# Fluff reasons for new allies in 6th Edition



## SoulGazer (Jun 14, 2009)

Ok, so for some very strange reason, Necrons can ally Chaos Space Marines in 6th edition. I just happen to own both armies, what are the odds? Sadly, I have Word Bearers, and I can barely think of one plausible reason to have these two ally.

It's theoretically possible to have any race "trick" Nemesor Zahndrekh into thinking they're friendly since that crazy(awesome) old coot sees everything as Necrontyr. Zahndrekh's lords might object, and Vargard Obyron certainly would, but in the end Obyron is so loyal he'll go with whatever his master decides and end up killing any lords that object to the Nemesor's decree.

Do you think this would be enough to justify a Word Bearers/Necrons alliance?
Are any of you thinking of using two armies on the table top that would take a bit of shenanigans to justify fluff-wise?

Here's the chart of possible alliances from an official tournament a while ago, and a guy with the actual 6th rulebook has confirmed that it is the same chart as in 6th:

http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb447/Brindleysa/Dork Stuff- Fun Stuff/matrix.jpg

inb4 people rage due to some of the possible alliances. :smoke:


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

I think all of the new alliances are plausable. Just look at the Blood Angels/Necron truce/temporary cessation of hostilities for inspiration.


----------



## SoulGazer (Jun 14, 2009)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I think all of the new alliances are plausable. Just look at the Blood Angels/Necron truce/temporary cessation of hostilities for inspiration.


Yes, assuming insanity, anything is possible. :laugh:


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I think all of the new alliances are plausable. Just look at the Blood Angels/Necron truce/temporary cessation of hostilities for inspiration.


Oh that piece of fluff-rape. Now anything's justified...

"Yeah basically my Eldar are allying with Slaanesh Daemons because they both have the same taste in Broadway musicals..."


:headbutt:


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

spanner94ezekiel said:


> Oh that piece of fluff-rape. Now anything's justified...


Honestly, I don't see the Necron/Blood Angel phenomenon as contradictory to the current lore at all.


----------



## kaboot (Jan 4, 2012)

The new allies pisses me off. It makes no fucking sense. I think its a brilliant business scheme from GW, allowing people to field more than one army. That way, they buy more, at the cost of ridiculous allies.

Orks and daemons... really????


----------



## Iron Angel (Aug 2, 2009)

Worked in Dawn of War.


----------



## Moonschwine (Jun 13, 2011)

Well I can't complain at possible Kustom Force Fields for My Berzerkers. 

Fluff Reason: Everyone Loves to Fight for Khorne or Da' Boss.

A Necron / Chaos Alliance sounds something like "Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" sort of thing. Which to be honest was what the Blood Angels / Necron truce was. I feel sorry for Ward since it probably wasn't intended to be a "Yeah man, I love robots" but rather "Hmm, maybe if we don't slaughter one another we may come out of this alive." kinda thing.

None the less, he'll probably never be forgiven for it.


----------



## Hellados (Sep 16, 2009)

Is the Necron BA crap in the new Necron codex then?

Orks and SMs..... you what??

The Orks would possibly fight with anyone just for the sake of fighting, I can just see a warboss being killed and all the boys looking around for the next biggest bad arse then a titan appears out of the smoke and clouds LOL

But why on terra would Crimson Fists fight alongside Orks? against a bigger enemy maybe.. so against chaos, but against the Tau, Eldar, other SMs. . . .


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

kaboot said:


> Orks and daemons... really????


Why not? The new alliance system doesn't claim the Greenskins and the Daemonic hordes are suddenly comrades-in-arms. But Greenskins do commonly act as mercenaries, and as such have fought alongside Chaos hordes on numerous occasions. Or perhaps the Greenskins (or at least their command structure) have become corrupted, or perhaps they just happen to find themselves in the same theatre of war fighting against the same enemy, and intend to destroy each other after their mutual enemy is destroyed. Or perhaps the Greenskins are being manipulated by Tzeentchian daemons into the conflict. There are numerous reasons to justify a temporary "unholy alliance" (which I assume is the weakest form of alliance) between the factions.


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

So 'Purge the Xenos' no longer applies. 
Deathwatch allied with kroot.
Don't get me wrong, i liked the allies rules when they were created with fluff in mind. I am a bit wary of this fluff buchery for the sake of it. Necrons and tyranids, should never be able to ally, it is against their basic code. Orks and eldar have had allies in the fluff before and i see no problem with those but personally i think this is getting out of hand.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

The Black Templars being "grudging allies" with half the Xenos is hilarious.

