Brother Tyler

So you're suggesting friendly fire as a result of some sort of fog of war mechanism, is that correct? There are many wargames that incorporate fog of war in a variety of ways. In general, most represent fog of war effects as unintended consequences. These include things such as failing to activate a unit, units acting on incorrect orders (generally in games where orders have to be issued to units - often Napoleonics and the like), etc. For this to work in Warhammer 40,000, Kill Team, Necromunda, etc., you would have to build in some changes to the overall mechanics to allow for fog of war. Do you have any ideas on how to do this? The Astra Militarum stratagem that @Brother Anderson described sounds more like a "danger close" thing - a deliberate choice to fire at the enemy despite the proximity of and danger to friendlies* - rather than a fog of war thing. That kind of rule is easier to incorporate into Warhammer 40,000 than a fog of war friendly fire effect. * Admittedly, "danger close" generally refers to indirect fire and the like rather than direct fire with small arms. It's the closest thing I could think of, though.

Welcome to the Bolter & Chainsword community! Do you have an idea of the kind of Necron overlord you're most interested in?

Welcome to the Bolter & Chainsword community! We look forward to seeing how you participate in the hobby.

You can see some of the cards at the game's Board Game Geek page (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/8863/horus-heresy-2003). The only two images that show dreadnoughts there (as far as I can see) are this one (Kargul) and this one (it's very fuzzy, but it looks like the Justarius dreadnought of the Ultramarines Legion). You can also see scans of (all?) the cards at the Horus Heresy Collectable [sic] Card Game Online Deck Builder (https://www.pa-sy.com/hhccg/).

Yes, staff members (mods, admins, and chief librarians) can edit content tags.

Yes, tags are the default alternative (or augmentation) to the clubs idea. The key shortcoming with tags, and I really hope to improve this, is that we as a community do not use tags effectively. Individuals might use tags well, but the majority of us do not. This is compounded by multiple tags being used for the same thing, or a tag having multiple possible interpretations. More importantly, when we upgrade to Invision 5.0, the tags system will change. Up until this point, members have been able to enter tags as free text. We have settings options to force choosing of tags from predefined lists, but we've never enabled that. The flexibility of free text has driven one aspect of poor tag usage. With Inv 5.0, we will no longer be able to enter free text tags. This isn't a setting choice that we get to make - it will be limited in the software. Instead, we will have to develop predefined tag lists and members will only be able to use the tags from those lists. It will be very important to develop a sound structure for building that tag list and then having as comprehensive a tag list as possible (without having unnecessary tags). There will also be a mechanism for updating the list as needed. As far as games go, the structure I'm looking at is based on our current recommendations. As a rule, tags will be spelled out completely, with acronyms and abbreviations by exception and limited to only those that are necessary and efficient. The tags for any game, then, will include a general tag for the game (e.g., Necromunda game) as well as tags for each edition (e.g., Necromunda 2023). So far, the only game for which I see an acronym being used is the Warhammer 40,000 game, which will use the WH40K game tag as well as tags for editions, this game being the only one where we'll use numbers vice years (e.g., WH40K 1st edition). As a rule, even though some of the games include "Warhammer" or "Warhammer 40,000" in the game's official title (e.g., Warhammer 40,000: Kill Team), we'll ignore the "Warhammer" or "Warhammer 40,000" portion except for the actual Warhammer 40,000 game (e.g., Kill Team game). You'll note the inclusion of "game" in the tag. This is important in making the tag specific to the game rather than to some other aspect of the lore. For example, if we just used "Necromunda" as a tag it wouldn't be clear if the content is about the game or the world. Similarly, a tag that simply says "Space Hulk" might refer to the game or to space hulks in general. And while we might not have tags for things like planets or space hulks, we don't want people appending tags to content unless those tags are specifically about that content. In addition, we will have tags to support certain types of discussion such as army list, tactica, rule question, and battle report (and any others we determine to be useful). Members who are searching for content, then, can use the search engine and list multiple tags to find the content that has all of the chosen tags. So someone looking for any battle reports for the 8th edition of the Warhammer 40,000 game would enter the tags WH40K 8th edition and battle report. We won't have compound tags (e.g., WH40K 8th edition battle report) as that would create an overly lengthy list. I expect that we'll publish a guide to the tags, both advice on how to use them as well as an index of all of the tags to aid in decision-making. I don't want to go off on a tangent about tags, however. I've been quietly building a structure for tags in preparation for the Inv 5.0 upgrade and that will go through a staff review process and then a community review process before we implement it. Suffice to say that whether or not we decide to use the clubs concept to support previous editions of games, it will be important that (a) we develop an effective system of tags to help in finding content, and (b) those tags are actually used.

