Brother Tyler

Congratulations and well done to @Brother Christopher for the winning entry: I'll have the grand prize in the mail this week. And a salute to everyone else who submitted pictures of their wonderfully assembled and painted Legio miniatures. The prizes for the finalists will be placed in the mail this week, too.

Yes, the current list of tags is driven heavily by the Forums, Blogs, Articles, and Downloads (and maybe the Clubs to a degree) features. There are definitely a few gaps in at least some of those. For example, I've been considering adding tags for homegrown (or fan-made) rules (works for all of those features), DIY organizations (also works for all of those features, with the possible exception of Clubs unless someone conducts some group project to create a DIY whatever), and maybe tags for finished and in-progress models. Those all require some consideration and tweaking, however, to minimize confusion. For example, a WIP project tag could apply to diverse types of projects, including converting and painting a miniature, collecting an army, creating a homegrown rule, writing fan fiction, developing an alternate history, etc. And since there will be a single list of tags that apply to all features, we can't develop lists specific to features (i.e., we can't create a Gallery tags list, a Forums tags list, etc.). Ultimately, we have to balance having a usable list with the other elements of content discovery. There are easy solutions for finding content for which there are no tags, and that might require both adaptation and education.

Tags for (sub)factions were definitely considered, but those, more than anything, would make the system unwieldy or unfair if included. To walk the dog... The original concept included tags for every official faction and subfaction. So that would include Adeptus Astartes, each of the Legions (e.g., Blood Angels Legion, Thousand Sons Legion, etc.), and each of the Chapters (e.g., Blood Angels Chapter, Blood Ravens Chapter, etc.). The last time I counted (here) there were 343 official named Chapters. That count didn't include the official named Heretic Astartes Legions/Warbands, which would increase the number considerably. If you then included similar tags for the other (sub)factions (e.g., Adepta Sororitas, Order of the Argent Shroud, Order of the Ermine Mantle, Aeldari, Asuryani, Iyanden, Ulthwé, Astra Militarum, Cadia, Vostroya, etc.) the number more than doubles. And then you have to factor in (sub)factions with multiple names. For example, would we include "Space Marines" and "Adeptus Astartes" and "Legiones Astartes" as tags? Or would we reduce it down from there? Similarly, would we include both "Space Sharks Chapter" and "Carcharodons Astra Chapter" as tags? How about "Vylka Fenryka" and "Space Wolves Chapter" as tags? And then we get into characters. The list of official characters keeps growing and growing, especially as Black Library pumps out new works of fiction. In addition, characters might often go by multiple names, or might have commonly associated names and more complete full names. If a hobbyist doesn't know the full name, they might not find it on the list when they're looking for one of the more common shortened versions. And then there are many cases where the same name/word might apply to multiple things. For example, there are tanks named for the Primarchs Rogal Dorn and Leman Russ, as well as for Malcador the Sigilite. Even if we didn't include tags for the vehicles, some hobbyists might assign simply named tags (e.g., "Rogal Dorn") to content about the tank instead of the Primarch. The solution, then, would be to further complicate the tag list by having tags such as "Rogal Dorn tank" and "Rogal Dorn Primarch" (or the reverse of one/both) to ensure clarity, further increasing the size and complexity of the list. Ultimately, trying to get an expansive tag list would have resulted in a wholly unusable drop-down list. I then considered creating cutoff criteria. Perhaps we would only have tags for higher level subjects. for example, we might have "Ultramarines Legion" and "Ultramarines Successor" tags (the former would cover the Great Crusade/Horus Heresy era Legion and the latter would cover all the Chapters descended from that Legion, including the Ultramarines Chapter). Any Chapter whose lineage was unknown, then, would simply use the "Adeptus Astartes" tag (except the Deathwatch and the Grey Knights, of course, who would both have tags). A similar methodology might be used to limit the other (sub)factions. Characters could similarly be limited, but there would surely be debate about who qualifies as being important enough to have a tag and who doesn't. Again, though, we would have a tag list that exceeded 100 entries. Anyone here who has had to scroll down an extensive drop-down list knows what a PITA that is, and if you wanted to assign multiple tags you would have to search through that list each time (it would be in alphabetical order, or course). And then we have other things for which tags are extremely useful in content discovery. I use them extensively for a variety of projects, contests, challenges, etc., as do some of the other moderati and members. Everyone has their preferences and trying to accommodate all of those preferences would again result in an excessively long tag list; and it would be likely that we would have to constantly update (i.e., extend) the tag list as more things happen. Ultimately, having an excessively long tag list degrades the user experience, leading to an environment where people don't want to use the tags because finding the ones they want is so onerous. The goal is to have a tag list that is long and complete enough that it remains usable while helping members with content discovery. It also has to be remembered that tags work in conjunction with other elements of the content architecture. We have numerous categories and subcategories to also help with top level content discovery. So if you want to see images about the Necrons, you simply have to search through the Necrons category. There are similar Gallery categories for each of the factions, and subcategories for the major Adeptus/Heretic Astartes subfactions. The Blogs and Forum features, too, have similar (sub)categories. And two other important elements that are usable in content discovery are titles and descriptions. Even in cases where features don't have (sub)faction (sub)categories, such as Articles and Downloads, (sub)faction names can be entered in the search criteria to narrow content down to, say, the Vindicators Chapter of the Adeptus Astartes. This comes down to (a) members ensuring that they enter usable data in content fields (and I plan to create a best practices living document to help with that), and (b) members knowing how to use the search engine (a tutorial I have planned). Believe me, I totally understand where you're coming from on how a lack of (sub)faction tags will make searching more difficult. Having them, however, would reduce the utility of the overall tags system. Please explain this as I'm not certain what you mean. I think I have an idea, but I want to be sure that I'm responding accurately.

