Warhammer 40000 Forgebane - Pricing

Just a quick post today as I wanted to discuss the price point of the new Forgebane box set that will be released soon.

I'm drooling already.

I'm pretty excited for the new knights in this set but I already have plenty of Skitarii and I don't need another Tech-Priest. Similarly, I don't collect Necrons and I don't intend to start an army of them so, unless I can find a willing soul to split the box with, they will have to find new homes on Ebay.


Warhammer Community has stated that the box set will be cheaper than the combined cost of all the models minus the two knights and the Cryptek. That should already tell you this is a fantastic deal but where does that leave the approximate pricing of the box? Well, a little digging on the GW website reveals the following:


Tech-priest Dominus - £22
Skitarii Rangers        - £23.50
Necron Immortals     - £20.50
Necron Lychguard     - £20.50
Canoptek Wraiths     - £28.50
TOTAL                      - £115


Now, as Games Workshop are already giving us a hefty discount on this set, I would say that the retail price will be £110. I honestly can't see the set going for less than that because it includes two of the new Knight Armigers which will be incredibly sought after. Still, even if you managed to sell the rest of the set for half of the RRP, you would still be buying two Armigers for £55 which is bound to be far cheaper than they will cost when they are eventually released as a separate set.


Honestly, I'll probably end up buying Forgebane even though I don't need any more models to work on at present. Curse you addictive plastic soldiers!!

Warhammer 40000 Primaris Space Marines - Editorial

They shall be my finest warriors, these men who give of themselves to me.

Like clay I shall mould them, and in the furnace of war forge them.

They will be of iron will and steely muscle.

In great armour shall I clad them and with the mightiest guns will they be armed.

They will be untouched by plague or disease, no sickness will blight them.

They shall be pure of heart and strong of body, untainted by doubt and unsullied by self-aggrandisement. They will have tactics, strategies and machines so that no foe can best them in battle.

They are my bulwark against the Terror.

They are the Defenders of Humanity.

They will be bright stars on the firmament of battle, Angels of Death whose shining wings bring swift annihilation to the enemies of Man.

So it shall be for a thousand times for a thousand years, unto the very end of eternity and the extinction of mortal flesh.

They are my Space Marines and they shall know no fear.

They are the last, best, hope for humanity.

Except, they aren't!?

Yes, you guessed it. It's the most Space-Mariney of Space Marines. The new, shiny, Primaris Space Marines!

Sigmar? Never heard of her!

If you were hiding under a rock yesterday you might have missed the announcement from Games Workshop that they will be releasing the new Primaris Space Marines to coincide with the release of 8th edition. Unlike most of the daily tidbits thrown out by GW in recent weeks this seems to have caused a slightly more negative reaction from the vocal members of our community.

So what do we know so far? From a lore perspective the story is roughly this: Guilliman comes back from the dead and sees that the galaxy is in a sorry state. He realizes he needs some sort of super warriors to swing the tide in humanity's favour and apparently Space Marines just won't cut the mustard. Some shady dealings go on with Belisarius Cawl and the Adeptus Mechanicus and hey presto! Primaris Space Marines!

Ok, so far, so cheesy. But who exactly are these guys? Well, they're a little bigger than regular Space Marines (when did a Space Marine become regular?) If their stat line is anything to go by they're tougher and more aggressive than the usual breed. They have some enhanced equipment in the form of mark X armour and bolt rifles (thanks again Belisarius Cawl).

Now, what I want to discuss here is how the Primaris Marines could fit into the existing 40k lore. How this could be done poorly and how this could be handled brilliantly. The internet is full of people's (perfectly valid) concerns about how these guys will work on the tabletop. Will they invalidate the existing marines through power creep? Are they just a massive sales gimmick? But for me and, dare I say it, many members of the community the thing that keeps us coming back to 40k is the rich and detailed setting. It really is one of the most captivating sci-fi settings around and the iconic Space Marine is the most recognizable cornerstone of that setting.

For me, the Primaris marines represent the biggest change that GW has made so far in their Gathering Storm storyline. More than the destruction of Cadia and the resurrection of a Primarch, the Primaris marines tread on the toes of a huge wealth of existing source material, much of which could be marginalized or invalidated if this change is handled poorly.

