AssurBahniZharr:
In the Italian Official Forum GWtilea is reported a rumor (no source indicated - warseer i suppose) along with many others that CD are not present in the 8th Edition Rulebook.
I give it to your attention, for knowledge purposes only.
Rumors IMHO sound quite false, (20+ for a spell transforming a mage in a huge Imperator Dragon -.-’/ stonethrowers at s3(9) AS allowed).
Moreover, no armies should be reported in the rulebook, accordingly to previous rumors (Release of a pdf containg all current army list modification)
What do you think about this? Have you ever seen such rumors?!
Grimstonefire:
That is all correct as far as I know (as I posted it on warseer ;))
What I was told is that the chaos Dwarfs are not mentioned in the small rulebook (the rules only, no background).
There are 2 important things to note.
Firstly, very few armies are actually mentioned getting specific rules in the actual rulebook, they could still release them as a full book at some point in 8th ed and it wouldn’t matter that they are not in the rulebook.
Secondly, the person who told me had only read through the small book (twice). There is no background in the small book, only rules. So they could still be in the 300 pages of background.
Thommy H:
They weren’t in the 7th Edition book either - just their stats in the back with everyone else’s. I have no earthly idea why some people seem to think this made them more valid or why, by extension, the lack of similar treatment in 8th magically invalidates them. Dogs of War didn’t get any stats in the back, but had half a page in the colour section, so what does that tell you?
People need to stop reading into stuff. There is no conspiracy.
AssurBahniZharr:
Master! I highly beg Your Pardon…
I didn’t understand You posted that !
(until a couple of minutes ago, searching on warseer) XD
What can I say?! Had no idea we were talking about a small rulebook (thought it was to be released later with the boxed set, and not available first than the big one)…am i reading in to stuff?!
@ Thommy: I’ve no excuses, but I suppose it is Italian style:D If u have a single line (even a citation in italics) then it is almost-official-they-surely-meant-that-and-nothing-else, if u haven’t you can commit suicide along with your perhaps-should-not-be-at-all-performant armies. No way in the middleXD
Thommy H:
What?
This message was automatically appended because it was too short.
Grimstonefire:
That probably made more sense in Italian I think.
You are right, it is the small one that comes with the starter set.
To be honest, unless they reload the Chaos Dwarfs ravening hordes pdf again (which they will not be doing imo), we cannot expect GW to change the official/unoffical nature of our list with the rulebook.
We’re just going to be stuck in the middle until forgeworld give us a list.
Thommy H:
Yeah, I don’t know why anyone would think there’d be anything in the rules section - there wasn’t in 7th, just a couple of references in the colour section, a paragraph and a picture at the end of the background section and the stats in the back. No other army was referenced in the rules section either. Weirdly, the rules section of the main rulebook is for the rules of the game. Like I said: there’s no conspiracy.
However, I all but guarantee there will be some mention of Chaos Dwarfs in the background section. There pretty much has to be, because they’re actually part of the current Warriors of Chaos army. Everyone saying they’re going to be Squatted on Warseer seems to be cheerfully ignoring the fact that the Hellcannon is right there and the Chaos Dwarf background appears in the WoC book. It mentions Hashut, Zharr-Naggrund and a load of other stuff. So it’s not just going to go away.
Kered:
They also mention Hushut in Liber Chaotica.
Baggronor:
Everyone saying they're going to be Squatted on Warseer seems to be cheerfully ignoring the fact that the Hellcannon is right there and the Chaos Dwarf background appears in the WoC book. It mentions Hashut, Zharr-Naggrund and a load of other stuff. So it's not just going to go away.
Quite. They also keep popping up in the novels, in other army books (with increasing regularity) and occupy a rather large area of the world map. And they appeared in the fluff for Warhammer Online. And they even have their own webcomic. So there.
I fully expect a paragraph or two of CD fluff in the new book, maybe even an illustration.
We're just going to be stuck in the middle until forgeworld give us a list.
Technically, I don't think we're in the middle anymore, we are now unofficial. There is no legal CD list at GW-run events. We do have everything else though. And more.
They also mention Hushut in Liber Chaotica.
Who is Hushut? :)
Willmark:
The quiet brother of Hashut 
Bassman:
They even made Zharr Naggarund bases http://www.chaos-dwarfs.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=7700 what? Naggarund? 
warh:
The quiet brother of Hashut ;)
Willmark
Haha, that made me laugh quite a bit:hat off
Fequiil:
They even made Zharr Naggarund bases http://www.chaos-dwarfs.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=7700 what? Naggarund? :D
Bassman
in the thread i told you that i spelled the title wrong;P:~
We're just going to be stuck in the middle until forgeworld give us a list.