According to the 5th edition Codex: Space Marines, the Crimson Templars (not to be confused with the Red Templars) are an official Chapter that guards the Eastern Fringe. Nothing else is known about them, including their color scheme, Chapter badge, lineage, founding, etc. There's nothing wrong with fleshing out an official Chapter for which there is a dearth of information, however. Numerous hobbyists have done just that with this Chapter over the years, most appearing to use the Black Templars color scheme, but replacing black with crimson. There have been a few that were slightly more creative, however. Stepping back to your idea, I see several elements. The first element is the idea that the founding character (?) was a member of the Imperial Fists Legion Templar Brethren. This is interesting in that the Templars were the most zealous of that Legion and most, if not all, remained with Sigismund when he was designated the first High Marshal of the new Black Templars Chapter. It's always possible that some might have remained with the Imperial Fists Chapter or one of the other Successors, having the honor of being selected as the first Chapter Master of some 3rd Founding Chapter (much like Fafnir Rann served that role with the Executioners Chapter). If that's the case, there is room to develop a character who was unlike Sigismund in many ways. Your imagination is the only limit there. A variation on this element is that the members of Sigismund's Seconds weren't all from the Imperial Fists Legion. There were representatives of all/most of the [loyalist] Legions within Sigismund's Seconds, providing you with an opportunity to explore other avenues if you're open to them (nobody would blame you for wanting to stick with the VIIth Legion, of course, since they were the best ). Perhaps a son of the Khan served in Sigismund's Seconds and was so impressed with the exploits of Sigismund that, when later given the honor of leading a 3rd Founding Chapter, he incorporated some things about Sigismund that inspired him while also incorporating things from his parent Legion (and possibly whatever 2nd Founding Chapter he served within) into his new Chapter. Or you could pick any other Legion, for that matter. The second element is the character and culture of the Chapter. While the first Chapter Master will likely have some influence on the nascent Chapter, there are many other influences, including other important individuals, the culture of any world(s) they may have been granted for recruiting/stewardship, and, most importantly, the experiences of that Chapter over time. Organizations will necessarily evolve based on their experiences. Ultimately, a Chapter that has "templars" in its name doesn't have to be anything like the Black Templars Chapter (aside from those elements that are common to all/most Chapters of the Adeptus Astartes, of course). It would be relatively easy to make a Chapter, even one that uses the Black Templars rules, distinct from the Black Templars. First and foremost, avoid the crusading knights imagery. You could focus on "templar" in its meaning of being a guardian of or from a sacred temple or structure, allowing the holy site to be something important within the culture of your Chapter's world. Whether you want to revert to a "basic" Adeptus Astartes theme or adopt something a little more distinct, there are many themes that might be incorporated. Simply imagine the effects of the rules and then consider other ways in which those effects might be realized. Imagine the types of temples/holy sites that are found in other (i.e., non-European/Hebraic) culture - the Taj Mahal in India, Chichen Itza in Mexico, Karnak in Egypt, etc. Or you could go with European sources that are pre-Christian, such as Stonehenge in England, the Svetovid Temple at Arkona, or others. You don't even have to use historical influences as your model, instead creating a culture from whole cloth (yes, any such endeavor will naturally incorporate real influences, but the key is to use them sparingly and to draw upon a variety of such sources so that none becomes dominant). The third element is the religious influence upon the Chapter. While any member of Sigismund's Seconds would likely bear witness to the miraculous nature of Keeler and Sigismund's (and Rogal Dorn's) responses to the first saint of the Imperial Cult, the Imperial Cult itself isn't a monolithic organization. Expressions of the Imperial Cult are many and varied, with the adherents of the different sub-cults being no less zealous or dedicated to their faith. Sigismund's expression of his faith combined his pre-existing beliefs (heavily influenced by the teachings of the Imperial Fists Legion) with what he witnessed in Keeler. Any of Sigismund's Seconds might similar have their own distinct expression of their faith, similarly influenced by their pre-existing beliefs, their devotion to Keeler, and whatever happened to them after the events of the Horus Heresy. Much like the second element, a member of the Adeptus Astartes who is devoted to the Imperial Cult doesn't have to be anything like any other Adeptus Astartes who is so devoted. Imagine an Adeptus Astartes Chapter cult that combines elements of the Promethean Cult (of the Salamanders Chapter) with the Imperial Cult, revering the Emperor as a Deity while focusing on craftsmanship. Or consider a Chapter cult that personifies the Emperor Deified as a storm sweeping across the galaxy to presage the dominance of Humanity. There are lots of ways to skin this cat. Ultimately, if you want to create a DIY Chapter (even if it's a fleshed-out version of a minor official Chapter) that is distinct from a well-known Chapter, the first step is to stop thinking about that official Chapter - disassociate your DIY Chapter from that other Chapter. The danger if you do otherwise is that you'll simply create a red version of the Black Templars, or Space Wolves in all but name, or the Angels [synonym for blood]. A good example of such disassociation in the creation of a new Chapter is the Blood Ravens - they are considerably distinct from the Blood Angels and the Raven Guard (granted they're not a DIY, but I think you get the point).