It's probably a game balance reason over fluff, I think.


----------



## Lord Lorne Walkier (Jul 19, 2009)

For me it mostly comes from a "enemy of my enemy is my friend" when it comes to the Evil factions. It's not so much a reason of why they would ally and more a reason they would not shoot each other for a short period of time.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Lord Lorne Walkier said:


> It's not so much a reason of why they would ally and more a reason why they would not shoot each other for a short period of time.


Pretty much sums it up. I think the use of the phrase "allies" has given people a misconception as to how this new phenomenon was intended (lore wise).


----------



## Akatsuki13 (May 9, 2010)

shaantitus said:


> So 'Purge the Xenos' no longer applies.
> Deathwatch allied with kroot.
> Don't get me wrong, i liked the allies rules when they were created with fluff in mind. I am a bit wary of this fluff buchery for the sake of it. Necrons and tyranids, should never be able to ally, it is against their basic code. Orks and eldar have had allies in the fluff before and i see no problem with those but personally i think this is getting out of hand.


First off with the new Necrons there is nothing stopping them from allying with other powers. The new Necron Codex even describes a Dynasty that has enslaved a human world so they could actually raise a human army represented on TT by the IG. That's just one example of how they could ally with another power. Second the chart is a simple guide for the TT game. The fluff behind these battlefield alliances are left open to us. In fact in non-tournament games you can disregard that chart entirely. Last year a couple friends and I had a series of 2vs2 games with a SM/IG force facing a Tau/IG. The fluff behind these games were that an Imperial world had openly defected to the Tau Empire and a force of SM/IG were sent to bring them in line. Obviously we didn't have this chart but if it had we would have changed the Tau/IG relationship to Brothers in Arms for these games.

People need to remember that we have a degree of control over things here. If you want to have some team games where the alliance ratings are different from the chart then change them. Really it will only be enforced in tournament games.


----------



## Kelann08 (Nov 22, 2011)

I can see the insertion of a house rule for those bizarre alliance that don't seem to fit (orc/SM and the like). Some alliance fit "enemy of my enemy" in which the end of the alliance is civil. Necrons and Imperial Guard would be an example. The battle ends, both enemies walk away, warily. Alternatively, some alliances feature two forces in which one is using the other or one force is particularly bloodthirsty in combat or one force is using the cover of another to get things done. This third example would allow forces like space marines or necrons or eldar or dark eldar or tau to ally with tyranids. 

Your main space marine force brings a detachment of tyranids. The fluff says these bugs represent a portion of a larger force overtaking the planet. Your main force is deployed ahead of the tyranid vanguard to evacuate a high ranking official on the planet who is being held by the chaos marines already there prior to the invasion. 

The special rule would be "beginning in turn 2, any time a detachment squad consolidates (be it after regrouping or assault victory) and there are no enemy units in 12" make a leadership test. If the squad fails, they notice their nearest "allies" and hunt them out. They must move as fast as possible and assault as soon as possible. They are no longer under the owning players direct control. The squad must test for this each turn until they destroy their prey or their prey is more than 24" away at the time of the test."

Its not the easiest rule to read and I imagine can be written easier but this would mean that, if you brought an ally who fits into this niche (tyranids, orks, demons, based on who the main army is) you run the risk of losing control over them in a "fluffy fashion". Its also possible to play your army in a way that would avoid this. It might be a decent house rule to allow Tyranids to ally without actually being allies.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Tyranids should be included in this chart imo. With mind control and genestealer infiltration in their background I see no reason why they couldnt ally with orks at the very least.


----------



## Over Two Meters Tall! (Nov 1, 2010)

Serpion5 said:


> Tyranids should be included in this chart imo. With mind control and genestealer infiltration in their background I see no reason why they couldnt ally with orks at the very least.


In SoulGazers original post, the chart that came up from the link does have a Tyranid column/row and it shows they can't actually ally with anyone, so I'm unsure where this piece of the discussion is coming from. On the other hand, it makes complete sense that a 5-6 generation genestealer colony could begin to infiltrate an IG regiment... it's not technically an alliance, but I like the manipulated friend track for the tabletop.

For the Necron, my entire concept up to this point is they really are devoid of personality or politics as such, so the entire new paradigm of them being a race with a broader/deeper character than just a killing machine takes a little getting used to.


