Jump to content

Ioldanach

+ FRATER DOMUS +
  • Posts

    782
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Ioldanach

Profile Information

  • Location
    Lost in shadow on the Path of the Outcast

Previous Fields

  • Armies played
    Aeldari, Adeptus Astartes

Recent Profile Visitors

1567 profile views

Ioldanach's Achievements

  1. I would hate if GW went back to limiting sub-faction benefits to named characters. Every Ynnari army isn't going to include Yvraine or the Visarch. Tying sub-faction rules to named characters removes one of the aspects of the game that makes it so appealing - the ability to make it your own. If anything, the opposite mechanism should be used - you can't take named character X unless your army uses the rules for X's sub-faction. I think that the biggest problem GW has is that they've made sub-factions too distinct from the norm. Sub-faction rules should allow for a little bit of flavor and distinctiveness without changing things too much from the main faction. There are (and should be) a few exceptions, such as the Black Templars and Space Wolves compared to other Space Marines. For the most part, however, sub-factions should just be slight variations on the main theme. I would be very disappointed if GW took away sub-faction support. I want the Raven Guard to be different from the Salamanders, and for Ulthwé to be different from Iyanden. I don't need huge differences between related sub-factions, but small things here and there are nice.
  2. So I've been pondering more on this, especially after seeing this month's White Dwarf and the conversions of the Darktide characters, and I see this project having two outcomes, as before. In fact, I'll probably use the same names as before. The first version will be "basic" and will be limited by the models. The second version will be "unchained" and will aim for a lot more conversion, though it will be limited by what has been allowed in previous editions. The "unchained" version will probably differ from the "standard" version in that it will use points values, after all, it has to allow for a lot more weapon/wargear combinations.
  3. I like this. It reminds me a lot of older editions, but re-packaged for the current edition. I see a lot of exarch powers that don't have points values assigned. I assume that your goal there is to update those powers to be in line with the current edition and then to determine a fair points value for each. Is that correct? If I'm reading this correctly, if you're playing Crusade rules, all of your exarchs start at the basic datasheet level sans exarch powers. You can then use RP to advance them. When playing non-Crusade rules, however, you can have different exarchs start at different levels. Is that correct? Personally, I'm not a fan of the Crusade rules limitation, but I can see why you would leave that alone. As far as relics go, have you given any thought to re-introducing some of the old relics/wargear that exarchs could have in 1st and 2nd editions? It would be neat to see some converted exarchs with a web of skulls and other exotic weapons. It would also be neat to see some ascended level exarchs in armies, allowing players to use these pseudo-Phoenix Lords. I have a vision of a Dire Avenger exarch armed with a power glaive.
  4. You might infer that Abaddon was murdering Custodes and Imperial Fists Terminators left and right, but that’s not implied. In fact, the older lore that I’ve found doesn’t mention Abaddon’s performance against Custodes at all, only mentioning that he fought through Imperial Fists Terminators. While we can surmise that he was victorious and survived his battles against those foes, there’s absolutely nothing to imply that it was a cakewalk for him. I see several flaws in this passage. First, I was under the impression that Loken’s fate is unknown, meaning that he might not fight Abaddon during the Siege of Terra. Second, aside from poor writing (or wish-listing, as in this case), antagonists don’t just gain new abilities simply because their adversaries gain their own. Part of any conflict and suspense is overcoming more powerful adversaries. Given, Abaddon is one of the most powerful of the Legiones Astartes and was more potent than Loken prior to the Heresy; so using your argument, it might simply be said that Loken’s new abilities simply put him on par with Abaddon (making a theoretical battle to the two of them even more suspenseful, even though we would know that Abaddon would survive since he has a known destiny). Even then, the two could meet on the battlefield and neither might die. Blowing right past the “Loken is going to die” portion that has already been demonstrated to be false/wish-listing, what is your source for Dorn being “heavily wounded” [in the attack on the Vengeful Spirit]? None of the official sources that I’ve consulted mention Dorn being heavily injured, and especially not by Abaddon, who isn’t mentioned in any description of that event beyond battling his way through Imperial Fists Legion Terminators, finding the body of Horus, and taking the Claw. My primary source here is The Horus Heresy: Collected Visions which was