A tutorial about the Clubs feature is planned, but here's a quick rundown to answer your questions. The two easiest ways to access the Clubs feature are via the button at the top of the site and the link in the ++ SITE FEATURES ++ category (on the main Forums page). An indirect path into the feature is via the sidebar blocks. Recent Club Activity is one of the blocks that appears on both the main Forums page and in the various (sub)forums. Both versions show the 5 clubs in which there has been recent activity and you can click on any of them to take you directly to the club, then back out into the main Clubs feature page. A follow-on method for accessing the Clubs feature, usable after you have joined any clubs, is via your profile page. Simply click on the Clubs tab to see all of the clubs you have joined. You can then click on any of them to go directly into those clubs (backing out if you want to see the main Clubs feature page). And a great way to receive notifications about activity in any clubs is to follow the clubs in which you are interested and have your notification settings set up to provide you with notifications whenever there are updates in such clubs. This is actually a good idea for any content (e.g., blogs, discussions, forums, etc.) to which you want to pay attention and receive notifications when there are updates. What I envision (and this may change based on feedback and discussion) is that we would create a club for each eligible game ("eligible" here meaning games with multiple editions and whatever other criteria we decide upon). Each club would support all of the previous editions of the game. Clubs can include discussion forums, gallery albums, articles, blogs, download files, and calendar events, giving members a lot of control and flexibility. A link to each such club would then be included in the forum for [the current edition of] the game. We could provide one or two links - either a direct link that appears in the forum (such as the links to blogs and galleries that you see in many of the forums, especially those dedicated to specific factions) or a link in the resource topic that appears in the forum, or both. For example, if you look at the + IMPERIAL KNIGHTS + forum, you'll see links to Albums and Blogs. Those links will take you to all of the albums in the Imperial Knights category of the Gallery and the Imperial Knights category of the Blogs. In addition, there is the Imperial Knights Resources topic in which you can find links to a variety of Imperial Knights content both at the B&C and externally. We could use either/both of those methods. So a club dedicated to previous editions of the Kill Team game would be linked in the + KILL TEAM + forum whereas a club dedicated to previous editions of the Necromunda game would be linked in the + NECROMUNDA + forum. Using your example of Epic, the club for the previous editions of the Epic game would be linked in the + EPIC SCALE HORUS HERESY GAMES + forum. That forum currently covers three different games: Warhammer: The Horus Heresy - Legions Imperialis (the previous editions being Space Marine, then Warhammer Epic 40,000, then Epic Armageddon), Aeronautica Imperialis (the previous edition having the same name), and Adeptus Titanicus: The Horus Heresy (the previous editions being Adeptus Titanicus, then Epic: Titan Legions, then Adeptus Titanicus II), so there would be a club for each of those systems and each of those clubs would be linked in that forum (and there would likely be some cross-linking between the three clubs). Anyone who enjoys a previous edition of a game could then join the corresponding club and/or follow that club. As for names, I lean towards some sort of standardization to help with association. We currently have the Oldhammer 40k club, which supports previous editions of the Warhammer 40,000 game. We might use that as a template, creating clubs such as Oldhammer Kill Team, Oldhammer Epic, etc. That just hypothetical at this point (assuming we even do this) and whatever we end up doing would depend largely upon the desires of the community. And dovetailing off your comments, you might consider providing links to the various Discord servers and Facebook groups that support [previous editions of] Warhammer 40,000 setting games. We could then add those links to the resource topics to help other members of the community to find them.