So, Space Marines, they're big, tough and functionally immortal. They have eidetic memories and, in combat situations, their brains process far more effectively than a base line human. On the battlefield they are truly superhuman, able to withstand horrific wounds and keep on fighting. Able to shoot with pinpoint accuracy and tear their foes apart in hand to hand combat. Seemingly then, Space Marines are perfect, so much better than us (baseline humans) in every way. How boring!

The truth is that any fictional creature with superhuman characteristics doesn't really become interesting until we examine its flaws. In much of the existing fiction, Space Marines are magnificently flawed. For all their vaunted immortality and strength they pay a steep price indeed. Taken as children and morphed into living weapons their emotions are stunted almost to the point of autism. As such, many of them struggle to emapathise with normal humans and cannot relate to their emotions. Black Templars particularly seem to lack this emotional depth; only able to respond to another's distress with either rage or blank muteness.

In going beyond the abilities of a human being, the Astartes sacrifice a great deal of their emotional range. They are unable to feel fear, sexual desire or romantic love. Yet for all that, they are still able to feel bitterness, jealousy and shame. Would these emotions not come to the fore if a new and improved 'replacement' was created? The answer has to be yes, of course they would. Some marines are bound to feel resentful about the new saviours of humanity. After all, they've been defending the galaxy for 10000 years, who are these new guys to show up and claim they can do a better job?

The Primaris Space marines then must be as flawed as they are powerful. If they are simply invulnerable supermen that outclass the Adeptus Astartes then they will not make for interesting characters. Equally, if the Space Marines simply move over and make room for the new guys without some serious tension then this will not make for a believable fiction.

The replacement of humanity's finest is not unprecedented, the Adeptus Astartes themselves replaced the Emperor's Thunder Warriors at the beginning of the Great Crusade. Not much has been written about how the Thunder Warriors took this development but it seems there were more than a few murmurs of dissent. I would expect to see the same from the Space Marines of the 41st millennium. After all it is hard to believe that the Dark Angels, with all their secrets, would readily accept outsiders into their ranks.

The way I see it, there is an easy fix for a lot of the problems presented by the Primaris Space Marines. Are you ready? Here it comes.

Have some of them fall to Chaos.

It really is that simple. This could solve the issue of tabletop balance and give those whiney Chaos players something to be happy about for a change. Furthermore, it works well within the established canon. A new breed of marines could be susceptible to the touch of the warp in unforeseen ways. Some of them could feel rejected by their 'brother' Astartes and turn from the Imperium unaware of the full horror of Chaos. In playing up the new, young, naive angle the Primaris marines seem all the more believable. After all, they haven't had ten millennia to learn vigilance against the power of Chaos.

Just my thoughts and we'll all see how this develops in the coming months. But one thing's for sure, the Primaris Space Marines will cause a massive upheaval in the hobby landscape. For good or ill, only time will tell.

Warhammer 40k - Building an Army - Formations and Detachments

This article is partially a response to Nick's discussion over at The Burning Eye and partially a continuation of the thoughts I expressed in my Better Know a Blogger article over at St Andrews Wargaming. As Nick correctly says, the use of formations in army construction is a very polarizing issue within the 40k community. They are kind of like the marmite of 40k with players either using them regularly or shunning them entirely; very few of us are sitting on the fence.


In particular I'd like to take a look at the Necron Decurion Detachment. The reason I'm choosing to look at this in detail is threefold. Firstly, it is a detachment that a lot of people are familiar with so the majority should be able to follow along with my reasoning. Secondly, it is one of the more complex methods of building an army, being a detachment that is made up of formations. Finally, it includes pretty much all of the problems that I have with formations.

Behold! The tome of many sins!