Our tags system is in a transitional period. Prior to this, we have allowed freeform tags - members could basically type in whatever they wanted for their tags. We have had the option to limit tags, but I didn't want to do that. Freeform tags will no longer be an option when we upgrade to Invision 5.0, however, so we're leaning forward and building our tag list. Ultimately, tags are one element of our content discovery. Most people probably just look at them and see what tag(s) members have assigned to their content. Some of you may have figured out that you can click on a tag and the software will then perform a search, returning all results for content that shares the clicked tag. For tags to be truly useful, then, there needs to be some level of consistency. Freeform tags don't guarantee consistency and we would often see different spellings, abbreviations, etc. for the same concept. For example, content about Space Marines might have a variety of tags assigned, such as Space Marines or Adeptus Astartes, and you can imagine how some members might capitalize and others might not. We might even see tags like space, Marines, Adeptus, Astartes, etc. assigned instead, leading to confusion. For example, would the tag space refer to Space Marines, Chaos Space Marines, [outer] space, or some other subject that uses "space" in its name? And then there are the terms that have multiple meanings. A good example of this is Horus Heresy. That term might refer to the actual event, to the setting, to the current tabletop miniature wargame or one of its preceding editions, to the original wargame, to the revised game that Fantasy Flight Games published, to the collectible card game, to the series of books, etc. It has been clear for quite some time that we needed to standardize things, and I've been trying to do that without being overly limiting or oppressive. This involved coming up with guidelines for entering tags, though that would still allow for extensive tagging options. With the upcoming change in Invision 5.0, however, our hand is forced. My original plan was to simply standardize the schema I had been developing. After working through it, however, I realized that would be unworkable. The way the defined tags work is that members are allowed to choose from a list of tags. If we have a list of tags as extensive as the one I originally envisioned, or even a list one-tenth the size that I envisioned, it would rapidly become unusable and tags would become pointless. Moreover, we would be continuously updating the list as GW publishes new games, new editions of games, new (sub)factions, etc. So I had to consider tags as part of an overarching system for content architecture and content discovery. Tags work within an ecosystem that also includes content titles, content descriptions, content types (e.g., discussions, images, articles, etc.), and content location within features (i.e., the categories and subcategories of the respective features, as well as the forums and subforums within the Forums feature). While clicking on a tag will activate a simple use of the search engine, members can perform more advanced searches that include tags, content titles, content types, content authors, etc. Understanding that, I realized that the list of tags could be much smaller. More importantly, tags don't need to duplicate data that can (and should) be captured in those other elements. For example, we don't need a Dark Angels Chapter tag because members can simply enter "Dark Angels" into the search engine to find content related to that Legion/Chapter. Instead of entering any tags you want into a cell, you'll be presented with a drop-down list of the available tags, allowing you to select one or more. You don't have to select any, however. You will see staff members edit tag assignments, however. So if you select one of the tags that is intended for staff usage, we'll probably delete it. We'll add/delete tags to improve content discovery and remove/reduce confusion. The current list is transitional. I am certain that it will be expanded (I have at least three additions in mind as I compose this). For now, the tags available to you are: Banner of the Month battle report community challenge force composition MUD product review resource index rule question rumor site announcement strategy and tactics Banner of the Month is one that might disappear. I use that in my [usually] monthly topics about the Banner of the Month and having a tag is very handy. I might