I keep spelling "Khalkotauroi" incorrectly. Another change - the Fist of Purity member will be the alternate sergeant (equipped with a Deathwatch boltgun and power weapon [sword]). So I'm changing the "fist" member in this initial group to some other Chapter, a new DIY that I have to work on. Assembly of the initial six members begins today. Since I've changed the Sergeants around and didn't assemble the storm bolter warrior's bits, I'll have to rearrange the bits and collect some new ones. I'll try to post pictures as soon as I get them all assembled.

I see the Space Crusade project as something that could easily be conducted via a club, but not via the Nook. The topic is correct in leading with it not being an RPG thing, the only real relevance being that it is being conceived as a play-by-post thing. If you develop any products for playing/adapting Space Crusade to the PBP format, those would be good candidates for articles in either the Homegrown Rules or Miscellaneous category of the Articles feature and/or files in the Other Games subcategory of the Game Systems category of the Downloads feature. I could easily see outreach for this occurring in the + OTHER GAMES + forum, and perhaps in the forums related to the antagonists (definitely + ADEPTUS ASTARTES +, but also + ORKS +, + TYRANIDS +, and + NECRONS + depending on how things play out). From what I can tell, The Stars, Our Ruination is intended as a general-use project that anyone might use in an RPG. If that's correct, it could easily be conducted via a separate club. If, on the other hand, the project is being developed solely for the members of the Nook, then it would be appropriate to move it into the Nook. Outreach for this could occur in the + AELDARI + and + ROLEPLAYING GAMES + forums. Regardless, the finished product would be an excellent candidate as an article in the Lore category of the Articles feature and/or as a file in the Background (Lore) category of the Downloads feature (both with the Aeldari and/or Asuryani tags), with the article/file linked in the + ROLEPLAYING GAMES + resource topic. I definitely see the Knights of the Golden Throne project as something that should be conducted in a separate club. The end products of that project would be excellent candidates for articles in the Homegrown Rules category of the Articles feature and/or a file in the Warhammer 40,000 Roleplaying Games subcategory under the Game Systems category of the Downloads feature. I can see outreach for this project taking place in the + IMPERIAL KNIGHTS + and + ROLEPLAYING GAMES + forums. Depending upon the products developed, each of these might also be a great candidate for an issue of the Legio Imprint.

I definitely appreciate that offer, but there won't be any Exorcists battle-brothers in this kill team. If I ever get around to a proper Exorcists army/kill team, however, I may take you up on that offer (since you and I both know that the Exorcists are the greatest Chapter ever ). In other news, I've decided to move Chapters around a bit. The Veteran Sergeant will be from the Khalkotouri Chapter since the thunder hammer is more in keeping with my concept of that DIY Chapter and less appropriate for the Fists of Purity Chapter. The Fists of Purity veteran, then, will become a Warrior. I may swap one of the [Warrior] shotguns for a boltgun option (either the Deathwatch boltgun and power weapon or the Stalker pattern boltgun). I really wish the Deathwatch still had the boltgun/chainsword combination that was allowed when they first appeared in the Chapter Approved article back in 3rd edition. That would be so much more in keeping with both our name and lore. I guess the Intercessors offer the next best thing, so I'll have to keep that in mind if I ever do a Primaris version of this kill team.

To preface, this response is not saying "no" to the implied suggestion. Under our current structure, Shadow War: Armageddon is supported in the + OTHER GAMES + forum. You can see the resource topic for that game here. You can also see a number of files that hobbyists have created for the game in our Downloads feature (I think that most/all of these are also listed/linked in the resource topic). That game, like Battlefleet Gothic and some others, only had a single edition. SWA was surprisingly short-lived, being published in 2017 (viewed as a WH40Kified version of Mordheim and the 1st/2nd editions of Necromunda), and being "replaced" shortly thereafter by the 2018 edition of Kill Team (the first "proper" edition of that game where it wasn't an add-on to the main Warhammer 40,000 game). We could make clubs for games like Shadow War: Armageddon, Battlefleet Gothic, and others, but there is a much lower need for such clubs when these games had only a single edition and content for them works under the site's current structure. There's no "edition confusion" that arises in the various features. I'm not in any way opposed to such clubs, mind you, if the community thinks they would be better than the current setup.