First off, let me say that I'm not opposed to the concept of formations, just the way Games Workshop has chosen to execute them. In my mind, a formation should be used to restrict a player into building a list with a certain background in mind. Offering a player certain rewards for cutting down their list choices and fielding an army with a particular character. This is something that a few (a very few) of the available formations and detachments have managed to do. The realspace raiders detachment from Codex: Dark Eldar for example forces you to take a fast attack choice is addition to the usual CAD and gives you some minor benefits for doing so. It's as though the author is saying "Ok, you're playing in character with the army, here's a little bonus." I have no problem with this kind of thing, it's forcing a player to field a more fluffy army and it doesn't provide any game breaking special rules that an unwary opponent will find frustrating. Furthermore, the restrictions and bonuses suit the character of the army. From a fluff perspective you're fielding a lightning fast raiding force attacking under cover of darkness. The rules reflect this, you're using additional fast attack and you get some minor cover bonuses in the early game.


Moving on to Codex: Necrons and the Decurion detachment. The first problem I have found is that players (particularly those new to the game) find the construction of a Decurion list confusing. More than once I have set up opposite a Necron player who has proudly announced "I'm fielding a Decurion!" and when the models are placed on the table it turns out to be a Reclamation Legion with a couple of random units bolted on the side. Or even worse, they have neglected the Reclamation Legion entirely and tried to make a Decurion out of different formations. I think the confusion here arises from the double stacking restrictions used in the Decurion ie. you must take certain units to make a formation and you must take certain different formations to form the detachment. This isn't my main problem with the Decurion, just something I've observed from across the table.


The main problem I have with the Decurion and the Necron formations in general is the special rules they offer for seemingly no reason. For example, the Reclamation Legion is potentially a very large formation (it has many non-compulsory choices) with comparatively few restrictions (you must take a few units of necrons, an HQ and some jetbikes). As a reward for adhering to this loose structure the entire formation gains relentless, move through cover and a bonus to reanimation protocols. The question I have to ask is why? Why are these rules given to this formation? Essentially the army is a standard CAD plus some jetbikes, why do they now have move through cover? Have their feet been replaced with hoverboards? (note: if somebody converted this I would be totally ok with them using this formation.) Are the jetbikes somehow magnetically towing the warriors through cover? They also have relentless, again, why? What makes them able to fire heavy weapons on the move? Or able to rapid fire and then charge? Personally I can see no narrative reason for these special rules to be granted. The army isn't particularly characterful, it's little more than a regular CAD (why the jetbikes are included I will never understand) so there is no fluffy reason for additional special rules to be granted.


This problem occurs time and time again in the various formations that make up a Decurion. The Canoptek Harvest has similar issues, plus some rather nasty additional bonuses. The Royal Court falls into the same boat as the above. But that aside, let's look at the Decurion as a whole. In order to field a Decurion you must include one Reclamation Legion (see rant above) and one other formation or unit from a choice of nine. For doing this, the army is granted yet more reanimation bonuses (above those already offered by the Reclamation Legion). The question once again is why? I can see the justification for the reanimation bonus within the Legion itself, you are fielding a powerful warlord whose abilities allow his warriors to rise from the grave time and again. Personally I think that's pretty cool, it fits from a fluff perspective (if you ignore the jetbikes, relentless and MTC). But why, oh why, should adding a single unit of flayed ones or deathmarks to the army suddenly increase their reanimation ability? What is that extra unit doing to justify the extra reanimation? Do the flayed ones have spanners and greasy overalls to rebuild their fallen comrades? Are the deathmarks somehow cobbling together additional warriors from battlefield salvage? I don't know, and it's questions like this that spoil my immersion in the game and ultimately become annoying.



I feel like I've rambled enough (kudos if you're still reading.) I know I've picked very specific examples above and there are several detachments and formations that don't have these failings. But there are a great many that seem to grant powerful special rules with only the flimsiest of pretexts.

 

Let me know your thoughts in the comments. I'm bound to have raised a few hackles with this (particularly amongst you Necron players) but it's an interesting topic for the community and one that provokes strong feelings on both sides.

Games Workshop - Dreadnought Attacks FAQ

Undoubtedly many of you have seen the faqs being issued by Games Workshop via their Warhammer 40000 facebook page. Generally, I'm delighted that GW are providing faqs for their publications in this manner. It's something the game has needed for a while, and will continue to need as the complexity of the rules and force organizations continues to grow.

