doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262 
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 16, 2019 15:19:14 GMT -6
Can someone explain these to me? I noticed they have warlord traits and relics...how do these work? DO I get them in addition to my normal warlord trait and relic? Do they need to comprise a full detachment on their own, or can they be part of a detachment? Will they regrow hair thicker than before?
|
|
zyggy
initiate
Posts: 242
|
Post by zyggy on Apr 16, 2019 15:37:07 GMT -6
The basic rundown is this:
If you have a legal detachment of any kind, you can spend a command point to make them a specialist detachment. Specialist detachments gain access to their specific warlord traits and relics, and the relevant units in those detachments will gain a keyword that can be used for the specialist detachment's specific stratagems. These only apply to units in the specialist detachment, and you only gain *access* to their relics and traits, they are not in addition to the normal codex relics/warlord traits.
So for example, if you have two battalions of Deathskull orks and spend a command point to make one of them a specialist detachment. the units in that detachment (and only that detachment) still count as a deathskull battalion, but can now also equip the relevant relics/warlord traits and use their stratagems in addition to their usual ones. If you use the warlord trait, then obviously your warlord must be in the specialist detachment, just as in any other multi-detachment force.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingwalnut on Apr 16, 2019 15:40:00 GMT -6
So here goes...
Specialist detachments are essentially perks you can add onto existing detachments. You must spend 1 CP before the game begins to add this "perk" to a detachment. As far as I know, you cannot stack specialist detachments onto a single detachment, but I could be wrong about that.
Each specialist detachment only benefits particular units in said detachment. It does this by adding special keywords to certain units as a way to control what gets the buffs. For example, the Bringers of Despair detachment gives <Black Legion> <Terminators> the <Bringers of Despair> keyword. So it can only be applied to units in a detachment with those required keywords. Each specialist detachment has stratagems that can be used for the indicated CP cost on the units with those keywords, just like any other stratagem.
The Warlord traits and relics can only be given to units with the specialist detachment keyword. So essentially, you would need to make your warlord one of the units affected by this specialist detachment, EXCEPT! There is a stratagem available to everyone called "Field Commander". For 1 CP, you can give a character in a specialist detachment a warlord trait FROM that specialist detachment. This unit is not your warlord for the purposes of scoring points in the game. It is really just a way to give an HQ the specialist warlord trait without forcing you to give up other WL traits.
Similarly, the relic can only be given to characters in the detachment who match the keywords. Going back to the Brings of Despair, Angel's Bane (the relic for that detachment), is a relic combi bolter that can only be given to characters with the <Bringers of Despair> keyword, which can only be gained by being a <Black Legion> <Terminator> in the specialist detachment. So essentially, only HQs in Terminator Armor.
Does that make sense?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Apr 17, 2019 7:45:47 GMT -6
TL;DR:
You pay 1CP to make a detachment a specialist detachment.
You then can take that detachments relic/warlord trait *instead of* one of the BRB ones or Codex ones, but you still have to pay extra CP to take extra relics etc.
You can also pay 1CP to give the warlord trait from the specialist detachment to a character that gets that keyword, in addition to the free warlord trait you take on your warlord. Its a universal stratagem for all specialist detachments called "field commander".
So you basically pay 1-2CP for access to new strats and relics/warlord traits.
|
|
doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 17, 2019 7:48:16 GMT -6
Thank you gentlemen, that makes perfect sense, and might be worth it for a DG centric army with mediocre strategems
|
|
|
|
Post by kingwalnut on Apr 17, 2019 7:51:49 GMT -6
Can Death Guard actually use the chaos detachments from Vigilus Ablaze?
|
|
cj
neophyte
Posts: 734
|
Post by cj on Apr 17, 2019 8:57:08 GMT -6
Can Death Guard actually use the chaos detachments from Vigilus Ablaze? I myself have not read the book yet. How do the specialty formations get going? Is it based on keywords like <Heretic Astartes>, or is it legion/chapter specific? |
|
|
|
Post by kingwalnut on Apr 17, 2019 9:05:04 GMT -6
I just looked at the few I have screen grabs of. It look like they lead with "select a Chaos Space Marines detachment" so the Vigilus Ablaze detachments might be CSM specific only. They don't say Heretic Astartes, but I am not reading anything that for sure confirms you can't use them.
