Sorcerors in World Eaters Detachments

[CrystalSeer]

I assume it says somewhere that World Eaters can't take sorcerors, but I can't find it for the life of me. Anyone got a page ref?

[Panzer]

All your units in a World Eater detachment that can take a Mark of Chaos have to take Khorne so that automatically disqualifies Sorcerer. However since there were people who kept arguing for no reason GW added it to the FAQ as well.
 

Page 116 – <Mark of Chaos>
Add the following to the last paragraph:
‘If a unit has the Tzeentch, Nurgle or Slaanesh
keywords, it cannot be from the World Eaters Legion,
and if a unit has the Khorne, Tzeentch or Nurgle
keywords, it cannot be from the Emperor’s Children
Legion. In addition, Psykers cannot be from the World
Eaters Legion

[Trevak Dal]

And if you have an ally detachment, nobody gets Legion Tactics right?

 

Like

 

brigade: world eaters

 

Patrol: Alpha Legion with a sorcerer

 

Neither get their Legion tactics, right?

 

(I have not played an 8th edition game against anyone other than myself)

Edited March 3, 2018 by Trevak Dal

[Panzer]

No that's not how it works.

In your example your Brigade would get World Eater tactics and your Patrol would get Alpha Legion tactics. ;)

[Trevak Dal]

Ah I had misunderstood. But you'd be able to use the psychic powers on the World Eaters though right?

 

Hmm...if so a Supreme Command Detachment with Jump Pack sorcerers and maybe a prince with Alpha Legion traits to hold in reserve to pop down and zap some invulnerable saves or get some zerkers scuttling up faster...

Edited March 3, 2018 by Trevak Dal

[ChazSexington]

Yes, you can. World Eaters must take the Mark of Khorne if possible. Sorcerers cannot take the Mark of Khorne, so RAW, they can even take other Marks. 

Edited March 4, 2018 by ChazSexington

[Khornestar]

See the quote in the 2nd post in this thread. It’s cut and dry, at this point.

 

Source: https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/40K_8th_ed_Update_Codex_Chaos_Space_Marines_ver_1.2.pdf

Edited March 4, 2018 by Juggernut

[Panzer]

Yes, you can. World Eaters must take the Mark of Khorne if possible. Sorcerers cannot take the Mark of Khorne, so RAW, they can even take other Marks. 

No they don't. Why do I bother quoting the actual FAQ entry even. 

[Doom Herald]

Yes, you can. World Eaters must take the Mark of Khorne if possible. Sorcerers cannot take the Mark of Khorne, so RAW, they can even take other Marks.

 

The FAQ says no.

 

Prior to the FAQ I would have agreed with you. I do believe that I am one of the people Panzer is referring to. The poor wording of the Index made it arguable that an unaligned Sorcerer was a valid World Eaters unit. Funny enough, the Codex was even worse since the wording even allowed World Eaters Noise Marines. The argument was not for "no reason" it was out of frustration with Games Workshop for not having better quality control on the wording. The FAQ has clearly addressed this now, though.

Edited March 5, 2018 by ThanatosMalleus

[ChazSexington]

 

Yes, you can. World Eaters must take the Mark of Khorne if possible. Sorcerers cannot take the Mark of Khorne, so RAW, they can even take other Marks. 

No they don't. Why do I bother quoting the actual FAQ entry even. 

 

 

 

 

Yes, you can. World Eaters must take the Mark of Khorne if possible. Sorcerers cannot take the Mark of Khorne, so RAW, they can even take other Marks.

The FAQ says no.

 

Prior to the FAQ I would have agreed with you. I do believe that I am one of the people Panzer is referring to. The poor wording of the Index made it arguable that an unaligned Sorcerer was a valid World Eaters unit. Funny enough, the Codex was even worse since the wording even allowed World Eaters Noise Marines. The argument was not for "no reason" it was out of frustration with Games Workshop for not having better quality control on the wording. The FAQ has clearly addressed this now, though.

 

 

Ah, cheers, somehow missed the FAQ ruling. 

The 8th ed. codex editors should be taken out back and put out of their misery. Hell, judging by the quality, just unplugging them would do the trick. 

[Goreshed]

Or you know, people could use common sense and not be constant rules lawyers who ignore the intent of it to begin with to gain some sort of edge to one list or another.

[Doom Herald]

Or you know, people could use common sense and not be constant rules lawyers who ignore the intent of it to begin with to gain some sort of edge to one list or another.

That will be the day.

 

I did notice briefly after the CSM Codex, GW posted some job openings for editors. That Codex was particularly bad, the Table of Contents is even wrong.

[Goreshed]

GW seems to allow a lot of freedom with that particular group, this is one of the downfalls.

 

The second being the gaming culture in general.

[ChazSexington]

Or you know, people could use common sense and not be constant rules lawyers who ignore the intent of it to begin with to gain some sort of edge to one list or another.

 

Tbh, this one needed an errata it was so poorly worded in the codex. The RAI was unknowable. 

 

It's like with the Denizens of the Warp FAQ (which should've been an errata). That you can deep strike any <Daemon> meant you could deep strike Magnus and Morty. They FAQ'ed it to mean Faction Keyword Daemon, but does that mean ALL the other Stratagems, auras, and Psychic Powers only work on models with the Faction Keyword Daemon? The RAI was utterly incomprehensible, as the keyword system was applied arbitrarily. I had to ask one of the designers to figure out what was intended (All but Denizens of the Warp worked for keyword Daemons, which only worked for Faction keyword Daemons). 

Edited March 6, 2018 by ChazSexington

[Doom Herald]

 

 

Or you know, people could use common sense and not be constant rules lawyers who ignore the intent of it to begin with to gain some sort of edge to one list or another.

