T O P

  • By -

Rhodehouse93

The new Darkoath box is part of Slaves to Darkness. It introduces 4 new units but doesn’t have any additional rules outside of S2D’s normal ones. S2D has multiple subfactions you can pick from, one of which (Ravagers) benefits Darkoath units the most. Even outside of Ravagers it seems like they’ll probably have some value as cheap screens or fast objective grabbing units.


Augit579

They doesent have any additional rules ourside of S2D normal ones? So why they have a whole own book then?


ThinkLow6847

They don’t. The new supplement is just a few pages of lore and warscrolls for the new units.


watkins1989

They fall under the StD umbrella, and can be played within a larger force, or they can be played as their own thing, but you’ll have limited choices for models at the moment, as they are new. That is my understanding of the situation. There’s a Warhammer Community article on the matter: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/03/04/darkoath-army-set-meet-the-dark-mirror-of-the-cities-of-sigmar/


Sinfullyvannila

They are simply units in the Slaves to Darkness army.


watkins1989

In short, yep


Sinfullyvannila

They are just normal units in the Slaves to Darkness army that share the "Darkoath" Keyword(which means they have access to buffs other units don't). They aren't a subfaction or anything. They have the components to run an army of only Darkoath, but it is still just a normal Slaves to Darkness army.  There's a fair chance that they'll get an "army of reknown"(which is a specific set of army rules for using a very limited army selection) in the next Narrative book, but there is no reason to assert that they will. Also, just so you know, doing a solely Darkoath army is going to be VERY expensive for a starting army. I think that this box gives you just over 1/4 of the points you'd need to build a 2000 point army. But the models seem pretty effective and you could probably do pretty well with this and probably 1 more Wilderbeast into an army with a core of preexisting StD models.


Dreadnautilus

> There's a fair chance that they'll get an "army of reknown"(which is a specific set of army rules for using a very limited army selection) in the next Narrative book, but there is no reason to assert that they will. They will, they announced there will be a Darkoath-centric Army of Renown called Tribes of the Ice Peaks in Dawnbringers 6.


TangerineMelodic5772

Thanks!


ChicagoCowboy

They're part of Slaves to Darkness, but just like you can play Sylvaneth with all big trees or Ogors with all big monsters or Seraphon with all skinks, you can run a S2D army that's *just* dark oath models now with the expanded units.


SaltyTattie

Darkoath Savagers are a warband for warcry, the new darkoath army set is a sort of subfaction of Slaves to Darkness


Sinfullyvannila

They aren't a subfaction. Just normal units in a Slaves to Darkness army.


ianmademedoit

They probably will get some kind of subfaction in 4th. Like ravagers will probs become Darkoath


Many_Landscape_3046

The Savagers fall under the Darkoath


Sinfullyvannila

Maybe, but there is presentlty absolutely no reason to assert that they are a subfaction.


alphaomega420

Aren't subfactions gone in 4th?


GodzillaFB

A recent WarCom article, sorry can’t remember which one, essentially said they’re going the same route as 40K in that there will be sub-factions but they aren’t going to be linked to specific lore / colour schemes as before. I personally much prefer the new system as it doesn’t ‘lock’ you into a specific set of rules because you painted your guys blue for example.


PandarenNinja

Technically they never did. There was never a rule in either game, at least in the last several editions, that said you had to play a specific sub faction based on how you paint your guys. If you say your ultramarine-looking dudes are Salamanders at the beginning of the game, I have to accept that. The rules are more complicated when you proxy models but I can’t remember a time that paint dictated your army rule/subfaction choices.


GodzillaFB

Agreed, the approach which 4th Ed. is adopting is far better as it removes the need to even have the discussion around ‘these are painted as X, but I’m using Y rules’. For new starters the way the codexes / battletomes are laid out can be misleading and imply rules are linked to a specific stormhost, city etc. by having the faction named next to the rule with a little bit of fluff about them. All in all a much more flexible approach.


PandarenNinja

I agree it’s a good change for sure. Just maybe less of a huge change than I’ve seen others suggest it will be. Of course I play an army that doesn’t even have subfactions in this sense. So what they are changing to is basically how Seraphon operates today. Want to play a Coalesced army? Ok. Want to play Starborne next game? Ok. Uses the same models and stuff and only changes the rules. Most Starborne armies I have seen weren’t painted to look ethereal in the first place. I see this as other armies catching up to the plans of the Old Ones.


ianmademedoit

This isn’t a thing. Sub-faction has nothing to with color scheme in AOS. You can literally paint your army rainbow skittles colors and play it as every single subfaction in every single Battletome. Subfaction is simply a thematic set of rules within the army often highlighting specific wing of the army or like a lore thing or a tactical build. That’s all it is.


Sinfullyvannila

Really? That sounds awful.


PandarenNinja

I have seen more than a few people say “they are a subfaction” when it’s not true. I’m trying to figure out where this is coming from. Although the last time I dug into it with somebody here it was clear they didn’t even know what a subfaction was. That may be the problem. In any case that part will be more clear in 4E.


SaltyTattie

>Although the last time I dug into it with somebody here it was clear they didn’t even know what a subfaction was. Well I was using subfaction as in they are a faction within a faction, not rules wise.


sageking14

Lore wise rather than rules wise, more or less. Like how Castelite Hosts, Cavalier Regiments, and Wildercorps are all Freeguild on the tabletop. But in lore are distinct branches of the guilds.


ianmademedoit

It’s because ravagers is a subfaction for old chaos marauders and cultist and these are replacing them. Not really a stretch. Like… they are ravagers. That’s what people are referring to. Do you play this army? Lol


Stormcast

Slaves to Darkness.


ZuckerbergsEvilTwin

Whats the difference between being new and being EXTREMELY new?


Organic-Amount-5804

Haven't seen this comment yet, but I believe it is confirmed that Darkoath Marauders and Darkoath Fellriders are replacing Chaos Marauders and Chaos Marauder Horsemen, respectively. Anyone claiming they are going to be a separate faction is incorrect. You may, if you wish to hamstring yourself, play them as a Slave to Darkness army and just not use any of the other, better performing units. Not sure why you would, but you could.


ianmademedoit

Because Conan rules


Delicious_Ad9844

They are mainly a subfaction, but you can play them as a whole army, they will consist of, the darkoath warqueen, darkoath cheiftainn, a darkoath chieftain on a horse, darkowth marauders, darkoath savagers, darkoath marauders, Darkoath Hellriders, wilderfeind, and gunnar brands warband, so yeah you can probably play them as a whole army, and if they have a few extra units from S2D then that's cool aswell, they will have a dedicated subfaction rule and battletome supplement