----------



## kaboot (Jan 4, 2012)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Why not? The new alliance system doesn't claim the Greenskins and the Daemonic hordes are suddenly comrades-in-arms. But Greenskins do commonly act as mercenaries, and as such have fought alongside Chaos hordes on numerous occasions. Or perhaps the Greenskins (or at least their command structure) have become corrupted, or perhaps they just happen to find themselves in the same theatre of war fighting against the same enemy, and intend to destroy each other after their mutual enemy is destroyed. Or perhaps the Greenskins are being manipulated by Tzeentchian daemons into the conflict. There are numerous reasons to justify a temporary "unholy alliance" (which I assume is the weakest form of alliance) between the factions.


 
I completely agree with you that players can justify any alliance. My point is thats its ridiculous that we have to go to such silly lenghts to do so. 

IMO, I think GW just said Fuck It, let em all be friends. Mo' money.

I like the fluff, and when I play, I try to imagine a reason for the two armies to fight. The new allies rule is gonna make my head hurt. 

KISS: Keep it simple stupid


----------



## Rems (Jun 20, 2011)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Honestly, I don't see the Necron/Blood Angel phenomenon as contradictory to the *current lore* at all.


Current being the key word here. Before that Blood Angels/Necrons incident there was almost no fluff on the Space Marines having anything to with xenos. The very few exceptions being the odd cease-fire with eldar to defeat chaos. (exluding some wierdness from Rogue Trader days such as tigerius being half eldar for example). 

Personally i have more difficultiy believing that Astartes would be willing to work alongside Necrons than Necrons alongside others. The new necrons are rational and self aware. They conduct themselves for the most part via a strict honour code. Given that i don't see it as impossible that occasionally individual necron lords would come to respect certain foes or be willing to treat them as they would a fellow necron they were in conflict with. 

Astartes on the other hand are brain-washed children trained to kill. Most of them barely relate to humanity, let alone xenos, who they are sworn to destroy. It's a religious duty to cleanse the xenos. Only the most liberal, relate-able Space Marines would even be able to entertain the idea of working with xenos. 

Has their motto changed now?

_Cleanse the Xenos_ (except when they're friendly)
_Burn the Witch_ (unless they apologise)
_Purge the Heretic_ (or just give them a slap on the wrist)


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

to answer the original question with a question, Why do you need a reason? I doubt the rule book will require you to create a solid argument as for why these two armies have taken the feild together other than you have paid the required points from the relevant codex and have made the required minimum selections, after than who cares?
But if you need a reason here are a few
Because one of the two armies is a Merc force 
Because the leader of the necron force feels that chaos can offer his people the fastest way to a flesh body.
Because the Necrons programming was corupted by chaos/warpstorm/water/corrosion.
Because the chaos marines must do pro bono fighting for less fortunate armies
because the landlord at your local pub told you to
Because necrons look like chaos marines who could use a few pies
Because the leaders are married and insist on bringing there warbands on dates
Because im pretty
Because of the constant Eldar threat its not safe to bring one army.


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

I can see necrons allying with chaos, (could count as chaos androids from way back when, mentioned in both the first Heretic and a Thousand sons) but not the other way around

Orks and chaos make a modicum of sense with the whole "You wanted a new planet to wage on, we have given it to you, You wanted to fight X, they are here, and we just want you to keep they busy"

I wouldn't mind if people tried to do some fluff as to why their armies are together but most won't, and most won't convert any thing as count as.

I did laugh when even in the promotional video the bloke clear thought "this ally system is stupid in small games"


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

I'm really looking forward to the allies part - But I think it just seems to be me.

My eldar and wolves can now team up (not that I would - prefer to keep those two separate) but that would help now my eldar haven't got any good cc any more. Although if my eldar ever ally with anyone, it's to stab them in the back asap...

But the allies chart means I can now field my csm and demons in the same army. I've had to get an FOC worth of demons just to be able to use them, but now I can take the 'thirster or the 'keeper as part of my normal army and I'm really looking forward to this - A themed crossover army. It's what my army was supposed to be - I'd wanted chaos since 2nd ed - By the time I got them it was 4th and I could no longer field the army I wanted. Now I can - Score.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

I see this allie way simply a gaming-thing, not fluffy. Its like when you play DOW and Tyranids can ally with IG and Chaos against other Tyranids. However, you CAN do it fluffy with Orks and Chaos, Traitor Guard and Chaos, SM and Eldar and so on. Its up to yourself.