|
|
doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 17, 2019 11:38:55 GMT -6
Can Death Guard actually use the chaos detachments from Vigilus Ablaze? No, but an Allied Detatchment absolutely can. Since they refuse to fix the CP system I might as well take advantage of it. Some alpha legion obliterators with a mark of Nurgle under a Feculent Gnarlemaw with a dark apostle is going to make people flip the table. |
|
|
|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Apr 17, 2019 13:02:44 GMT -6
While I certainly enjoy some of the bonuses as a CSM/GSC player, does anyone else feel like this is reminiscent of some of the 7th ed bloat? Especially bringing back formations. It's already hard enough to memorize your opponent's army. Every codex already has 5+ subfaction rules, 20+ strategems, relics and warlord traits.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingwalnut on Apr 17, 2019 13:36:47 GMT -6
It doesn't feel too overwhelming to me. I feel like 40k is a game that lends itself to bloat. When you have 10+ core factions, you are going to get some serious build up in content.
I think it also creates an "asset rich environment", where there are always under utilized elements and units that might be a lurking strong combo or soft counter to a meta thing.
|
|
doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 17, 2019 15:30:27 GMT -6
While I certainly enjoy some of the bonuses as a CSM/GSC player, does anyone else feel like this is reminiscent of some of the 7th ed bloat? Especially bringing back formations. It's already hard enough to memorize your opponent's army. Every codex already has 5+ subfaction rules, 20+ strategems, relics and warlord traits. I don't necessarily feel like it's bloat yet, but it's a slippery slope. I also think their time would be better spent working on factions that aren't being seen in competitive play, or fixing the dominance of soup lists. Does the Imperium really need more tools over, say, Necrons and Tau, or even Orks? Let's get everyone on the same footing in terms of strength first, then add new toys. |
|
|
|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Apr 17, 2019 16:07:09 GMT -6
It doesn't feel too overwhelming to me. I feel like 40k is a game that lends itself to bloat. When you have 10+ core factions, you are going to get some serious build up in content. I think it also creates an "asset rich environment", where there are always under utilized elements and units that might be a lurking strong combo or soft counter to a meta thing. Yeah but there are already a ton of crappy strategems, relics, subfactions already, and I wish they would just tighten up the existing rules rather than introduce new ones. In the existing csm codex, there are only like 4-8 strategems i would ever use. They should fix what is already out there rather than throwing more shit at the wall hoping it sticks. |
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Apr 18, 2019 8:27:16 GMT -6
That's basically how it is for everyone though - like 4-8 stratagems that you keep on hand for matched play, while the rest are very much niche and fluffy stratagems that would be used in narrative play with a specifically designed narrative army.
Like my dark eldar codex basically has a stratagem that lets each specific unit do something funky - but if you only play kabalites, they go under utilized. Necrons are the same way - canoptek strats, heavy destroyer strats, tomb blade strats, etc - if you don't bring those units often, or at all, then yeah you won't use them.
I think a lot of the time I find myself questioning the balance of the game and then realize I'm specifically thinking about matched play and/or competitive play, when in reality the books are written for open and narrative play as well - there has to be something for everyone.
|
|
cj
neophyte
Posts: 734
|
Post by cj on Apr 18, 2019 8:56:02 GMT -6
That's basically how it is for everyone though - like 4-8 stratagems that you keep on hand for matched play, while the rest are very much niche and fluffy stratagems that would be used in narrative play with a specifically designed narrative army. Like my dark eldar codex basically has a stratagem that lets each specific unit do something funky - but if you only play kabalites, they go under utilized. Necrons are the same way - canoptek strats, heavy destroyer strats, tomb blade strats, etc - if you don't bring those units often, or at all, then yeah you won't use them. I think a lot of the time I find myself questioning the balance of the game and then realize I'm specifically thinking about matched play and/or competitive play, when in reality the books are written for open and narrative play as well - there has to be something for everyone. I think describing a codex as non competitive i viewing the game exclusively through matched and competitive play. There is certainly a time and place for that, but I don't like the idea of every unit being top of the line. 40k has far too many moving parts to be considered balanced, and although some things will work better than others I don't think it's possible to truly find a place for everything in a competitive scenario. |
|