Games Workshop has an interesting model with their games, publishing new editions every few years. As a result, much of the content here becomes obsolete when a new edition of a game is published. When I say "content" I am mostly focused on discussions about gameplay (rules discussions, tactica, army lists, and battle reports) and files related to gameplay (e.g., these alternative rules for the Black Templars were created for the 8th edition of the Warhammer 40,000 game). Many hobbyists are focused solely on the current edition of a game, though there are some hobbyists that enjoy playing older editions of games. Ideally, we want to be able to support players in both camps. Our status quo does that, so this isn't necessarily a "problem" that needs to be fixed. What I'm trying to figure out at this point is if there might be an alternative that supports the community without creating an onerous work effort, either for the members or for the staff. The Oldhammer 40k club sparked an idea. For those that aren't aware of the club, it is a B&C club that provides support to players who enjoy older editions of the game. We are currently on the 10th edition of that game, so discussion about previous editions and files to support those editions can take place in that club while members who enjoy the current edition of the game can continue to use the site's main forums. Clubs tend to be underutilized, with the system not providing the maximum visibility. We've mitigated that somewhat through the use of the sidebar blocks and the addition of a link to that club in the resource topic for the Warhammer 40,000 game. With the recent reorganization of the site's forums, it occurred to me that other games [that have dedicated forums] might similarly be supported with clubs. For example, the Kill Team game is on the 2024 edition, but the game has had various iterations over the years, including its original incarnation as a subset of the Warhammer 40,000 4th edition rules and several similar follow-ups, with distinct editions being published in 2018 and 2021. There may be hobbyists who enjoy one (or more) of those older versions of the game. Under this concept, any of the games for which the B&C has a dedicated forum and for which there are multiple distinct editions might have a club here. Meanwhile, there would also be a club for each such game to support older editions. The main Forums and Downloads features would have content for the current edition of the game while content for older editions would be moved into the corresponding club. The clubs would then be linked in the main forum's resource topic, giving members interested in playing an older edition of the game an easy path to the club (rather than having to search for it). The method of facilitating this would be the use of edition-based tags for games, and we are working on standardizing those. These tags should be included on any relevant content and when there is an edition change, content with the older edition's tag would be moved into the corresponding club. We wouldn't necessarily need such clubs for every game for which there are multiple editions. Similarly, I don't know how much of a need there might be for this solution for some of the more niche games. There might be room for clubs for some of these, however. For example, the Aeronautica Imperialis game had two editions, though it is no longer supported and has been rolled into the other epic-scale games set in the Horus Heresy (though the 1st and 2nd editions were set in the "modern" era). The 1st edition was distinct from the 2nd edition, so some might believe that such a club is warranted. I'm not sure how much content appeared for any of the editions of the game here at the B&C, however. A club to support the game might be helpful for members of the community, though. I can definitely see this having potential for the Kill Team, Necromunda, and Warhammer: Horus Heresy games. I can also see it supporting the Legiones Imperialis (Epic) and Adeptus Titanicus games. Whether or not it would support games such as Aeronautica Imperialis, Space Hulk, etc. is up for debate. It's really a matter of how rules change across editions - the more substantial the differences are, the more likely it is that a club might be helpful, especially if there is a substantial amount of content for the older edition(s) of the game here. The work I see for these hypothetical clubs involves: Determining if a club would be helpful for any game. Ensuring that the proper tags are assigned (should be done by the member submitting the content, but the staff might perform a role in disciplining the process). Moving content into the clubs when there is an edition change. This falls to the staff, but can be very easy when the right tags are used. To be clear, I'm not saying that we should do this. It's just something that occurred to me as I considered ways to support the community. Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not the benefits to members would be worth the effort required (on the part of both the members and the staff). I'm interested in your thoughts on the subject.

At this point it looks like the creation of a club resets a member's achievement points to 1. I'm not sure why the system would do that.