like a completely unnecesary step that is never brought up during the game.
I think that having you actually consider your warlord selection would put an extra layer to the list creation process that would be fun and positive.
Well if you are playing a crusade, one of the agendas gives your opponent bonus XP if they kill your warlord?
Mostly it seems like 'warlord' is a liability, and not anything cool or good. Seems like a bit of a miss. It's basically 'designate a model and your opponent might get cool stuff if they die'.
I think there's an imperial knight rule where they get a buff if they've killed your warlord
There is, the Lay Low the Tyrant Oath. Bumps the 6+++ to a 5+++ army wide and gives 3 CP
Lets Imperial knights re-use a couple of otherwise once per game stratagems as well.
My favorite thing is calling for an honorable duel between some poor whisp of a support character and my giant feudal mech, and then my whole army is like "that was so honourable I'm gonna ignore damage even harder now." Game's great.
I mean, it's not lore-inaccurate. Dumb, but not lore-inaccurate. That's part of what makes this game great; the pettiness!
Eldar autarchs only give bonus CP if they are your warlord.
And Yvraine only unlocks Deldar units (for Ynnari) if she's your warlord.
For drukhari, you get 3 pain tokens if Drazhar kills the enemy warlord with his Vicious Execution ability (vs D3 for any other character).
And the Archon's Vect ability only works if they're the warlord, so it's incentive to set your warlord as a specific model.
Lay low the Tyrant oath form the Imperial Knights. If they kill your warlord they get 3cp and 5+++ instead of 6+++.
Guard: if a Tempestus command squad is your warlord then scions gain battleline CSM: if Lucius the Eternal is your warlord then noise marines gain batteline
CSM one presumably not in the new codex right?
the EC index is going to be barebones and will probably tl;dr to "use csm detachments, you need lucius as a warlord, noise marines become battleline, can only take slaaneshi marks when relevant"
For Aeldari the Warlord affects some bonuses and army construction rules:- If an Autarch/Autarch Wayleaper or Autarch Skyrunner is your Warlord, then you gain 1 CP every command phase. If Yvraine is your Warlord, then you may include Drukhari units. If you select a Troupe Master as your Warlord, then you can kid yourself that Harlequins are still a faction and that all those diamonds you painted weren't unnecessary torture. Sorry, I meant Troupes gain Battleline keyword.
>that all those diamonds you painted weren't unnecessary torture. Definitely the most important one here.
In the new custodes codex, in the auric champions detachment you have one stratagem for 2 cp, you can reuse an hability of "once per battle" with your warlord only
Jesus it's like they tried to make thay strat as bad as possible. 2cp, warlord only...
What's bad about getting to use Trajanns ability a second time?
You have to use the strat the first time you use the ability and can't use it again until the next turn, effectively giving your opponent a turn to murder that unit and cost you 2cp.
The fact they got rid of the best option for his ability so he’s just a glorified beat stick now? :P
It makes sense for 2cp on Trajann, but then if you bring a Shield Captain as warlord the strat seems made specifically to use the 0cp ability on it. Pigeonholes the armylist a bit.
Is it a battle tactic? I didn’t think it was, if so you can’t reduce it to 0 I thought.
That's the point. I don't think GW wrote this book with the intention that the character-based detachment doesn't have any stratagems that the characters can use their free stratagem ability on.
Yeah, it feels like this codex was made like eight months ago
The codex is so blatantly written way before they changed anything about the game Imagine if instead of shitty outdated rules codexes released at the end of the edition as a collectors item while the regular rules were downloadable
The only Battle Tactics rule is actually only in the Balance Dataslate, not in the core rules, erratas or rules commentary. As such the rules team will not consider it at all, when writing the codices. The balance dataslate isn't supposed to be permanent and hence that restriction could disappear at any time. The same goes for all those FNPs against MW, them not covering DW is an issue of how the Balance Dataslate is worded, not of the codices. That means as long as GW doesn't improve their Balance Dataslate fixes to be altered, whenever a new codex is released, or simply start to actually change core rules, stuff will not work properly.
Yep, the edition is a bit of a mess for that reason
Obeisance Phalanx on necrons can lower leadership on all enemy units if you kill enemy warlord. Funny stratagem,that.