force myself to just search for the text string in the content title. battle report is fairly obvious in its meaning. Theoretically, battle reports can be located in the various forums of the ++ STRATEGIUM: RULES AND GAME PLAY ++ category (e.g., a Necromunda battle report would be posted in the + NECROMUNDA + forum, an Aeuronautica Imperialis battle report would be posted in the + EPIC SCALE HORUS HERESY GAMES + forum, a Space Hulk battle report would be posted in the + OTHER GAMES + forum, etc.). However, hobbyists often post their battle reports in the (sub)forums dedicated to the participating (sub)factions. For example, a Warhammer 40,000 battle report featuring the Ultramarines versus Orks might be posted in the + ULTRAMARINES + forum, the + ORKS + forum, or both. Truth be told, the method I prefer is that members create their own blogs and post their battle reports in their blogs, then post outreach topics in the appropriate (sub)forums to draw eyes to those blog entries. We're not going to be heavy-handed here, giving hobbyists the freedom to choose whatever they prefer. Regardless, assigning the battle report tag to all such content will allow members to find it wherever it is. community challenge refers to any of the various contests and challenges that we conduct here, such as the 12 Months of Hobby Challenge 2026 (conducted via the Clubs), the Bunker Bingo 2026 Challenge! (also conducted via the Clubs), and the recent Legio Roll of Honour challenge (conducted via the Forums). This tag can also be used for external contests and challenges. force composition is what we would normally think of as an army list. However, different games have different names for this concept. In Battlefleet Gothic, for example, one uses a fleet registry. A more generalized name makes it usable for any of the various games covered here. MUD is a tag used by the staff (it definitely doesn't mean "Malcador unceremoniously died" ). product review would be used for any type of review of a product such as a miniature, a boxed set, a book, etc. resource index is a tag used by the staff to identify both the resource index topics that appear at the top of many (sub)forums as well as the topics that are linked from those resource topics. We use the resource topics to minimize the number of pinned topics, allowing members to get to the more current topics without having to scroll through dozens or more pinned topics. The topics linked within retain top-of-the-forum visibility and quick accessibility via the links in the resource topics, and the tags help us to readily know when they are in those indices (so we can unarchive them, when necessary). rule question would be used for any discussion in which a member has a question about a rule. Ideally, each discussion will be limited to a single rule and the topic title would include the rule name (where practical), allowing members to (a) focus discussion on that rule, and (b) recognize which rule is being discussed at a glance. There may be times when the interaction between two or more rules is an issue, allowing the interactions between those rules to be discussed in the same topic. rumor should be used for any bonafide rumor (not speculation), including the Rumour Engine (and it's occasional thematic alternative names) that Games Workshop presents at Warhammer Community. site announcement is another tag used by the staff to identify topics like this one, announcing some change or update to the site. strategy and tactics is the tag used for discussions about strategy and tactics on the tabletop (not army/force composition). We're not going to have tags for characters (e.g., Roboute Guilliman, Eldrad Ulthran, etc.), nor are we going to have tags for (sub)factions/organizations (e.g., Ultramarines, Red Corsairs, Legio Furibundus). Similarly, we won't have tags for Black Library authors. We won't have tags for units (e.g., Vindicators, Intercessors, etc.). We're not going to have tags for images, articles, downloads, blogs, etc. since those are content types that are easily selectable in the search engine. And we definitely won't have tags for members (a lot of members have done this in the past, and it made perfect sense at the time). We will almost certainly expand this list. For example, I can see tags identifying that content is about a DIY/homegrown organization as well as tags to identify models, terrain, and gaming boards (or something like that). If you have suggestions, feel free to post them here.

