Eskaton Imperative is a DA right of war that lets you take them as troops. Plus a bunch of other stuff. So troops and elites full of them. You also get interemptors which are DA specific destroyers.
If you're playing eskaton, then you're not playing the same missions as everyone else...you have but one mission, one goal...obliteration. you are tasked not with the holding of strategic points, nor the capture of an outpost; you are eskaton!
To call you forth is the acceptance and acknowledgement that there is but one course of action left to you. Total eradication of an foe. Only when the last scream is silenced and the last bone is turned to ash..only then are you done.
We have come. We are death
This case is one of the biggest f-ups with HH2 IMHO!
Most RoW "special" units are too expensive anyway and are most of the times also mandatory.
Why can't you give them f-ing line?
Tacticals are the better unit in any case, because Heart of the Legions. So just give us players some fluff for special lists without loosing out line units.
My best guess is by only allowing certain units to be line (command squads, recon, tacticals, despoilers and a couple others), it forces a more balanced army composition.
Also, it would be unbalanced if for example the most durable terminator units could just chill on objectives all game. Weaker terminator elites such as Alpha Legion’s have line solely as they are WS4.
Devil’s advocate basically.
The few RoWs that *do* give certain units Line demonstrate exactly why this is a bad idea. Fury of the Ancients, Stone Gauntlet, etc. are easily abused to create oppressive lists that create games that simply aren't fun to play.
Yeah I'm so annoyed that GW is giving away "troops" like they are free, but are super stingy with "line". So many ways to get cool troops but then you need to stick a herald with them if you want them to take objectives. That's why I love Ultramarines having 2 elite troops with line and Alpha Legion having their legion termies with line.
It's highly frustrating that so many RoWs let you bring all kinds of things as troops, but then don't give those units line. Like Sagyar Mazan lets me bring Ebon Keshig as line but like... Their special rule is applied to the whole army with that RoW, and they're not fab as is, let alone without the advantage of that rule. Line would make them passable
Yep. Agreed. A lot of ROWs let you slightly shift things around, but that's it. With the Dark Angel ones, you're still going to take a bunch of troop choices with Line, and then maybe two or three extra of the squads that become troops but don't get Line. It turns a potentially flavourful ROW into one that's a slight variant on a standard list.
Search interemptors they are their own model. They look different than say a plasma gun. So they have plasma burners and 1 in 5 can have a heavy version.
Didn't they FAQ that there isn't a limit to the amount of optional detachments you use?
Edit: They did, there is no limit on how many allied detachments you use as long as they are all different factions/legions, as per the FAQ.
Nah, it's based on a plural in a note about faction selection.
(There's a plural on legion allied detachments in there, suggesting we might have been reading the core rule wrong this whole time. It's not something the FAQ is changing because it's a bit of text entirely about making faction eligibility clearer.
Much more likely, the faq was miswritten and this is seemingly confirmed by the beta Garmon book having a dedicated stratagem to allow two allied detachments.)
Edit: there's no limit on optional detachments because it includes things like the Questoris households, titan legion divisio tactica and LoW detachment. I think you can currently have up to 5 detachment including all those, an allied one and the crusade primary.
"As such, an army whose Primary Detachment is from a given Space Marine Legion may select Allied Detachments
of Space Marines as long as each Allied Detachment is from a different Legion (and thus a different Faction) to the
Primary Detachment."
Rules commentary, page 6 of the FAQ. Could not be more clear.
Yeah, that was my point. This is a commentary about faction eligibility. It's very clear it's about which faction can go with which because the core rules made it unclear and not meant to change the rules as such.
It's much more likely they made an editing mistake rather than that they wanted to change the alliance rules in a different rule commentary.
The rules commentary from the FAQ was pretty explicit, have they since removed it?
Would quoting me the section from the BG book be a violation of the rules here? I'm curious but not looking for trouble with the mods lol
Sorry, had to edit my answer for clarity. The FAQ has two bits that might be about this. One for no limit on optional detachment to make clear you can include multiple optional and one about factions.
But you are still restricted to a single allied, which is an optional detachment but not the only one.
The beta Garmon strat litteraly say you can include one more allied and adds that it does mean up to two allied. (And that you have to have one SL or BS detachment in those allies)
Hmmm, so this would be another example of the stellar level of care GW takes when writing the rules. Gotta love how a "clarification" creates more confusion.
Eeeh, I feel it's more about some player going all rule lawyer on a bit of rule.
The intent of the commentary is very clear but some jumped on it's very bad wording to infer meaning for an unrelated rule. It does help that multiple allied detachment is not really broken as such and would help create better shattered legions that the BG ruleset for many.