However the "unholy alliances" which should never happen, are simply a gaming thing, kinda like Nurgle Bezerkers or Slaaneshi Thousand Sons. I am a fluff-nazy, but I can still see the difference and tell them apart. I for one, will keep my Chaos armies fluffy, but think about using Traitor Guard to expand them.


----------



## darknightdrako (Mar 26, 2010)

In the grim darkness of the liberal future there is slight hatred for one another.


----------



## Iron Angel (Aug 2, 2009)

In the desperate dimness of the future, there is only wary friendship.


----------



## kaboot (Jan 4, 2012)

In the enthusiastic brightness of the near future, there is only skipping. tra la la la la


----------



## nevynxxx (Dec 27, 2011)

I find it odd that Tau and IG are not battle brothers.... Unless of course Demiurg will make an appearance in any eventual new book... It would have made a perfect way to model them...


----------



## cegorach (Nov 29, 2010)

Given the few posts above, exactly how long would it take for Warhammer 40,000 to become ponies, I am seeing an awful lot more friendship than I was used to and for one don't like it. 
I mean yes it is possible that an inquisitor would find four orks and convince them that together they might be able to take out the seven chaos marines and that alone they would all die. But in my experience, most inquisitors are a bit ... overzealous. In fact most of the imperium would face execution if they did consort with Xenos.

Oh and Eldar being easy allies with Dark Eldar ... seriously? You think that if some Eldar mercenaries were contracted to work for Dark Eldar they would be brothers in arms? Really? I thought they were sworn mortal enemies and were pretty much parallels with Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines. I mean it is possible that you could convince a renegade chapter of Space Marines to join forces with Chaos Space Marines technically going by the same basis. If Abaddon said to them "look Sonny Jims, do this for me and I will give you three thousand Gene Seed and fourty nine Strike Cruisers" Then yeah the renegade chapter (But still space marine army) would do it no? This just makes no sense to me how they class some things together but still disallow some, it is like most of Warhammer 40k, self contradictory. Which certainly keeps things interesting.


----------



## Grins1878 (May 10, 2010)

I think fluff wise a some of the armies don't work, but I definately think the 'nids should get orks and IG (for the purpose of an old coven style army - to be honest, anyone wanting to field one against me would be welcome to, I think it'd be a boss army!).

The only ones I think would be a bit ropey would be Templars and some of the choices they have. They don't really like chapters with too many many psykers do they (bar grey knights)? so them and xenos of any style I would have thought would be a bit naughty like.

Orks I could pretty much see fighting alongside anyone (bar obviously templars and marines in general), Necrons, not being the mindles automatons they used to be I could see them allying with pretty much anyone. 

I'll reserve judgement for the others, some of them I think would work well and others not so much, but it is just a game so you don't have to face them if you don't want to.

I know my brother is made up, as his Templar and IG armies are based on fluff together anyway so it's worked out for the greater good... Can't say I'll be playing my greenskins alongside my wolves though...


----------



## Dave T Hobbit (Dec 3, 2009)

Grins1878 said:


> ...I definately think the 'nids should get orks and IG (for the purpose of an old coven style army....


Could even add in Daemons as well for the Chaos Genestealer Cult.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

I imagine news will be breaking soon concerning the new lore alterations, but for now check this article out, makes sense.


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

The futures bright.

The futures......... MAUVE!?!?! :shok:


----------



## darknightdrako (Mar 26, 2010)

cegorach said:


> Given the few posts above, exactly how long would it take for Warhammer 40,000 to become ponies, I am seeing an awful lot more friendship than I was used to and for one don't like it.


Glad I wasnt the only one thinking about it. Probably in the 7th edition where factions will start "loving and tolerating the shit out of each other". So far this edition they are tolerating each other. Next ed will be the loving :angry:


----------



## Hellados (Sep 16, 2009)

I have to disagree, this is English sci-fi and it's not known for being dainty, see 1984 and other George Orwells for a start 

Guess it depends on the investors though, that's for sure why it's getting more and more mech as time goes on imho


----------



## Grins1878 (May 10, 2010)

Dave T Hobbit said:


> Could even add in Daemons as well for the Chaos Genestealer Cult.


What he said! Yeah, Chaos Genestealer cult would be ace too! Don't think the nids are too fussy! :biggrin:


----------



## Shas'o Stormforge (May 26, 2012)

So I can now have Tau and Orks working side by side with no problems what so ever. 