the authoritative source prior to the Horus Heresy novels changing things. I’ve also checked various codices and campaign books, however, and haven’t found any that mention this “fact.” You’re basically claiming that Y happened (even though it conflicts with official lore) because X happened (even though X didn’t happen). When did Abaddon visit the daemon world that was ruled by a daemon prince of Tzeentch? Was that before the Siege of Terra? Or did it take place after the death of Horus and the flight of the traitors into the Eye of Terror? Similarly, gaining powers of foresight is cool, but that doesn’t make him a full-blown psyker with other powers that you imply might be in his possession at the time of the Siege of Terra (especially since he didn’t get those foresight powers until after the Siege of Terra). Yes, the followers of Chaos only have so much leeway, but the core of Abaddon’s lore since he was first introduced is that he continues to resist submitting fully. Becoming a daemon prince in the manner that you suggest completely defies that lore. It would deny Abaddon the freedom in real-space that he needs, and which drives him to continue to resist. You are basically suggesting a revision to the character that disregards the element that defines him. This is mostly irrelevant to the discussion since a defining aspect of Chaos is that many who ultimately serve it hate, fear, and loathe it prior to submitting. Many do not join Chaos willingly, but some of those go on to become great champions of Chaos and daemon princes. To counter, Sanguinius hates Chaos and refuses to give in to its lure. Going back to your original suggestion, you made one statement that is quite important and really makes the purpose of these suggested rules clear: No model should be able to “solo the enemy army” except via plot armor. Rules that might allow for such a model wouldn’t be fun or sporting. As it stands right now, Abaddon is superior to any loyalist Space Marine, which is probably appropriate. Whether or not he’s superior to Roboute Guilliman is up for debate. At the very least, Abaddon should approach the Primarch’s abilities, and potentially even rival him sufficiently to be a threat. At the very least, each should have relative strengths and weaknesses in comparison to each other. Making Abaddon outright superior to Roboute Guilliman, however, isn’t appropriate. Again, though, I’m no expert on Abaddon. Please cite and quote the official lore that is driving your suggestions. So far you’ve only mentioned your personal interpretations of the lore, which many find questionable and which are in conflict with the official sources that I've consulted. Worse, you don’t seem to understand Abaddon’s nature and place in the setting. You have suggested rules that are completely at odds with what Abaddon is supposed to be, presumably for the purpose of making Chaos the inevitable all-conquering element of the setting that would then, by the nature of what you want it to do, completely ruin the setting and the game. Abaddon is a great character (and a great miniature). The novels by A D-B have done a great job of fleshing him out (I’m eagerly awaiting the continuance of that series) and the rules have kept pace with making him the big bad of the setting. If there are weaknesses with the rules, they should be fixed. We need to do that in a manner that corresponds with the lore, though, and not just because we want Chaos to pwn everybody.
  5. I'm not surprised that modern [Horus Heresy] codices/novels don't mention Abaddon's mark since the Chaos gods didn't start courting his servitude until after the death of Horus. The earliest we should see any semblance of his mark is in the Black Legion novels that A D-B is writing, these taking place after the Horus Heresy, Scouring, and Legion Wars. None of the options you've presented appear to accurately represent Horus as he's presented in the lore, especially during the Horus Heresy. The whole point of Abaddon's lore is that he is resisting total submission to the Chaos gods, both individually and collectively. What lore justifies Abaddon learning spells? Is there any official lore saying that Abaddon is a psyker? He relies upon powerful sorcerers throughout the millennia, but doesn't appear to wield any psyker powers of his own (as far as I'm aware, but I don't consider myself an expert on the character). The Unbound option seems similarly iffy. While I've seen lots of speculation from hobbyists about a theoretical matchup between Abaddon and Guilliman, all of them seem to be heavily biased and subjective (even though it appears that Guilliman is given the edge in a slight majority of them). What official lore clarifies the relative power levels of each? The Warp-Chosen option is, I think, extremely imprudent. It's completely dependent upon (a) disregarding Abaddon's millennia-long refusal to submit to any/all of the Chaos gods, and (b) relies upon a further progression of the lore. It's like writing rules for a hypothetical version of Tycho if he had not succumbed to the Black Rage and had instead fallen to Chaos (just to make him even more psycho). It's fine as a personal speculation for your own hobbying efforts as well as for those that want to tinker with the setting in personal ways, but it doesn't seem like something that should ever hit the mainstream. I was under the impression that Abaddon's current rules embody the blessings of all four of the Chaos gods. Are there any aspects of his current Warhammer 40,000 rules that don't adequately represent your opinion of him? Or perhaps you'd like to focus on Abaddon during the Horus Heresy, when he is much less powerful than in M41. Can you cite official lore, especially from reliable narrators or objective omniscient views (vice unreliable narrators), that backs up your estimation of what Abaddon's powers/mark should be?