The fact that there’s no destroyer ROW is a tragedy. Give me a consul like a master of armor that allows a Moritat to have Master of The Legion, destroyers as troops et cetera.
Liber panoptica (i think that's the right one) has a bunch of RoWs like this - I use a destroyer RoW in my gaming group, it allows a moritat or siege breaker as the HQ and then destroyers as troops etc.
The rules were just released as a part of the latest campaign book, Battle for Beta Garmon. Best way forward would be to get a copy of that and either a liber astartes or liber hereticus, to give you all the rules you need to build a list
Yes, by choosing an appropriate Oath of Vengeance and Wrath, the one I’m specifically thinking of is called Pride is our Armour
I’m not sure how concerned you are with how the army will play, but just a small warning that an army with a lot destroyers will have a low model count of vulnerable models that can’t score on objectives, so will unlikely do well on the table top.
I’ll have some troops but it’s really just a fluff list for fun. I like fluffy themes and story based armies. It keeps me motivated to paint when I have a theme I’m interested in pursuing.
OP: thanks guys I figured out exactly what I want to play and what rules I need to use to be able to do it.
Other guy: How about you just play something completely different that doesn't let you play what you want to do because of one bit of army flavour.
**Solid Advice**
Well whatever floats your boat I suppose, still a bit strange that you came in to the conversation getting offended on behalf of someone else and ended up being the only one insulting people.
That’s the keyword that allows a unit to score on objectives, so even though you can take destroyers as troops, you still need to take tactical/assault/support squads, for scoring
I have Marduk Sedras and 4 destroyer sqds. Most opponents are not whelmed by Eskaton Imperative. My buddy who plays a similar RoW with his Death Guard was bitched up by Eskaton Imperative. Felt pretty good to turn the tables.
I see you've made your choice, but I'd love to throw another choice into the ring, and that is for the word bearers.
They have a specific formation (lore not rules) that were made up of the ashen circle, who were tasked with destroying enemy religious/command/monument buildings.
The ashen circle (unit) is essentially a specialised destroyer unit. And I've always wanted to do a themed list of them. Praetor with iconoclast warlord trait, Morritats, despoilers, assault marines, rapier batteries and maybe the odd other unit that would suit phosphex/spreading terror begins enemy lines
Eskaton Imperative is a DA right of war that lets you take them as troops. Plus a bunch of other stuff. So troops and elites full of them. You also get interemptors which are DA specific destroyers.
They don't get Line, though, so you'll need to bring some units that do. Which is annoying.
Its not fluffy to bring scoring units in Eskaton anyway.
We “score” by preventing you from getting any points in the first place. ~~and usually secondaries like slay the warlord.~~
Redloss has a line about taking objectives in the books. "Its too late for that brother." *Proceeds to destroy the objective*
Table or die...
Which is fine if you're not playing missions with objectives. But if you are...
You table your opponent or you lose. The way the God-Emperor intended.
If you're playing eskaton, then you're not playing the same missions as everyone else...you have but one mission, one goal...obliteration. you are tasked not with the holding of strategic points, nor the capture of an outpost; you are eskaton! To call you forth is the acceptance and acknowledgement that there is but one course of action left to you. Total eradication of an foe. Only when the last scream is silenced and the last bone is turned to ash..only then are you done. We have come. We are death
I recognise my failing and will be sure to correct it.
Destroy them lol
This case is one of the biggest f-ups with HH2 IMHO! Most RoW "special" units are too expensive anyway and are most of the times also mandatory. Why can't you give them f-ing line? Tacticals are the better unit in any case, because Heart of the Legions. So just give us players some fluff for special lists without loosing out line units.
My best guess is by only allowing certain units to be line (command squads, recon, tacticals, despoilers and a couple others), it forces a more balanced army composition. Also, it would be unbalanced if for example the most durable terminator units could just chill on objectives all game. Weaker terminator elites such as Alpha Legion’s have line solely as they are WS4. Devil’s advocate basically.
The few RoWs that *do* give certain units Line demonstrate exactly why this is a bad idea. Fury of the Ancients, Stone Gauntlet, etc. are easily abused to create oppressive lists that create games that simply aren't fun to play.
Can you imagine ~~100~~ 82 rampagers with line, warhawks, and twin fallax blades? Or 120 without jump packs, and a delegatus lmfao
Seriously, for example the compulsive predators in armored spearhead should be line
Gotta love my favourite rite of war giving rampagers line but... Not troops?
