Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hello Gamers,

Guess what - my buddy and I fixed 40k. Yup, the hardship is over. The fun can proceed again.

Don't believe me? Follow these simple rules changes for a game or two and see for yourself. Please interpret them narrowly as I am sure there are ambiguities we take for granted since we discussed each rule during development of the DRAL Rules. The DRAL Rules for Competitive Play has reignited the hobby for us!

DRAL Rules for Competitive Play:

A) ALLIES
1) Allies may be taken in games equal to or larger than 2500 points per side or in any game where there are more than 2 opponents.
2) "Battle Brothers" ally mechanic is banned and counts as "Allies of Convenience."
3) Revised Ally chart created by Forge The Narrative is likely to be adopted as well. http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/05/how-to-bring-sexy-back-banning-battle.html; http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TK7buLKXL1s/U1kg0UV9mvI/AAAAAAAAlRo/ecLb72eyVUk/s1600/matrix-New.jpg

B) ASSAULT
1) Charge Distance: Units charge per 5th Edition rules, generally 6 inches for infantry and 12 for bikes/cavalry etc. Units may now elect to charge an additional D6 inches however the result of 1 causes the charge to fail regardless of how far the intended recipient of the charge actually was to the charging unit. Resolve Overwatch as normal.

2) Challenges: A challenge may only be initiated by a charging IC.

3) Look Out Sir!: A player may only elect to perform a LOS! once per game, regardless of whether in the Shooting or Assault phase.

4) Power Weapons: Ignore armor saves per 5th Ed. rule book.

5) Pistols: A player may elect for any model engaged in close combat to use the profile of its pistol(s) instead of its normal unit profile. (NB: The number of Attacks used is the same as the number of shots the pistol would have otherwise been able to make if in the shooting phase. You do not use the assaulting units "A".)

6) Consolidation: A unit that wins a given close combat, and is permitted to consolidate, may do so and engage a unit in a new close combat if that unit was within 3" of the consolidating unit. The assaulting counts as making a "disorderly charge" (no bonuses) and the combat will begin in the following Assault phase. The unit accepting the assault does so as normal (i.e. Overwatch, Counter-Atteck, etc. may be utilized).

C) DEPLOYMENT
1) Opponents who elect to go first or steal the initiative may not launch an assault in game turn 1.

2) Reserve: Units entering from reserve, including Outflank but not including deep strike unless otherwise specified, may assault in the Assault Phase the turn they enter play.

D) SHOOTING
1) Look Out Sir!: A player may only elect to perform a LOS! once per game, regardless of whether in the Shooting or Assault phase.

E) USRs
1) Furious Charge: provides +1S and +1I per 5th Ed. rule book. Rumor has it Orks will have access to S5 one way or another. If this is true then DRAL will eliminate this revision of Furious Charge. Updated 1/30

2) Fleet (et al.): Permits player to re-roll the Run move or re-roll the optional D6 when calculating charge distance (explained above) Updated and explained on page 3 of this thread.

3) Outflank: Unit may assault in the Assault Phase the turn they enter play via Outflank. Alternative in consideration: "A unit that is deployed via Outflank may only be hit by snap shots the Turn they arrive but may be assaulted normally.

4) Sky Fire: Ignores a Flyer's save that results from Zooming status. (explained below)

5) Deny the Witch: Deny the Witch is now a USR and therefore may only apply to a unit if expressly mentioned in its profile/rules entry.

F) FLYERS
1) Shooting Flyers: All units may fire at flyers, regardless of the flying status (ie. hover or zooming etc), at full BS. No more snap shots... (weapon type restrictions remain however)

2) Zoom Saves: Zooming flyers benefit from an unmodified 3+ save from ground to air fire. Updated and explained on page 3 of this thread.

G) VEHICLES (generally)
1) Assaulting out of Vehicles: Units MAY assault out of Vehicles that had not moved during the movement phase (per 5th Ed. rules)

2) Defensive Weapons: A "defensive weapon" is any vehicle or walker mounted weapon with a Strength equal to or less than 4.
2.1) Defensive Weapons may Over watch (snap shot a charging unit) so long as the unit starts the Assault phase within the weapon's arc of fire.

H) SPECIAL CHARACTERS
1) SCs may not use Warlord Traits out of the main rule book unless expressly permitted in the relevant codex.