  6. Keeping in mind that this isn't just about the Inquisition (I'm aiming for the basic diversity that the Inquisitor game offered), I'm looking at four baseline kill teams: Inquisition Rogue Traders Adeptus Mechanicus Ecclesiarchy The intent is to have each represent the most common type of kill team that might participate in the shadow wars of the Imperium, each being unique in terms of its members and rules. Each would then offer variations based on subsets. The Inquisition is the best to describe the concept. There are the ordos, each of which would offer a unique variation in terms of members, psychic powers, and weapons/wargear. There is also the radical/puritan option, which would create further variation. The Inquisition probably has the most variety in this, but each of the other factions would similarly have some variant options. For the most part, I'd like to build a consolidated framework for members. For example, a crusader is a crusader is a crusader, so a crusader in an Ordo Hereticus Inquisition kill team would be the same as a crusader in an Ecclesiarchy kill team. There might be differences in terms of how many there might be (I could see an Ecclesiarchy kill team allowing for more crusaders than an Inquisition kill team, for example), but the operatives would follow common rules throughout. In this way, the faction book can be smaller by simply presenting the rules for each operative type once and relying on the kill team rules to identify how they may be used differently in different kill teams. The Elucidian Starstriders and Corsairs are two official kill teams that provide an example for how I think this concept will work (there are others that are similar, but these are the two that I've looked at closely).
  7. What a coincidence! I haven't been around in a while, but I did just upload a new version of the Kill Team templates to the Downloads. You can see it here.
  8. A while back I was privileged to work with a group of fellow hobbyists here in the development of rules for using the Inquisition and Rogue Traders in the previous edition of Kill Team. You can see the designer's notes and links to the files here. While I've always wanted to update those rules for the new edition of Kill Team, the old rules were reliant upon the old Commanders or Rogue Traders expansions. With the inclusion of the Elucidian Starstriders in the Kill Team 2022 Annual, we may have a decent precedent for including characters like rogue traders and inquisitors in kill teams, toning things down a bit from the COMMANDER rules. My initial thoughts are: This would be a sort of expansion to allow for what we used to be able to do in the Inquisitor game, but updated based on model expansions and the new Kill Team game. While I would strive to balance it for the main game, my primary goal is to get the kill teams for this project balanced against each other for an Inquisimunda type of experience (i.e., without the main factions). Things would be toned down quite a bit from the previous effort. I'd still like to give players a lot of freedom, but the shift from points to fixed fire teams changes the dynamic a bit. Space Marines, Sisters of Battle, and Sisters of Silence would be excluded. Multiple kill teams would be created, allowing for different types of inquisitors, rogue traders, tech-priests, and prelates. So where the previous version of the rules allowed a player to choose an inquisitor's ordo and modify their command roster options accordingly, there would be a kill team specifically for an Ordo Malleus inquisitor, another for an Ordo Hereticus inquisitor, etc. While all of the inquisition kill teams would have broad similarities, each would have unique elements. I've just begun playing around with things, so I'm very interested in any input anyone might have.
  9. I finally got the 2022 Annual and created a new template based on that format. In addition, I fixed the font size issue identified above and improved the skull graphic. The file now includes both formats (Compendium and Annual) so you can choose the one that works for you. From what I can tell, the original (Compendium) format allows for different types of kill teams to be chosen for a faction whereas the new (Annual) format only includes a single kill team option. If you see any areas where I can improve either file, please let me know.
  10. It's great to see the site back online and better than ever. A big "thank you" to everyone involved in making it happen!