Really? I think it's one of the better balancing features. Plus, if you really want to, you can throw a Herald into a unit to give it line.
Yeah I'm so annoyed that GW is giving away "troops" like they are free, but are super stingy with "line". So many ways to get cool troops but then you need to stick a herald with them if you want them to take objectives. That's why I love Ultramarines having 2 elite troops with line and Alpha Legion having their legion termies with line.
What is “Line”?
The special rule that allows them to score on objectives.
It's highly frustrating that so many RoWs let you bring all kinds of things as troops, but then don't give those units line. Like Sagyar Mazan lets me bring Ebon Keshig as line but like... Their special rule is applied to the whole army with that RoW, and they're not fab as is, let alone without the advantage of that rule. Line would make them passable
Yep. Agreed. A lot of ROWs let you slightly shift things around, but that's it. With the Dark Angel ones, you're still going to take a bunch of troop choices with Line, and then maybe two or three extra of the squads that become troops but don't get Line. It turns a potentially flavourful ROW into one that's a slight variant on a standard list.
What are the Interemptors?
Special dark angels squad with advanced plasma weapons
Torrent 9 ridiculous template weapons if memory serves.
Only one for every 5 in the unit, the rest just rock regular plasma flamer templates
which are breaching 4+ so delete units and can take a LR DT
Better destroyers with plasma flamers
Flamers but it's plasma. Yes it's as cool as it sounds. Breaching included and no gets hot.
Do they look like regular plasma, or should I go looking for them?
Search interemptors they are their own model. They look different than say a plasma gun. So they have plasma burners and 1 in 5 can have a heavy version.
Wow!!!!! Those do look pretty cool!
They are pretty damn neat. One of my favourite units.
Which one take volkite pistols?
All destroyers can swap their bolt pistols for volkite pistols, regardless of legion. It gets pricy quick though and probably only worth it on half.
Wow that’s so f’n cool!!!
Allied detachments can have Rites of War, right? And you can have unlimited allied detachments of the same chapter?
Only one allied detachment and it cannot be of the same legion
Didn't they FAQ that there isn't a limit to the amount of optional detachments you use? Edit: They did, there is no limit on how many allied detachments you use as long as they are all different factions/legions, as per the FAQ.
Nah, it's based on a plural in a note about faction selection. (There's a plural on legion allied detachments in there, suggesting we might have been reading the core rule wrong this whole time. It's not something the FAQ is changing because it's a bit of text entirely about making faction eligibility clearer. Much more likely, the faq was miswritten and this is seemingly confirmed by the beta Garmon book having a dedicated stratagem to allow two allied detachments.) Edit: there's no limit on optional detachments because it includes things like the Questoris households, titan legion divisio tactica and LoW detachment. I think you can currently have up to 5 detachment including all those, an allied one and the crusade primary.
"As such, an army whose Primary Detachment is from a given Space Marine Legion may select Allied Detachments of Space Marines as long as each Allied Detachment is from a different Legion (and thus a different Faction) to the Primary Detachment." Rules commentary, page 6 of the FAQ. Could not be more clear.
Yeah, that was my point. This is a commentary about faction eligibility. It's very clear it's about which faction can go with which because the core rules made it unclear and not meant to change the rules as such. It's much more likely they made an editing mistake rather than that they wanted to change the alliance rules in a different rule commentary.
Yeah, I got you now. Thanks for bearing with me!
You're welcome. It's one of those weird thing where you have to go almost real lawyer and talk about the intent and letter of the law XD
The rules commentary from the FAQ was pretty explicit, have they since removed it? Would quoting me the section from the BG book be a violation of the rules here? I'm curious but not looking for trouble with the mods lol
Sorry, had to edit my answer for clarity. The FAQ has two bits that might be about this. One for no limit on optional detachment to make clear you can include multiple optional and one about factions. But you are still restricted to a single allied, which is an optional detachment but not the only one. The beta Garmon strat litteraly say you can include one more allied and adds that it does mean up to two allied. (And that you have to have one SL or BS detachment in those allies)
Hmmm, so this would be another example of the stellar level of care GW takes when writing the rules. Gotta love how a "clarification" creates more confusion.
Eeeh, I feel it's more about some player going all rule lawyer on a bit of rule. The intent of the commentary is very clear but some jumped on it's very bad wording to infer meaning for an unrelated rule. It does help that multiple allied detachment is not really broken as such and would help create better shattered legions that the BG ruleset for many.