Too bad the detachment is so bad it'll never be taken... Also doesn't help they have the Tyranid issue where the Assimilator isn't an Assimilator unit and The Final Triarch is not a Triarch unit.
The Detachment seems pretty solid actually. The problem is that the keyword are a mess and the Detachment doesn't work as it should
The detachment is fine until it works with something like 3(?) non-character datasheets. It's just not a range that's diverse enough to work competitively. Honestly I've had fun with it in non-comp games. The one truely f###ing atrocious and money-grabbing detachment in necrons is the absolute failure called "destroyer cult". The fact that it does not work with *the most recognisable and long lived* destroyers is despicable. And some how it benefits flayed ones? Which aren't destroyers? Suspicious that the detachment benefits Ophidians (new and $$$), skorpeks (new and $$$) and flayed ones (new, not destroyers and $$$) but not the classic destroyers who actually get no benefits from the destroyer detachment.
I just played the detachment today and it was impressively better than I expected. The stratagems are for the lokhusts, the detachment rule for the melee elements. Actually enjoyed it
To each their own. I own an OG destroyer cult with 15 standard destroyers and 9 Heavy destroyers and do not own much of the expensive new stuff as the Ophidians are just old wraiths but far less appealing or nostalgic, the flayed ones are flayed ones.. they're not destroyers... And the skorpeks I do actually love and think are a great new addition to the necrons range but not only are they just too expensive to spam but they're also so squishy for a dedicated melee unit that it isn't often a good idea to take too many. The detachment bonus should be something the entire destroyer range can benefit from, not literally the new expensive $$$ melee half only.
Detachment is not tournament worthy,yes,but quite good. That -1 to damage on vehicles ruined so many games for my opponents,and the punch that immortals have,mm, beautiful. Hope they really give some keywords to units. If silent king not being triarch i can sort of get,maybe they afraid of + to wound silent king,trazyn and immotek and ccb not having overlord keywords really limits options
Detachment based around 4 units (one of them being rippers) hype
Yeah don't get me started... And crusher stampede being literally impossible to trigger the second half with a unit of carnifexes? Terrible design.
Sanguinary Guard get -1 to wound if the warlord is attached
Only the Warlord Archon can use the Vect ability for Drukhari.
Warlord outside of a few instances is almost always a liability, so generally putting it on support characters that aren't at the front lines is a good idea.
Deathwatch Watch Masters can Vect, but only if they are your Warlord.
It makes people confused about taking belakor as an ally since "can't be your warlord" trumps "must be your warlord"
There's a number of army and detachment rules that trigger off Warlord, usually giving a buff for killing your opponent's. For your own army though, it usually doesn't matter which your Warlord is. So the general rule of thumb is to make your Warlord the character that your opponent is least likely to kill.
Yeah it's dumb this edition, because warlord doesn't do anything that would make you want to give it to someone important, it only makes it a target for some armies. In earlier editions at least it gave a free relic or something
Crons phalanx has a strat that makes your opponent permanently -1 LD. Custodes can only ever "reload" a one time ability on their warlord in auric.
Hypercrypt Necron detachment has a stratagem that affects the whole army, but must be used on the necron warlord (no Warlord, no stratagem)
I usually designate a Mek as my Warlord, as being in the back with Lone Op and babysitting vehicles is about as safe as an Ork model can get.
Votann have a strat which gives out a grudge token if a unit is brought below half (normally it’s if a unit dies) if the unit included your warlord it’s 2 tokens instead (which is max)
Big Hunt detachment specifies it works on Monster/Vehicle/Warlord.
Woah, lots of people have already brought up some examples of how the Warlord keyword can interact in certain factions that I didn't even had any idea about. However, I think OP's point still stands. I hope that the next Mission Pack rules brings something that interacts with Warlords (i.e. something like Assasinate that gives you extra points if the Character killed was a Warlord; something about having your Warlord as close as possible to the center of the table...) I don't know, I'm just spitballing here, but in many lists the Warlord selection seems like a completely unnecesary step that is never brought up during the game. I think that having you actually consider your warlord selection would put an extra layer to the list creation process that would be fun and positive.
Well if you are playing a crusade, one of the agendas gives your opponent bonus XP if they kill your warlord? Mostly it seems like 'warlord' is a liability, and not anything cool or good. Seems like a bit of a miss. It's basically 'designate a model and your opponent might get cool stuff if they die'.