This has been revealed as the new Prince Yriel model (Warhammer Community article, B&C discussion).

This has been revealed as one of Huron Blackheart's new Red Corsair models, the Reave-Captain (Warhammer Community article, B&C discussion).

This has been revealed as one of the new Mutilators (Warhammer Community article, B&C discussion).

Welcome to the community and the hobby! I'm very curious about how you stumbled across such an obscure Chapter. And for those who scratched their heads at the name, you can see information on the Golden Halos at Lexicanum.

A big "thank you" to everyone who participated in the challenge. It's always great to see hobbyists' work, and we always appreciate seeing members of the community expand the ranks of the community's mascot Chapter, the Legio. The staff members have narrowed the field down to five entrants. They are, in alphabetical order: @Alby the Slayer (see all images here) @Brother Christopher (see all images here) @Chaplain Raeven (see all images here) @Infernal (see all images here) @Spazmolytic (see all images here) You can see each image at full size by clicking on it. Each of the members submitted more images, so be sure to check them out by following the links to their entry posts. The poll will remain open through 11:59 PM CST, Sunday, February 15. The member who receives the most votes will be awarded the grand prize, a free copy of Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War - Onslaught and a magnetized gold Legio seal. The other four members will receive a hook and loop Legio patch and a magnetized silver seal. All members participating in this challenge received a badge, and most received the Legio Mini Me badge (and one received the Legio Honour Shield badge), not to mention the undying gratitude and admiration of the Legio.

Demon Ship, designed by Malev Da Shinobi and available from Black Site Studios, is a great microgame where you control the Survivor after something has gone terribly wrong and the [space]ship is now infested with demonic creatures. The premise is very on brand for the Warhammer 40,000 setting. In fact, it is virtually identical to the premise of the Rogue Trader expansion for the 2018 edition of Kill Team. While the official products available from BSS are great (the magnetized kit is awesome), the game itself allows players to use any 6x6 board. In addition to that magnetized kit, I've created a Lego version of the game as well as a magnetized meeple version. Those are nice and all, but I intend to create a WH40K version, too. Many other hobbyists have used WH40K stuff (Zone Mortalis boards, minis, etc.) to WH40Kify Demon Ship and I want to jump on that bandwagon. While I'll cover my personal efforts in this endeavor in a separate blog in this club, I'd love to see other hobbyists' Demon Ship WH40Kification efforts in this blog, too. The necessary elements that I see are: A suitable 6x6 board (note that I didn't give increments, I'll address this later) Miniatures (1x survivor, 2x blade demons, 1x gun demon, 1x frog demon, to be expanded as Malev Da Shinobi expands the game) Terrain (2x 1x3 walls, 1x 1x2 wall, 1x 1x1 wall, 2x chests, 2x barrels, 1x console, 1x platform, 2x doors) The game is played on a 6x6 grid. The default is 1" squares, but this can be scaled up or down based on the miniatures. My meeple set, for example, uses smaller squares. With WH40K miniatures, most likely on 32mm bases, I'll need the squares to be 32mm or larger on each side. I may use the Zone Mortalis boards, or I may craft my own bespoke board. If I do the latter, I'll be able to magnetize things, though that will be optional. The miniatures are where I see a lot of room for variability. The "Demon Ship" name automatically lends towards using daemons. It occurred to me, however, that Necrons might be a good fit. Figuring out who the baddies are will help me figure out who/what the Survivor is. If I go with daemons, I'm leaning towards a Grey Knight. If I go with Necrons, I'm leaning towards a member of the Deathwatch. There are lots of other options, however, including a Sister of Silence, an Inquisitor, an Assassin, etc. And I don't need the Survivor to be from the Imperium. What if the Survivor were a Harlequin? Or a Necromunda ganger? Or a voidsman-at-arms? There is a lot of room for interpretation and I'll go into more detail on that when I create my own blog. I'd love to see how other hobbyists decide to WH40Kify this game, however. The terrain, too, allows for a lot of freedom and will depend largely upon the theme/premise. For example, if one uses the premise of an Imperial ship whose Geller fields have failed, the terrain might resemble corrupted Imperial STC architecture. Someone using the premise of a Deathwatch operative inside a Necron tomb world/ship, meanwhile, might lean on architecture appropriate to the Necrons (the Tomb World killzone might provide fodder). Someone else might want to represent their demon ship as Adeptus Astartes warriors clearing an Ork rok during the Third War for Armageddon, with suitably asteroidish features. And at least four other ideas have occurred to me as I've been composing this. Overall, it will be interesting to see how different hobbyists decide to re-theme this gem of a game to fit the WH40K aesthetic.