2) SCs may not use psychic powers or disciplines from the main rule book unless expressly permitted in the relevant codex.

I) MISCELLANEOUS
1) Expansions: Expansions may be used in games equal to or larger than 2500 points per side
1.1) Definition of Expansion: Any rule set compatible with WH40k that is NOT (a) the main rule book (that which is purchased with the game or a counterpart version), (b) an army codex as defined by GW but where only one may be in effect for a given "army" (chapter, legion, "race", "species", coven et al.) at a time; or (c) Official FAQs or Errata as published by GW free of charge on their primary website, is considered an Expansion. (Horus Heresy or 30K is fantastic and is highly recommended even at 2000 )


That is the heart and soul of the DRAL Rules! Please play test and report back. If you love quick and deadly games without all of those "Gotchya!" moments, these rules are for you.


* * * * *

WIP

Currently Play-testing Vehicle Toughness - most notably for dreadnoughts and walkers.


* * * * *

Thanks for reading! Again, please try the DRAL Rules out for yourself and report back. Happy gaming (once again)!

If you want to play 5th edition...just play 5th edition...lol

So why the out of left field buff to Land Raiders, exactly?

 iGuy91 wrote:
If you want to play 5th edition...just play 5th edition...lol

but there were some improvements to 5th to 6th.

The goal was not to create a brand new game but instead take 6th edition and strive to streamline it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 curran12 wrote:
So why the out of left field buff to Land Raiders, exactly?

As stated those are not technically part of the DRAL Rules but instead a highly suggested house rule for those that think Land Raiders fall far short of their fluff description and are drastically overpriced at 250 points and above. The changes attempt to cure the "wow i just got one-shotted by a 20 point guardsman" woes.

I feel like a lot of the nerfs are directed at IG. Did someone making these rules get beaten by IG alot?

 iGuy91 wrote:
If you want to play 5th edition...just play 5th edition...lol

This is the simplest solution to what you think of as "problems".

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
If you want to play 5th edition...just play 5th edition...lol

This is the simplest solution to what you think of as "problems".

Occham's Razor prevails!

5) Pistols: A player may elect for any model engaged in close combat to use the profile of its pistol(s) instead of its normal unit profile.

Sooo I can get a powerfist that has a ranged attack, strikes at initiative, and can get an extra attack from a free CCW with only 1 less strength for 10 points cheaper than an actual powerfist? And I can dual wield these mythical "plasma pistols"? Sure count me in. Seriously though, good ideas here, but quite a but of work to be done. These rules create as many problems as they solve, if not more.

 ultimentra wrote:
I feel like a lot of the nerfs are directed at IG. Did someone making these rules get beaten by IG alot?

Actually none of the players involved are IG players and IG was not a factor. The driving forces were the desire to quicken game speed and boost the deadliness of assault. Another goal was to minimize unanticipated cheese combos. Admittedly, this concern has lessened naturally over time by the rapid release of new codices.

Why does this nerf IG? Because of the boon to assault?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rav1rn wrote:

5) Pistols: A player may elect for any model engaged in close combat to use the profile of its pistol(s) instead of its normal unit profile.

Sooo I can get a powerfist that has a ranged attack, strikes at initiative, and can get an extra attack from a free CCW with only 1 less strength for 10 points cheaper than an actual powerfist? And I can dual wield these mythical "plasma pistols"? Sure count me in. Seriously though, good ideas here, but quite a but of work to be done. These rules create as many problems as they solve, if not more.

No you would get one shot for each plasma pistol. Pistols shoot once in the shooting phase. It is in their profile.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
If you want to play 5th edition...just play 5th edition...lol

This is the simplest solution to what you think of as "problems".

But then the new codices won't work. 6th did bring a few positive changes with its release. I never said it was a complete loss.

Also, flyers are a welcome addition tot eh game but the way it was done was a silly money grab and made purchasing new, dedicated anti-air units mandatory. In our system you get very strong bonuses for dedicated anti-air, however it is not required to stay competitive.

 Deuce11 wrote:

 ultimentra wrote:
I feel like a lot of the nerfs are directed at IG. Did someone making these rules get beaten by IG alot?