THAT TOTALLY MAKES SENSE , NO PROBLEMS THERE AT ALL!:angry:

So this is what would happen if an ork boy saw a fire warrior

Ork Boy:Ello lets fight dem humies. 
Fire Warrior:Ok greenskin.
(And remember they fought together with no problems what so ever)

What were the GW people on when they thought up the allies for some of the armies.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Shas'o Stormforge said:


> So I can now have Tau and Orks working side by side with no problems what so ever.
> 
> THAT TOTALLY MAKES SENSE , NO PROBLEMS THERE AT ALL!:angry:
> 
> ...


The fact that some Orks hire themselves out as mercenaries and that the Tau are well known for employing alien mercenaries? Hell there are Ork mercenaries hiring on with the Tau in one of the Last Chancer novels.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Over Two Meters Tall! said:


> In SoulGazers original post, the chart that came up from the link does have a Tyranid column/row and it shows they can't actually ally with anyone, so I'm unsure where this piece of the discussion is coming from. On the other hand, it makes complete sense that a 5-6 generation genestealer colony could begin to infiltrate an IG regiment... it's not technically an alliance, but I like the manipulated friend track for the tabletop.


I meant to say they should be included in being able to have allies. 



> For the Necron, my entire concept up to this point is they really are devoid of personality or politics as such, so the entire new paradigm of them being a race with a broader/deeper character than just a killing machine takes a little getting used to.


The lore has been giving necrons personality traits for some time now, well before the recent codex update. I remember years back to the Medusa V campaign, one of the White Dwarf battles included several pieces of fluff regarding the Herald of the Storm (precursor to Imotekh perhaps?) and the satisfaction it felt at inflicting pain and death upon its enemies. It felt anticipation and hatred, and it had conscious thought and memories.



Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I imagine news will be breaking soon concerning the new lore alterations, but for now check this article out, makes sense.


Is it just me, or do the comments on that page seem as up and down as they do here? 




I never understand why people feel that bitching on the internet about 40k changes was somehow going to make things better. All it does is encourage more whining and this in turns tends to create bias and misdirected enmity. What's even more retarded is that this is happening before anyone has come to grips with the new lore. Hell you don't even know what it is yet? 

I've not known gw to write terrible lore. It becomes different, but if you can just close your eyes for a few moments and disregard some of what was, it becomes much easier to accept what now is.


----------



## gridge (Feb 11, 2012)

Just because two forces aren't killing each other at the moment does not mean they are friendly. The way I reason it, is they are merely allies of necessity when faced with a superior force that will wipe them both out if they don't redirect their attention. Once their common foe is defeated they can get back to killing each other. Personally, I don't plan on using allies and wouldn't corrupt my marines with foul xenos or minions of Chaos, but I can still see ways to rationalize it. However, in my opinion, if a campaign is being played it would be best to limit possible alliances for fluff reasons.


----------



## Karnax (Sep 23, 2010)

cegorach said:


> Oh and Eldar being easy allies with Dark Eldar ... seriously? You think that if some Eldar mercenaries were contracted to work for Dark Eldar they would be brothers in arms? Really? I thought they were sworn mortal enemies and were pretty much parallels with Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines.


IIRC, they don't hate each other as such. The DE scorn the eldar for being weak and scared (as they no longer give in to excess), and so see no problem with hunting down eldar for prey as with any other 'prey' race.

The eldar I believe pity the DE in some respects, as they're damned to slowly wither away.

As to the OP, I agree with bitsandkits.


----------



## Danger Close (Apr 9, 2012)

All i can say, Guard and Chaos Daemons......
Mindfuck :/


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

Didn't Dark Eldar save Iyanden because they found the idea of them using so many wraithguard humouress.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Danger Close said:


> All i can say, Guard and Chaos Daemons......
> Mindfuck :/


Traitor Guard?


----------



## khrone forever (Dec 13, 2010)

Danger Close said:


> All i can say, Guard and Chaos Daemons......
> Mindfuck :/


possessed guard?


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Rems said:


> Current being the key word here. Before that Blood Angels/Necrons incident there was almost no fluff on the Space Marines having anything to with xenos. The very few exceptions being the odd cease-fire with eldar to defeat chaos. (exluding some wierdness from Rogue Trader days such as tigerius being half eldar for example).
> 
> Personally i have more difficultiy believing that Astartes would be willing to work alongside Necrons than Necrons alongside others. The new necrons are rational and self aware. They conduct themselves for the most part via a strict honour code. Given that i don't see it as impossible that occasionally individual necron lords would come to respect certain foes or be willing to treat them as they would a fellow necron they were in conflict with.
> 
> ...