  11. I'm really looking forward to this, though I'm just as disappointed to hear about the painters. Thanks to everyone involved in making this happen!
  12. For me, all games are friendly, even those in a competitive environment such as a tournament. Warhammer 40,000 isn’t just “a game.” It’s a hobby of which the game is only one component. Other components include artistry, lore, and being social. My approach to the game is to strive for as much of each as I can, within whatever limitations I may have. When I play a game, I’m there to play well, hopefully to win, to push nice looking miniatures around a nice looking table so that the whole is somewhat immersive and aesthetically pleasing, and to ensure that whomever I’m playing with has as good of a time as possible. I still want to win, but not at the expense of my opponent’s enjoyment. It’s possible to lose a game and to still have an enjoyable time. That doesn’t mean that I’m going to throw a game just so that my opponent has a “good time,” but I’ll do my best to make sure that they don’t make mistakes out of ignorance. This game is so complex that it is unreasonable to expect everyone to know everything. Even experienced players have gaps in their knowledge. I’ve been involved in the hobby for quite some time, but I don’t have the presumptuousness to think that I know everything (there are huge gaps in my knowledge); and if my opponent is doing something risky that might be out of ignorance, I’m going to let them know. I wouldn’t do that in real combat, but Warhammer 40,000 is a hobby. It’s about having a fun overall experience (and if you can win, even better, but you should be able to have fun even when you lose). Outside of a tournament I might play against someone that likes to play “gotcha” with me, but only once. After I’ve figured out that they’re a cutthroat player that puts more emphasis on winning than everyone having a fun time, I’ll probably refuse to play against them after that. Conversely, someone that works with me to make the overall experience fun for all is someone that I’ll gladly play again, even if I lose. And I do my best to be that person for my opponents. Obviously I can’t pick my opponents in a highly competitive tournament, but I’ll still do my best to make tournament games enjoyable for my opponent (even when I’m doing my best to beat them). The ethics to me are simple: Make the game fun for everyone, even when you’re trying to win. Capitalizing on rules ignorance goes against this concept.
  13. Per previous discussions, the following changes have been made in the new versions I just uploaded today: The weapon options have been streamlined. Operatives no longer come with an array of blades and brace of pistols as standard with additional weapons. Other factions don’t have this feature, so it seemed inappropriate and unnecessarily complex to include them here. Operatives now generally come with one ranged weapon and one melee weapon. The Rogue Trader version was not supposed to include any drukhari weapons, but in cutting and pasting from the Doom of Mymeara version, I forgot to remove the blast pistol from the felarch’s options. I have now removed it (though the Doom of Mymeara version, which retains the drukhari weapons, still allows the felarch to take a blast pistol). After the question was posed, I took a closer look at the various factions in the Compendium and saw that most do not have an invulnerable save. Since The Doom of Mymeara (second edition) doesn’t allow felarchs to take an invulnerable save, I removed the shimmer shield (equipment). I’ll have to take a closer look at the Rogue Trader sources and Warhammer 40,000 2nd Edition Codex: Eldar to see if the squad leader level character could take an invulnerable save (usually a refractor field or similar). If it turns out that they could, I may return that equipment to the Rogue Trader variant. The suggestion to represent the brace of pistols as allowing the operative to choose between the shuriken pistol and splinter pistol profiles is actually very sound. The only problem is that the splinter pistol will be the go-to choice, making the two options superfluous. If the two weapons were closer and there was a tactical reason to choose either depending on the situation, I would do that. As it is, though, it seems like nothing more than a tip of the hat to the old lore. I’m still looking at ploy ideas, and welcome any suggestions, but some of the factions don’t have many ploys, so I’m not sure if the corsairs need more ploys. I could see replacing some of the current ploys, which are taken from the craftworlds, drukhari, and harlequins lists, but we’ll need to come up with ploys that are thematically appropriate to the corsairs and why/how they fight. I didn’t add the squad leader level void dreamer character that I described previously. That wasn’t in either The Doom of Mymeara or the 1st/2nd edition Eldar rules for the pirates/corsairs, so it seemed inappropriate to add them here. I’m considering creating a third variant later, once these two variants are finalized, to create my own version of the