Actually none of the players involved are IG players and IG was not a factor. The driving forces were the desire to quicken game speed and boost the deadliness of assault. Another goal was to minimize unanticipated cheese combos. Admittedly, this concern has lessened naturally over time by the rapid release of new codices.

Why does this nerf IG? Because of the boon to assault?

It's not just the assault boon its the assault out of outflank. IG has no or very little mobility, and this change absolutely invalidates any kind of range advantages they once had, because now you can just outflank your new deathstar (and trust me, even with these changes there will still be deathstar units, thats something you can't change because of IC rules and 6th ed in general) and IG won't be able to react to it. Tau has mobility in its suit units and jetpack infantry, and can react much better to outflanking assault units with interceptor and supporting fire. IG has chimeras, but when you combine the new assault rules (which always strike back armor, which invalidates Leman Russes as well now) with the Hull Point system Chimeras are now even weaker than before!

Congrats you've just broken the back of one of the most popular factions. The only other viable build would be close combat IG. And even then it would be hard to do without allies.

That's another thing to, 2500 points for allies? Seriously? Who the feth plays 2500 point games? I certainly haven't ever played one. Highest I've ever seen is 2k. And even those didn't allow double force org chart.

 ultimentra wrote:

 Deuce11 wrote:

 ultimentra wrote:
I feel like a lot of the nerfs are directed at IG. Did someone making these rules get beaten by IG alot?

Actually none of the players involved are IG players and IG was not a factor. The driving forces were the desire to quicken game speed and boost the deadliness of assault. Another goal was to minimize unanticipated cheese combos. Admittedly, this concern has lessened naturally over time by the rapid release of new codices.

Why does this nerf IG? Because of the boon to assault?

It's not just the assault boon its the assault out of outflank. IG has no or very little mobility, and this change absolutely invalidates any kind of range advantages they once had, because now you can just outflank your new deathstar (and trust me, even with these changes there will still be deathstar units, thats something you can't change because of IC rules and 6th ed in general) and IG won't be able to react to it. Tau has mobility in its suit units and jetpack infantry, and can react much better to outflanking assault units with interceptor and supporting fire. IG has chimeras, but when you combine the new assault rules (which always strike back armor, which invalidates Leman Russes as well now) with the Hull Point system Chimeras are now even weaker than before!

Congrats you've just broken the back of one of the most popular factions. The only other viable build would be close combat IG. And even then it would be hard to do without allies.

That's another thing to, 2500 points for allies? Seriously? Who the feth plays 2500 point games? I certainly haven't ever played one. Highest I've ever seen is 2k. And even those didn't allow double force org chart.

Sorry but, and i mean this lightly, if that is your opinion you may need to play more. I am not trying to start a flame war, i promise. If you know your opponent can outflank dangerous units then it is your job to mitigate the threat. IG do this with tanks. IG has tons of cheap metal boxes to block vulnerable points of attack. Add to that the ability to overwatch with defensive weapons (which a chimera full of guardsmen would have plenty of), and the greater difficulty of silencing tanks before they are wrecked, and the change that broke its back, as you said, is really not a big deal. BTW in 5th Ed, this was allowed and you didn't see IG complaining that they had a weak codex...

Now, 2500 for allies. Look, allies and double FOC, sucks. It does! The proponents of the DRAL Rules believe Allies is more balanced at larger point games. As for who plays 2500, well a lot more than you think! Especially with the introduction of Horus Heresy where a single primarch is 400-500 points, and Escalation where 350+ point Lords Of War are introduced, 2500 points is going to look like 1850 on the table-top.

Believe it or not, the DRAL Rules team has been playing warhammer since 2nd Edition... we been arond the block and have a good feel for the game and how the rules have progressed. I encourage you and a buddy to try out the DRAL Rules and report back your impressions.

Happy Gaming!

So your answer to criticism is "you should play more"?

Sounds like you're not interested in any feedback other than praise.

 curran12 wrote:
So your answer to criticism is "you should play more"?

Sounds like you're not interested in any feedback other than praise.

It is not feedback if it wasn't tested out.