Amen to that. However, since when has anyone really taken the game seriously to that level. In Illinois and Virginia no really gave a shit about tyranids fighting along side Imperial Guardsmen. All sorts of ally bullshit. Fluff wise. Bullshit that doesn't work. I don't think thats a necessary thing to put in fluff and try to explain. It just goes to a point where people start saying stop.

But like Dawn of War, just try to win. 



Serpion5 said:


> I never understand why people feel that bitching on the internet about 40k changes was somehow going to make things better. All it does is encourage more whining and this in turns tends to create bias and misdirected enmity. What's even more retarded is that this is happening before anyone has come to grips with the new lore. Hell you don't even know what it is yet?
> 
> I've not known gw to write terrible lore. It becomes different, but if you can just close your eyes for a few moments and disregard some of what was, it becomes much easier to accept what now is.


"Bitching" can also be feedback to GW. I really don't know how GW has been doing since the new lore. But a lot of people finds problems with it and in future when GW does change the lore again they'll know what things to change from the whining. 

What else can we do? For those who didn't witness a positive change to their own view of the 40k universe, why should they just sit back and accept it. I mean I whined. I "bitched," but its good to get your thoughts out there. I don't do it anymore because I think it takes time and energy but I got to pay my respects to people who constantly do it. Because honestly its pretty tiresome. And as you said, know one is going to change it. In the end we are going to forced to accept it. Whether or not the fluff is crap or not. My old poll showed that half the people disliked the change. Half. Thats a lot. But hey, a glass can be half empty or half full right?


----------



## Moriouce (Oct 20, 2009)

Eldar should be able to ally with whoever. Simply we pesky humans that never would understad why!


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I remember everyone bitching about how the Imperium allying with the Eldar saying it was impossible.

However, I believe it is the most likely ally the Imperium would force itself to ally with. The Imperium would make do with the learning of technology and knowledge of the galaxy. 

The Eldar are prideful but they aren't blind enough to ignore they probably lose more Eldar than they breed. They need the human shield.


----------



## Jesting (Jul 15, 2012)

I am very new to Warhammer 40k, but I heard that allying had already existed in earlier editions of the rulebook but was taken out. Is this true?


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Jesting said:


> I am very new to Warhammer 40k, but I heard that allying had already existed in earlier editions of the rulebook but was taken out. Is this true?


It was around in 2nd edition, not sure why it was taken out. Even then, Tyranids had no Allies (even Genestealer Cults refused to ally with Nids), and Genestealers got Chaos allies. Back then Allies cut into what was broadly your 'Heavy Support' section, although it was really the 'Vehicles' section as Marines could take Devastators, Terminators, Assault Marines and Veterans in their 'Squads' section, the old Troops.

Midnight


----------



## Lord Solar Macharius (Oct 5, 2010)

IG+Tau= Gue'vesa Auxillaries
IG+Chaos= Lost and the Damned


----------



## Veteran Sergeant (May 17, 2012)

Danger Close said:


> All i can say, Guard and Chaos Daemons......
> Mindfuck :/


This is what seems to throw people off.


Remember, the Imperial Guard is not one homogenous entity. Codex: Imperial Guard is used to represent a vast number of different types of units. High end PDF like the Ultramar PDF. Drudging siege specialists like the Death Korps of Krieg. They could be the fanatical troops of a shrine world. Jungle fighters like the Catachans.

So yeah, if you have Tau allies, it's possible they are humans subjected by the Tau Empire who have been brainwashed like everyone else in the Tau Empire and now fight for the Greater Good. 

If they're allied with the forces of Chaos, they are traitor Guard, or heretical PDF converted by Chaos agents. 

If they are allied with Sisters or Grey Knights, they are Guard that have been commandeered by Ecclessiarchal or Inquisitorial agents.



Remember folks, if you include the Forgeworld kits, there have been _fourteen_ different model lines for Guard Regiments since 2nd Edition. Cadian (metal then plastic), Catachan (metal then plastic), Mordian, Tallarn, Valhallan, Steel Legion, Praetorian, Vostroyan, Tanith, Death Korps, Elysian, Traitor (FW). This is before you get into the specialist troops like Stormtroopers, Rough Riders, etc. That alone should tell you something. And people give Space Marines a hard time for getting too many models, heh. 

There are billions of them, so the Imperial Guard can be just about _anything_ you wish them to be. Which is probably why they can ally with just about anybody.


----------