Technically, I don't think we're in the middle anymore, we are now unofficial. There is no legal CD list at GW-run events. We do have everything else though. And more.
Baggronor
what about the count-as-dwarfs thing?
Baggronor:
what about the count-as-dwarfs thing?
Well, yes, but thats still the Dwarfs army list being used. We can attend as 'counts as' Dwarfs or WoC but it still isn't our own list.
Willmark:
We're just going to be stuck in the middle until forgeworld give us a list.
Technically, I don't think we're in the middle anymore, we are now unofficial. There is no legal CD list at GW-run events. We do have everything else though. And more.
Baggronor
True to a point. Right now the Indy CD lists is doing quite well and its the same thing that we have been facing for a while.
IF things come to a head and GW does not give us rules or FW doesn't[/align] then it might be time for CDO to make an official announcement on what the rules for CDs will be in terms of usage.
Some
Thommy H:
Will we get to vote on which rules CDO arbitrarily deems to be official then? Because you’re only the biggest community because we, the members, made you it.
Because I know I’m not alone in having serious problems with the Indy GT list, and I’m not at all convinced making a sweeping statement about supporting it over Ravening Hordes or another fan-made list (because that’s all it is) is a positive step. This is not an issue with devotion to rule or RAW, but an issue with thinking we shouldn’t support something that not everyone thinks should be supported.
Just saying.
Baggronor:
Will we get to vote on which rules CDO arbitrarily deems to be official then? Because you're only the biggest community because we, the members, made you it.
Because I know I'm not alone in having serious problems with the Indy GT list, and I'm not at all convinced making a sweeping statement about supporting it over Ravening Hordes or another fan-made list (because that's all it is) is a positive step. This is not an issue with devotion to rule or RAW, but an issue with thinking we shouldn't support something that not everyone thinks should be supported.
Its true that CDO as a whole will never agree on what is the 'Ultimate Chaos Dwarfs List', mainly because the standard of creativity here is so high; everyone has their own version, because you need that level of imagination to play the army in the first place. So I doubt we would be able to go, 'This is it' to anything that isn't made by GW (as 'made by GW' is the only thing resembling officialdom). The best we could hope for would be a consensus on a set of tweaks to RH, if any are necessary. The main thing we should continue to do is offer a selection of fan-lists that rock and make GW look lazy by comparison imo.
Grimstonefire:
I think the best thing to do would be to just update the RH list to 8th and produce something everyone would be happy to play against. Keep it mainly the same, no new units etc.
The RH list is the only uncontroversial list CDO could ‘officially’ support. If people want to play another list that’s fine.
Personally I wouldn’t see the need to actively promote the RH#2 list, and argue it’s existence in 8th. If people want to play against CD, this is what it takes. If people don’t then they won’t and it will be their loss.
Thommy H:
I’m all for bringing Ravening Hordes into 8th - indeed, I’d like to be a part of making that happen - but I would actively oppose CDO giving an official seal of approval to any fan-list. Except mine. Mine is utterly flawless.
AssurBahniZharr:
They weren't in the 7th Edition book either - just their stats in the back with everyone else's.
Thommy H
It was quite enough to validate RH, to let friends play with you, and to save some hope;)
I have no earthly idea why some people seem to think this made them more valid or why, by extension, the lack of similar treatment in 8th magically invalidates them.
Thommy H
This is exactly how it works, if it is stated somewhere it exists, conversely it dosen't exist anymore...(and it doesen't matter how it is written)
People need to stop reading into stuff.
Thommy H
Italians can be very creative;)
You write a law, we begin to find the tricks in the law:D
We like to appear always very professionalXD
To go back to topic i think that what people is expecting is a new RH (i'm one of those) or simply a line, "still use old RH".
We need only this, as 8th edition rumors are quite interesting if applied to what we have in RH List (IMHO)
Otherwise, at least in my country , CDs will go directly into a sealed box (not mine beloved ones, of course).
IndyGT is, in fact, too american, too fan made, only nice to read for those who can read english, to have any follow in my country. And it is not even considered by the plenty of national associations we have (FIGW the most famous).
Just to let you know, we don't even know there was a novel by G. Thorpe just because gw novel books aren't distribuited in italy and/or translated in my language.