eldar corsairs that, though based on the older sources, is more of a synthesis of them. If I do that, I’ll probably include the void dreamers in that variant. Yes, I’ll probably work on the OUTCAST list soon, too. I’m just waiting to finalize these two CORSAIR FLEET variants so that the corsairs in the OUTCAST list are consistent. In concept, the OUTCAST list will combine some elements of the CRAFTWORLDS list and the CORSAIR LIST into a new list, not entirely one or the other, but a slightly different mix for a different type of kill team. I’m getting the sense that, aside from actual playtesting results, both of these variants are close to their finalized forms as representations of previous incarnations of the corsairs. I have a feeling that the corsairs, if indeed they are in the upcoming Craftworlds codex, will be revised somewhat and the variants that I’m working on will become obsolete. At that point, assuming Games Workshop doesn’t give us official rules for the eldar corsairs in Kill Team, I’ll create a new variants that translates the Warhammer 40,000 version into Kill Team 2021 concepts.
  14. It’s time to murder my darlings. I’ve been looking at some things and think that a few more changes need to be implemented. There are probably more things that need to be taken care of, but I’ll (we’ll) get to those eventually. These should serve as a sufficient starting point. First is the brace of pistols. In the first edition of The Doom of Mymeara, the corsairs had shuriken pistols and no access to drukhari weapons. The second edition of The Doom of Mymeara gave access to drukhari weapons and replaced the shuriken pistol with the brace of pistols, providing the following lore/rules: Imperial Armour Index Xenos gave the brace of pistols a range of 8”, which was shorter than the 12” that both shuriken and splinter pistols had. Where the other pistols fired one shot, however, the brace of pistols fired D6 shots. The brace of pistols also incorporated the abilities of both splinter (poisoned) and shuriken (rending). From a mechanical point of view, however, the concept seems unnecessary. The Warhammer 40,000 game doesn’t cover reloading, after all, so having a bunch of spare pistols doesn’t mean anything mechanically. Either the model is firing a shuriken pistol or it is firing a splinter pistol. The only real potential bonus is when the model is firing two pistols at the same time. This can be easy to implement if the model is only allowed to fire one type of pistol, but can get complicated if the rules allow for the model to fire two types of pistols at the same time. The concept of a pew pew corsair gunfighter seems intriguing, however, shades of Jango Fett before Mace Windu came along. The best way to implement it while preserving balance with the guardians and kabalites is to consider the brace of pistols to be a pair (bunch) of laspistols while also allowing [certain?] operatives to take shuriken or splinter pistols instead. The profile would be changed to match the Astra Militarum laspistol, but with either 1 additional attack or the fusillade ability, or both. This would represent the corsair dual-wielding laspistols. One alternative I’m considering for representing the old concept is to allow a corsair model to take both types of pistols and one other weapon (array of blades, spar-glaive, whatever). The operative can then switch between the shuriken pistol and splinter pistol at will, which matches up to the lore I quoted. Another alternative might be to provide an ability whereby an operative equipped with (certain?) pistols can increase their Attacks stat by 1 and/or get fusillade/ceaseless, but can only use a gun butt profile in Fighting during that turning point (and I’d have to add the gun butt profile). I’m not sure if either of those is necessary, though. For now I’m going with laspistol and fusillade ability to represent a “brace of pistols.” Second is the Corsair blades. I’ve changed them to match the drukhari array of blades. The concept is the same – the operative has a bunch of knives. Being different for the sake of being different doesn’t seem prudent. Third is the chainsword. At this point I’m thinking about just going with the spar-glaive, identical to the Storm guardian blades and chainsword (removing the chainsword as a separate entry). If chainswords/chainblades are given distinct rules when the Striking Scorpions are added to the asuryani options (as the Kill Team Core Book implies will happen), I’ll revisit this. In the meantime, being different for the sake of being different doesn’t seem prudent. Fourth, I’ve changed the celestial shield (equipment) to a shimmershield. Felarchs weren’t able to take shimmershields in The Doom of Mymeara, and their asuryani/drukhari guardian/kabalite counterparts can’t take invulnerable saves. The voidstorm corsairs, however, are intended to be a corsair counterpart to dire avengers, so making the shimmershield an equipment option (costs points instead of being integral), seems reasonable. This change downgrades the invulnerable save from 4+ to 5+, and reduces the cost from 2EP to 1EP. The above changes have resulted in a number