Think you're a nerd? My daughter has this on her baby-grow!

However, scrolling to the end of the latest Space Wolves faq, I was met with a surprising and somewhat disappointing 'house rule' for the number of attacks on a Dreadnought stat line.




Before I start complaining bitterly (and believe me, that's what this article will most likely devolve into - feel free to jump out now) let's reminisce a little. Back in the days of 5th edition (actually, 4.5 edition if you had that dodgy pdf download rulebook - does anybody else remember that?) times were simpler. They were heady days of 500 point battles, modest miniatures collections and making the attempt to use whatever you had that was actually painted.


Back then, Dreadnoughts and their equivalents were a pretty big deal on the battlefield. There's only so much you can fit into a 500 point CAD that can even glance a Dreadnought or stand a decent chance of wounding a monstrous creature. Many times these battles culminated in a miniature 'clash of the titans' as Dreadnoughts, Carnifexes and Talos Pain Engines tore eachother apart in the middle of the field. In these clashes, there was only one possible outcome. One combatant would be utterly destroyed; the other would stagger away, horribly damaged, but usually functional enough to be the deciding factor in ultimate victory.


The point I'm trying to make is that, in a one on one scrap, these things were relatively balanced and that made them tense and exciting. The dreadnought would lumber forwards, chipping a wound from the Carnifex with it's assault cannon. In return, perhaps the Carnifex would glance the Dread with it's bio-plasma. Who would get the all important charge? And would it be enough to seal the fate of their opponent? Much trepidation and nail biting ensued as the dice were rolled and the fate of the vanquished party was sealed!


Now, with the sudden enhancement of your average Dreadnought, these types of battles are no longer so balanced, nor, exciting. Four or five power fist attacks will make mincemeat of most monstrous creatures and your average walker stands even less of a chance. A Space Marine Dreadnought charging into a Carnifex or Helbrute looks almost comical as the Dreadnought emerges victorious with perhaps a couple of scuffs to his paintwork. Meanwhile his 'towering opponent' is just a pile of scrap metal (or gooey Tyranid chutney).


Changing the balance of a unit within the game (even one that is considered to be underpowered) can have far reaching consequences. Maybe in these days of super heavies and D-weapons, these types of things are insignificant. But, for me at least, this change damages the cinematography of the game. It takes away what should be an exciting and fluffy tabletop moment; and for that reason alone, it can only be a bad thing.

Skitarii - How many projects is too many?

Yet another 40k temptation I've failed to resist! Last weekend I went and got myself the 'Start Collecting Skitarii' box set.

Why must you tempt me so!?

For those that have missed out, these 'Start Collecting' box sets are a fantastic deal (in so far as anything made by Games Workshop can ever be referred to as a 'deal.') For £50 you're getting around £78 worth of miniatures and all wrapped up in a formation you can actually field to boot!


Despite the savings, and the beautiful models (I love that Tech-Priest Dominus!) I have serious misgivings about introducing yet another project into my cluttered, overcrowded and mostly unfinished hobby life. This marks the fifth Warhammer 40k army for me along with a small collection of Infinity Nomads, some random Space Wolves (half of the Stormclaw box because why not?) and the hazy dream of a Khorne Berserker-biker army that never really materialized into anything more than a bunch of ebay purchases that hide under the bed.


Other considerations are starting to come to the fore as well. I am rapidly running out of storage space for my miniatures collection, so potential purchases are often weighed against the amount of room that they will occupy on my, increasingly groaning, shelves.


Inevitably, any plans I have made for past projects tend to spiral wildly out of control. As my Night Lords collection shot past the 3000 point mark I swear I heard each and every unpainted miniature cry out 'Get a hold of yourself man! We were only ever supposed to be a 1000 point skirmish force!!' I have reconciled myself to never reaching the end of my collection of Tyranids and my Dark Eldar, though limited in scale, require a punishing amount of time to paint to the standard I have set. So with all of this in mind, what possessed me to add another army to the hobby pile?