Further, tactics change with every new release. Honestly, the complaint that guardsmen are vulnerable to assault is poor reason for claiming the rules fail. Shooting rules the roost and IG has guns in spades. The purpose was made clear, to boost assault so that it is a viable tactic. The strength of shooting has not only stayed just as strong BUT has been strengthened as well by making the average shot more dangerous against flyers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Besides you miss characterized my reply. i gave a full explanation of why assaulting off the outflank is not unduly detrimental to IG.

considering that no one in your group plays as imperial guard, you seem very knowledgable about how they play.

Honestly this reads to me like a list of things that an angry close combat player came up with after being beaten by tau or ig. Try putting this much effort into your list make up and tactics and you might not need these nerfs.

xruslanx wrote:
considering that no one in your group plays as imperial guard, you seem very knowledgable about how they play.

Honestly this reads to me like a list of things that an angry close combat player came up with after being beaten by tau or ig. Try putting this much effort into your list make up and tactics and you might not need these nerfs.

Lol wow so much hate. I expected it but yet didnt see it coming.

I don't play CC armies... never have. But I empathize with those that do.

Further, Just because there are no IG players that were part of this project doesn't mean we never played them. Quite to the contrary. Was my assessment wrong or are you just trolling?

The hobbyists that developed the DRAL Rules can and do play 6th Ed. successfully. But we feel as many do that the edition is slow, clunky, and boring. And that is the opinion by those that stuck it out instead of quitting altogether. Instead of quitting we aim at fixing. When I don't play someone from my immediate gaming group, I play pick-ups at the local gaming store... the largest on the east coast, and I play true 6th ed.

I don't hate you, just the rules you've come up with. At least be honest and call it AssaultHammer, or something. A unit of outflanking cavalry can move 12" onto the board, then assault 12" + d6", *then* consolidate into another assault. That in itself breaks the game.

Then you consider that every single elite melee unit just became capable of killing an entire army on its own....just no. You think you've balanced it by not making it a charge, but you've not. A unit of lightening claw terminators in combat with an infantry squad don't need the charge to wreck them, but that's okay because I can just swing my own awesome close combat unit in to - oh no I can't, I'm boned. I'm boned the moment a single assault unit makes contact with a single one of my units. Screw that.

If you think 6th is slow, clunky and boring, you are definitey in a minority. 6th has its flaws but my friends and I enjoy it far more than 5th. Incidentally if you think than an entire melee army loading up on transports, driving as fast as possible towards the enemy and popping smoke, then getting out and assaulting, is somehow a more "fun" game, then go for it. I don't in the slightest miss the dynamic of "Kill all his rhinos turn 1, I win. Kill all his rhinos turn 2, I lose". Your 5++ rules would make this dynamic even worse.

Not going to comment on the rest of the thread, but;

If you think 6th is slow, clunky and boring, you are definitey in a minority.

This simply is not the case. Heaps of people agree with one or more of the "slow, clunky and boring" descriptions, amongst many other issues with the game.

 Dakkamite wrote:
Not going to comment on the rest of the thread, but;

If you think 6th is slow, clunky and boring, you are definitey in a minority.

This simply is not the case. Heaps of people agree with one or more of the "slow, clunky and boring" descriptions, amongst many other issues with the game.

Well dakka is very negative towards 40k, but a majority of people still enjoy it. One could extrapolate that the 40k community as a whole is much more positive.

That's pretty off-topic though.

Slow and clunky and 'enjoyable' aren't mutually exclusive (though boring probably would be). Its simply a case of it not being *as* enjoyable as it otherwise could be.

xruslanx wrote:
Well dakka is very negative towards 40k, but a majority of people still enjoy it.

Why do you keep reposting that horrible poll (which you even admit was a biased poll designed to "prove" mine wrong) as if it actually means anything?

xruslanx wrote:
I don't hate you, just the rules you've come up with. At least be honest and call it AssaultHammer, or something. A unit of outflanking cavalry can move 12" onto the board, then assault 12" + d6", *then* consolidate into another assault. That in itself breaks the game.

Then you consider that every single elite melee unit just became capable of killing an entire army on its own....just no. You think you've balanced it by not making it a charge, but you've not. A unit of lightening claw terminators in combat with an infantry squad don't need the charge to wreck them, but that's okay because I can just swing my own awesome close combat unit in to - oh no I can't, I'm boned. I'm boned the moment a single assault unit makes contact with a single one of my units. Screw that.