I agree with both @W.A.Rorie and @Grotsmasha, though I'm going to focus my recommendation on the Space Marine Adventures games. My main reason for this is that the hobby aspect of these games is very light: five or so push-fit models (easy to assemble) in different colors (you don't have to paint them if you don't want to) and relatively simple components create a very low barrier to entry. This is especially helpful in using them as a gateway into the larger hobby. The only one of these games that I personally own is Rise of the Orks (you can see my review of the game here). The other games in the series are Labyrinth of the Necrons, Tyranid Attack!, and Doomsday Countdown (the adversaries are in the names, except for the last which features Chaos cultists). If I recall correctly, [some of] these games were available through a mainstream retailer in the UK, but I forget the name. If your nephew shows an interest in whatever game you choose, painting miniatures is the next step. If his interest grows/continues, moving up to either Kill Team or Combat Patrol (or the fantasy equivalents if that's where his interest takes him) is the next logical step. And a plug for my favorite WH40K gateway game: if you can get your hands on either the 2009 or 2014 editions of Space Hulk, those are a great progression from a simple boardgame into the larger tabletop miniature wargames. The miniature assembly is more complicated than the other boardgames, and there are more miniatures to assemble (and maybe paint). There is a lot of replayability in that game, as long as the difficulty [for the Space Marines] is acceptable. The game is long out of print, though, so you may find it difficult to acquire.

It just occurred to me that the basic premise of this game could be re-themed to the last stand of Captain Invictus. Of course, there isn't a model for Captain Invictus (not counting conversions), but that might be a nifty fan effort with hordes of Tyranid gribblies replacing greenskins. It also sets up a possible campaign of sorts where different elements of the Ultramarines First Company are defending different portions of the polar defense fortress, with the campaign culminating in the last stand (and the forces available to the Tyranids being affected by the previous battles in the campaign?).

If new information about the upcoming Adeptus Custodes release becomes available, please contact the staff and we'll either unlock the discussion or post the new information.

Actually, though I was a participant in the challenge, I can't take credit for it. Credit is owed to @Olis, @Aqui, @Conn Eremon, and the other Liber mods (and the Liber community as a whole) at that time. It's always great to see old projects dusted off and reinvigorated. I'm looking forward to seeing the Order of the Parthenon brought back to its full glory. I figured I'd drop this here just in case it helps... The Bolter and Chainsword : Sisters of Silence Painter

Someone recommended that more advanced notice be given regarding themes for banner of the month challenges. What I'll try to do (assuming I remember), is publish a tentative plan during January for March of that year through February of the next year. This will give everyone 2+ months notice for every month throughout the rest of the year. I'm aiming for the number of months with themes to be no more than 50% on average. Also, and very important, plans may change based on major releases. In such cases, changes will only affect plans 2 or more months out. Here's the tentative plan for March 2026 - February 2027: March: no theme April 2026: no theme May 2026: Necromunda June 2026: no theme July 2026: The Xenos Threat August 2026: September 2026: Pirates and Renegades (Red Corsairs, Anhrathe, Ork Feebootas, etc.) October 2026: Orktober November 2026: no theme December 2026: The Age of Darkness January 2026: no theme February 2026: no theme During any month for which there is no theme, anything and everything in the Warhammer 40,000 setting is fair game.