GW: Kharadron Overlord Rules Unveiled

GW shows off Age of Sigmar’s first transport vehicle, wacky weapons and more. Take a look!

GW TV pulled the covers off of this weekend’s newest Order faction – the Kharadron Overlords.


We have already seen the minis, first unveiled at GAMA 2017.  Now take a look at some of the rules:


The Arkanaut company are the bread and butter units of the faction. I love the characterful “Glory-seekers” rules. Perfect for swashbucking sky-pirates.


Moving up the chain to more elite infantry are the Grundstok Thunderers. These units have the heavy weapons, including that massive 36″ Grundstok Mortar.


The book will feature six Skyports with special rules that let you pick where your Kharadron Overlords hail from. Here are the rules for the fleets hailing from Barak-Thryng for example.

Finny the thing we’ve all been waiting for. Rules for a transport vehicle for Age of Sigmar.  The faction features the game’s first transports and folks have been wanting to see what those rules would look like.

If 40K is moving to Warscrolls these rules might be a blueprint for how vehicles may work…


~ Look for the Kharadron Overlords to arrive this weekend! More soon.


  • Bran D

    Barak-thryng must suck at clearing grudges…they have a damn log!

    • Jared van Kell

      They just keep adding more grudges faster than they can settle them.

  • Bran D

    Also, jw, have these battletombs been in an option for hardcover vs perfect bound softcover?

  • orionburn

    Grudesettler bombs – that is an awesome name for a weapon!

  • gordon ashacker

    Squats are back! Toss out the Squat timer!!!!!!

    • Cristhian Mario Landa Rivera

      Lmao. I don’t any IG logos.

      Ain’t happenin’

      • Nathaniel Wright

        Git gud at conversions and use the rules for 30k militia.

        • Cristhian Mario Landa Rivera

          Implying you can’t do that already with current plastic dwarfs and the milia uses literal seaships to transport.

          Otherwise, is not a plastic Squat Squad.

          • Emprah

            Who said space dwarves have to be IG allied? Just make them independent steampunk goodness, add a melta gun or two and the Squats are back baby!

          • Cristhian Mario Landa Rivera

            Then they wouldn’t be squats.

          • Shinnentai

            I think these will be more to scale with 40k models. The general aesthetic fits in with 40k a little better too I think. I’m actually pretty tempted myself! (with weapons swaps of course).

            Obviously I’d be using rhinos as transports rather than the airships! Would still need to source bikes (I don’t really like Mantic’s).

          • Cristhian Mario Landa Rivera

            Not sure if they are, they are on 25mm bases, but they seem a bit taller than regular Dwarfs.

          • Shinnentai

            Well that’s why I think they’d work better than Warhammer Dwarf models in 40k – sure squats are supposed to be smaller, but I think the Warhammer Dwarves are a little *too* small and compact (due to having to rank up on 20mm bases).

  • dave long island

    I for one welcome our new Kharadron Overlords.

  • MechBattler

    I’m imaging these dwarves sound like this…

  • JamesD

    Your website is more likely put someone at risk of viruses than any illicit porn site. You need to clean yourself up!

  • sjap98

    Ironclad: interesting embark & disembark rules…will we get those i n 40k?

    • William Jameson

      Yes, I agree. I quite like that the disembark action takes place in the Hero phase.

    • EvilCheesypoof

      I like it, nice and simple.

  • Anders Busch Hjarlvig

    I just hope they dont remove the toughness parameter in 40k. Imo its the single worst thing about AOS. Having vehicles that can be wounded by everything wont work in 40k. Way to much ranged small arms fire in 40k compaired to AOS for that to work…

    • Steven Hyche

      Toughness is still in AoS… it just goes by extra wounds. This ironclad can take more than any 40k vehicle. Most vehicles in 40k can get wiped off the table in a single turn.

      • Shinnentai

        The point he’s making is that it won’t make much sense thematically for a tank to be taken down by lasgun volleys.

        • euansmith

          Unless they concentrate their fire and melt a hole through the armour?

          • Shinnentai

            Yeah there’ll always be justifications – that shotgun shell obviously went through a vision slit and touched off the ammo supply, or in the case of previously damaged vehicles their armour would already be rent open, leaving vulnerable spots.

            If 6th Ed does go in this direction, I do think it’ll cause some teeth-gnashing from existing players.

            I don’t really mind – at least it will allow me to include a cool tank in a small intro game without having to worry about it ruining things due to lack of Anti-tank on the other side.

          • Dr.Clock

            In 40k it probably makes sense to have 1+ or even 0+ saves in order to make some things ‘actually immune’ to anything that doesn’t have a rend rating, or indeed anything without a -2 if you start at a 0+… between super-low saves and super-high wound counts, and with the ability to custom tailor ‘wound loss stat changes’ for each unit, and even include facing charts on ‘dataslates’ for each unit, I think it could work quite elegantly for the wide range of units.

            So basically T8/AV11 would come to a 1+ save (currently T<5 = ineffective), and T10/AV14 = 0+ save.

          • Shinnentai

            Possibly, though I should think there will be a ‘roll of 1 always fails’ to avoid unkillable infantry (inevitably there will be armour save buffs somewhere). Could make vehicles an exception to this, but still seems clunky.

            I’m really interested in what we end up with in 8th. I do play 40k but I’m not particularly attached to the rule-set, so I’m pretty optimistic.

          • Dr.Clock

            Yeah… anything up to a 40mm base should probably not get a 1+ or 0+… might make sense to have to have ‘top limits’ on some saves too for things like terminators – start at a 2+, and can’t be ‘rended’ to worse than a 4+. 1+/0+ as I say would be reserved for anything that currently have T8+ or AV11+

  • WhenDidVicesBecomeVirtues

    Did they have any art yet showing a “sky port”? Lore wise are they land bases or airborne also?

  • Oskar Calvo

    The las news about the Squats and the Demiurgs were that G.W. didn’t know how to create a interesting army.
    So, with those dwarf they can not say that again.

  • John Traupman

    heard it here first (total rumormill): 40k Embark/Disembark rules will be the same as you see for the Ironclad, in 8th ed.

    • EvilCheesypoof

      I hope so, it’s simple and accomplishes all it needs to.

  • Dennis Finan Jr

    Who woulda thunk pirate mechanical dwarves. I love them

  • Oliver Milne

    Glad to see the 2000AD influence still going strong at GW. Borag Thungg, Earthlets!