Tbh, this one needed an errata it was so poorly worded in the codex. The RAI was unknowable.

 

It's like with the Denizens of the Warp FAQ (which should've been an errata). That you can deep strike any <Daemon> meant you could deep strike Magnus and Morty. They FAQ'ed it to mean Faction Keyword Daemon, but does that mean ALL the other Stratagems, auras, and Psychic Powers only work on models with the Faction Keyword Daemon? The RAI was utterly incomprehensible, as the keyword system was applied arbitrarily. I had to ask one of the designers to figure out what was intended (All but Denizens of the Warp worked for keyword Daemons, which only worked for Faction keyword Daemons).

If I am not mistaken, the FAQ (which is definitely errata in disguise) said all strategems which use DAEMON are meant as DAEMON as the faction keyword. If you asked a designer and this was the answer, it needs to be published, otherwise it doesn't matter. Edited March 7, 2018 by ThanatosMalleus

[ChazSexington]

 

 

Or you know, people could use common sense and not be constant rules lawyers who ignore the intent of it to begin with to gain some sort of edge to one list or another.

Tbh, this one needed an errata it was so poorly worded in the codex. The RAI was unknowable.

 

It's like with the Denizens of the Warp FAQ (which should've been an errata). That you can deep strike any <Daemon> meant you could deep strike Magnus and Morty. They FAQ'ed it to mean Faction Keyword Daemon, but does that mean ALL the other Stratagems, auras, and Psychic Powers only work on models with the Faction Keyword Daemon? The RAI was utterly incomprehensible, as the keyword system was applied arbitrarily. I had to ask one of the designers to figure out what was intended (All but Denizens of the Warp worked for keyword Daemons, which only worked for Faction keyword Daemons).

If I am not mistaken, the FAQ (which is definitely errata in disguise) said all strategems which use DAEMON are meant as DAEMON as the faction keyword. If you asked a designer and this was the answer, it needs to be published, otherwise it doesn't matter.

 

 

It definitely was an errata in disguise. Sorry, yeah, I brainfarted - I meant all stratagems. 

 

Edited March 7, 2018 by ChazSexington

[Goreshed]

Now I'm just talking in this case and this case only,

 

But since the beginning of time when we had the first true full edition that was 3rd (not hating on the rogue trader days) khorne has ALWAYS hated sorcerers. If one were to apply that logic to building armies, then the obvious choice is to not take sorcerers.

 

Maybe I'm just getting grumpy in my old age. Maybe I'm just annoyed with people ignoring fluff just to win. Maybe I don't have enough alcohol. Too many variables to tell.

 

But I will say this. Why are people ignoring the basic background of the game to gain an advantage on the table top? If someone wanted to run world eaters with sorcerers go play blood angels. There are other options.

[CrystalSeer]

In AoS, khorne has slaughtpriests. They are effectively sorcerors, in that you roll a dice and get an additional effect.

 

However, they pray to khorne, and their blessings come from khorne. They do not manipulate chaos per se.

 

Fluff wise, this is how I would spin it. Rules wise, it's as simple as having a non world-eaters detachment filled with cultists.

 

As far as why bother? Mostly just tired of imperial characters/custodes getting 3++ and fnp and 'come back to life' saves. Death Hex would go a very long way towards dealing with that.

[Doom Herald]

They have been changing the fluff heavily, not to the point of Khornate Sorcerers but Khornate psykers and magic is not unprecedented. Genetically, all the primarchs are somewhat psychic. Angron did not display psychic ability, but Sanguinius did and Khorne was fighting with Slaanesh over him. There was a champion of Khorne in Hammer of Daemons who could manipulate the shape of spilt blood with his mind and used it to his advantage in battle to trip his enemies in duals. Further, I believe there was a cult of Khorne who's psykers used their power to summon Khornate daemons and then you wave the Dawn of War storyline. The exact interaction between Khorne and psykers is variable. Some posed that maybe Khorne hates those that use magic in place of might in combat.

 

Pair this with the fact that no one knew what exactly was planned for 8th edition changes and the poor wording and it would be very easy to confuse people with the intent. Plus, they said they wanted feedback because they knew with a total re-vamp that changes might have to be made. This is to say nothing of the confusion that new players or those less experienced with fluff would face. Many of us were trying to point out the inconsistencies with the Index to get a better quality Codex, but we were ignored and in many ways the Codex was worse because we were ignored.

 

Someone totally new to 40k, not knowing about the errata, who picks up the CSM Codex could easily field a World Eaters army with Sorcerers, Noise Marine, and a daemon summoning Cypher who tries to summon Be'lakor all because these issues were ignored when we pointed them out in the Index because "the answer should be obvious."

[techsoldaten]

In AoS, khorne has slaughtpriests. They are effectively sorcerors, in that you roll a dice and get an additional effect.

 

However, they pray to khorne, and their blessings come from khorne. They do not manipulate chaos per se.

 

Fluff wise, this is how I would spin it. Rules wise, it's as simple as having a non world-eaters detachment filled with cultists.

 

As far as why bother? Mostly just tired of imperial characters/custodes getting 3++ and fnp and 'come back to life' saves. Death Hex would go a very long way towards dealing with that.

 

Yeah, I think I understand your frustrations. It's hard being World Eaters as you are cut out of an entire phase of the game.

 

8th edition makes it pretty simple to add a second detachment, lead by a Sorcerer. I would just go that route to keep everybody happy.

 

Unlike other HQs, the Sorcerer does not have an aura buffing things in your main faction. So you're not losing anything by going this way. Make it Alpha Legion and get -1 to hit on your infantry.