As I was in the midst of my hobby crisis. Desperately wanting to build and paint Skitarii but trying (and failing) to force myself to paint Night Lords someone told me: 'I say go for it with the Skitarii - I mean life is here to be enjoyed and it's not like they're expensive or anything.' This really put things into perspective for me. Even if they just become another unfinished project (who really finishes their hobby projects anyway?) I will enjoy the process of building, converting and painting them. The games they are involved with will be fun, or at least give me a story to tell. Undoubtedly I will learn new painting and modeling techniques as I go (every army I have collected has broadened my skills in ways I hadn't imagined).


With that firmly in mind, I ordered the box and have set about building and painting them with very pleasing results so far. To finish this article I'd like to come back to the question in the title. How many projects is too many? Is there even such a thing? I'm still not sure, but I fully intend to enjoy searching for the answers.

Betrayal at Calth

Bam!

Ok, so this isn't exactly breaking news, but I thought I'd write something about it anyway because GODAMMIT I'M JUST SO EXCITED!!! I've been out of the country for the last week or so and I missed all the breaking news; then I came back to see Betrayal at Calth splattered all over the rumour sites. 

I'm not exaggerating when I say I was on the phone to my local pusher immediately (ok, maybe pusher is a little harsh, perhaps dealer is more appropriate?!) I've simply got to have one of these, the miniatures would make splendid additions to my Night Lords and it would give me another GW board game to share with (infect) my local board games group.

Now much has been said about GW releasing one off, limited run type board games (although I'm hearing this won't be limited). I've read many complaints and disparaging comments about the quality of the games, the miniatures and the pricing of both. I for one, believe that the quality of GWs miniatures has gone from strength to strength in recent years. If you think that any manufacturer in the world can match the quality of GWs plastics for the same price point then I urge you to go and pick up a copy of Dark Vengeance. The detail and casting quality on those Chaos Chosen blows my mind every time I pick one up. Not only that but they're snap-fit models to boot! Anyway I digress.

The point is that I'm very excited to see the new Heresy plastics; I can only imagine that the quality will be sublime.

Moving on to the game itself, which it seems is playing second fiddle to the miniatures in the minds of most fans. Judging from my past experiences of GW board games I can say that I'm looking forward to this side of Betrayal at Calth as well. I am fortunate enough to own both the latest release of Space Hulk and Execution Force and I can say that I've enjoyed both games thoroughly. They both work well with two players but can be easily adapted to accomodate teams of players on both sides (IMHO the best way to play Space Hulk).

Now speaking of pricing, we all know it's going to be £95 (here in the UK). That's a lot of money, it really is. But is it good value? Many people have compared price points with the Heresy range from Forge World. Obviously it works out cheaper if you look at it this way (though estimates of exactly how much seem to vary wildly). For me, it was a no-brainer. The miniatures fit nicely with one of my fledgling armies and the fact that I can customise them with legion specific shoulder pads and trophies etc means that it will be easy to make them unique. Essentially, for anyone looking to start playing battles in the Age of Darkness, Betrayal at Calth should be an obvious starting point.

Whilst I'm on a bit of a pro-GW rant. Lets talk about the modern iteration of 40k, with a particular nod to rules writing and in-game balance. If you float around these here internets (like I do) then you're bound to have come across a swathe of comments, articles and general whining about game imbalance, codex creep and generally stuff just being OP or UP etc. Now I'm the first to admit that the game isn't balanced; I'll even go so far as to say that GW intentionally uses this imbalance to sell shiny new models. But I ask the question, has the balance of the game improved or worsened over the years? The overwhelming answer has to be yes, massively. I've played most editions of 40k (I missed Rogue Trader and 3rd Edition) including a lot of 2nd Ed (which I still play regularly.) Comparing the 2nd edition rules with 7th shows a clear improvement in terms of rules clarity, cross-codex balance and points values. Don't believe me? Dig out your old 2nd Ed stuff and get a couple of games under your belt without wearing your rose tinted specs. I guarantee you'll agree before the end of turn 2.

Alright, rant over, the message is this. Yay GW! Please keep making and improving shiny toys that I want to buy!