of changes to each of the fire teams regarding the weapon combinations. For the most part, the end results are similar to what they were before, but with pistols offering choices (instead of the operative just coming with a brace of pistols) and the chainsword being removed. What I’m looking at now is whether or not these are balanced with other lists. The primary comparisons are the guardians and kabalites. These are generally equipped with a pistol and sword or a “rifle” and fists. The array of blades is the corsair counter to fists. Right now most models have a pistol choice, an array of blades, and some other weapon. I’m trying to figure out if that’s right, or if the corsairs should be limited like their counterparts. Realistically, a model equipped with a lasblaster or shuriken catapult isn’t going to use the pistol profile, so including the pistols seems to be an indulgence. Similarly, a model with a spar-glaive isn’t going to use the array of blades profile. The only real reason I can think of for keeping these is for thematics and model appearance, but I’m not sure if that’s sufficient reason. And then there are a few things I’m considering, and for which I’d like some input from others. First, I’m considering including a void dreamer as an alternate leader. This would basically be identical to the felarch, but would take a witchblade and have access to a few psychic powers. This draws on the concept of aeldari outcasts occasionally experimenting with their psychic abilities outside the protective strictures of the Witch Path. This might not be a full void dreamer, so might have a slightly different name. Thematically, the concept is similar to the way in which asuryani warlocks can join guardian squads (though they are not included in the asuryani kill team in the Compendium). Void dreamers (or whatever they might end up being called) would not be “battle psykers,” but would be more concerned with seeing, cherry picking three from the Anhrathe in the previous edition of the Kill Team game. Second is dissonance weapons. Aside from a few cannons in the asuryani list, and not counting the howling banshees, neither the asuryani nor drukhari make extensive use of dissonance weapons. So the extensive inclusion of these weapons in The Doom of Mymeara rules for the corsairs makes them one of the signature weapons for the anhrathe. The main problem is that there are no bits for these weapons. We might extrapolate how they look based on the corsair jetbike conversion kit that Forge World used to make, as well as from the asuryani support weapons, but the conversions forced/allowed by these rules should be based on kit-bashing and not on sculpting. I’d love to see Games Workshop give these weapons to the corsairs if/when they re-introduce them to the setting, at which point I’ll incorporate them into these lists. For now, though, they’re going to remain on the “would like” list. Third is a ploy (I’m not sure if it should be strategic or tactical) that capitalizes on equipping operatives with corsair jet packs. The concept I have in mind right now is allowing all Corsair Fleet operatives that are equipped with corsair jet packs to make a 2” (3”?) move after all operatives are deployed but before starting the first Turning point (or something like that). Or maybe it could be something different, depending on suggestions I get from the audience.
  15. I did a little more thinking and made some adjustments to the above, keeping The Doom of Mymeara and Rogue Trader variants as separate. They are mostly identical except that The Doom of Mymeara variant keeps the drukhari weapons while the Rogue Trader variant replaces those with asuryani counterparts (e.g., dark lance removed and replaced with bright lance) and adds the hand flamer, power axe, and power glove for a few models. The structure of each is identical (you can see the explanation at the download page). You can take a corsair reaver fire team with a gunner (now only able to take special weapons). Instead of a gunner you can take a ghostwalker or a balestrike corsair (heavy weapons, one per kill team). You can take a voidstorm corsair fire team with a gunner (also only able to take special weapons). All voidstorm corsairs are effectively felarchs now, though with slightly more limited options. Instead of a gunner you can take a ghostwalker or a corsair malevolent. Instead of a corsair reaver/voidstorm corsair in one fire team, you can take a felarch (single operative datasheet now). You can see more details at the download page. I'll continue to make small refinements to these variants, seeing them as "get you by" rules for players until (unless) GW gives us shiny new official corsairs in Kill Team. If the rumors are true and we see new eldar corsairs, I'll update these to align with the WH40K rules (there won't be a need if GW gives us official Kill Team 2021 rules for the corsairs ). I have some bespoke variants in mind, hence the addition of the OUTCAST keyword to all of the operative datasheets. The current version of each is dated 26 December 2021 (follow the link in the first post).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.