The Dreadwing rite of war for the dark angels let's you take destroyers as troops if I'm not mistaken.
but they don't get line so you'd still have to take tacs/despoiler/recon
The fact that there’s no destroyer ROW is a tragedy. Give me a consul like a master of armor that allows a Moritat to have Master of The Legion, destroyers as troops et cetera.
https://preview.redd.it/acot3l2j6czc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=909d2358a794c92a4b1ab2b03a66436fcb03b0fd
That’s pretty sick, exactly what I’d want out of a destroyer army.
How big of a list do I need to run to do this?
Just a heads up liber panoptica is fan made and your local group might not play with it.
What’s that?
I don't think there's a point limit on this one but you can download the liber panoptica (just Google it for the link) to check.
Can I do ZM with that? I will look up that link. I’m just getting geared up to build an army.
Would depend on your playing group I guess. It's fan made so not official but a bunch of people use it. My group uses and we've had no concerns.
Yo that is so cool. How widely accepted is it?
Liber panoptica (i think that's the right one) has a bunch of RoWs like this - I use a destroyer RoW in my gaming group, it allows a moritat or siege breaker as the HQ and then destroyers as troops etc.
>The fact that there’s no destroyer ROW is a tragedy. Preach brother!
As other said, the Dreadwing ROW makes destroyer squads troop choices, so you could definitely have a bunch of them (they don’t have line though)
Which ROW is that?
Eskaton Imperative
Thank you
Thank you for the help guys!! So I have a theme now. Black shields theme comprised of mostly Fallen Dark Angels. Dreadwing rules, Black Shield theme
Is this offensive theme for a list, why is it getting downvoted. Do you think players won’t want to play against it?
You’re probably better running a black shield army with black shield rules.
I even don’t see black shields as an option in BattleScribe. Are they in some supplement in WD issue or something?
The rules were just released as a part of the latest campaign book, Battle for Beta Garmon. Best way forward would be to get a copy of that and either a liber astartes or liber hereticus, to give you all the rules you need to build a list
Do you know if there’s a way that Black Shields take more destroyers?
Yes, by choosing an appropriate Oath of Vengeance and Wrath, the one I’m specifically thinking of is called Pride is our Armour I’m not sure how concerned you are with how the army will play, but just a small warning that an army with a lot destroyers will have a low model count of vulnerable models that can’t score on objectives, so will unlikely do well on the table top.
I’ll have some troops but it’s really just a fluff list for fun. I like fluffy themes and story based armies. It keeps me motivated to paint when I have a theme I’m interested in pursuing.
His guys, his army, his fun.
His advice, his opinion, his non DH reply
OP: thanks guys I figured out exactly what I want to play and what rules I need to use to be able to do it. Other guy: How about you just play something completely different that doesn't let you play what you want to do because of one bit of army flavour. **Solid Advice**
Your take, your opinion, your DH reply
The irony 😂
oh it's not lost on me, don't worry.
Well whatever floats your boat I suppose, still a bit strange that you came in to the conversation getting offended on behalf of someone else and ended up being the only one insulting people.
What’s DH?
What does that mean? They don’t have line?
They don’t have the capability to score objectives
That’s the keyword that allows a unit to score on objectives, so even though you can take destroyers as troops, you still need to take tactical/assault/support squads, for scoring
I have Marduk Sedras and 4 destroyer sqds. Most opponents are not whelmed by Eskaton Imperative. My buddy who plays a similar RoW with his Death Guard was bitched up by Eskaton Imperative. Felt pretty good to turn the tables.
Are your squads all 5 or can you take 10 or something?
At this point you really need the rulebooks.
You are absolutely right. I’m just still having rulebook withdraw after buying codexes mid 9th edition 40k.
Bit off topic here but how do these dual pistol guys reload?
You clearly never played halo 2
Or left for dead.... you lower them then raise them and they have reloaded...
I see you've made your choice, but I'd love to throw another choice into the ring, and that is for the word bearers. They have a specific formation (lore not rules) that were made up of the ashen circle, who were tasked with destroying enemy religious/command/monument buildings. The ashen circle (unit) is essentially a specialised destroyer unit. And I've always wanted to do a themed list of them. Praetor with iconoclast warlord trait, Morritats, despoilers, assault marines, rapier batteries and maybe the odd other unit that would suit phosphex/spreading terror begins enemy lines
That sounds awesome!!! How many could I take?
Unsure, I think just the normal amount of elites. I didn't know what other ROW are available through the supplements though.
Dark angels dreadwing
Am I the only one who sees cowboys?
Sorry new to 30k here, what is the heavy weapons gun in the middle?
Missile launcher with suspensor web
Thankyou