If you think 6th is slow, clunky and boring, you are definitey in a minority. 6th has its flaws but my friends and I enjoy it far more than 5th. Incidentally if you think than an entire melee army loading up on transports, driving as fast as possible towards the enemy and popping smoke, then getting out and assaulting, is somehow a more "fun" game, then go for it. I don't in the slightest miss the dynamic of "Kill all his rhinos turn 1, I win. Kill all his rhinos turn 2, I lose". Your 5++ rules would make this dynamic even worse.

Outflanking cavalry is interesting. THAT will have to be play tested.

Consolidating into combats has proved to work well since it has been limited to 3 inches.

Guys, it would be nice if someone actually played with the rules before telling me you hate them lol.

@Deuce11: Dude(ette) I love these rules in theory. My favorite edition was 5th. I played eldar, daemons, grey knights, tau, dark eldar, and CSM/ Space Wolves. My experience with this game is varied and fairly deep.

Sixth was such a kick to the nuts of close combat oriented armies that I found myself literally upset! I couldnt believe that after all of the nerfs and variables added to CC and the buffs to shooting, they made shooty codexes even MORE powerful upon release. Rather then minor flavor/ rules tweeks to revitalize Eldar, for example, they grossly buffed their shooting while leaving ALMOST ALL (emphasis added to head off comments) of the close combat units relegated to either the shelf, or hoping and praying that your opponent doesnt sneeze at them before they get to assault something.

What you guys have done here is begin to bring in the brilliant parts of 5th, and there were many, with the brilliant parts of 6th, and there are many, leaving an all together more brilliant game experience. My only gripe is that you dont work for GW.

@ Negative Nancies: Play with the rules, then you can B**CH. Until then offer criticism and plan on trying them. The level of knee-jerk b**ching going on here is rediculous.

thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:
@Deuce11: Dude(ette) I love these rules in theory. My favorite edition was 5th. I played eldar, daemons, grey knights, tau, dark eldar, and CSM/ Space Wolves. My experience with this game is varied and fairly deep.

Sixth was such a kick to the nuts of close combat oriented armies that I found myself literally upset! I couldnt believe that after all of the nerfs and variables added to CC and the buffs to shooting, they made shooty codexes even MORE powerful upon release. Rather then minor flavor/ rules tweeks to revitalize Eldar, for example, they grossly buffed their shooting while leaving ALMOST ALL (emphasis added to head off comments) of the close combat units relegated to either the shelf, or hoping and praying that your opponent doesnt sneeze at them before they get to assault something.

What you guys have done here is begin to bring in the brilliant parts of 5th, and there were many, with the brilliant parts of 6th, and there are many, leaving an all together more brilliant game experience. My only gripe is that you dont work for GW.

@ Negative Nancies: Play with the rules, then you can B**CH. Until then offer criticism and plan on trying them. The level of knee-jerk b**ching going on here is rediculous.

Seriously? "bi**chin" about the fact that you can outflank deathstar units and charge it into close combat with them easily, on top of buffs to things like furious charge, and a consolidation into combat? Kindly feth right off. If you want to play 5th then ask your opponent to play 5th. I don't like the fact that SM bike armies and Ork bike armies will literally be unstoppable now. Sounds like someone bought a gak ton of death company and rhinos and is buttdevastated that they can't use them anymore.

You guys are acting like assault is completely dead in 6th edition. It isn't! I see White Scars/Raven Guard rhino rush get into CC all the time. Ork truck rush and biker mobs get in to CC all the time. Tyranids are still around. Sounds to me like you guys have some rose-colored glasses about how "good" 5th edition was. Assault isn't dead. Yes assault is nerfed, but it isn't dead. Try fighting someone besides screamstar, seer council and taudar or flying bakery if you guys are so upset about assault in 6th ed.

thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:
@Deuce11: Dude(ette) I love these rules in theory. My favorite edition was 5th. I played eldar, daemons, grey knights, tau, dark eldar, and CSM/ Space Wolves. My experience with this game is varied and fairly deep.

Sixth was such a kick to the nuts of close combat oriented armies that I found myself literally upset! I couldnt believe that after all of the nerfs and variables added to CC and the buffs to shooting, they made shooty codexes even MORE powerful upon release. Rather then minor flavor/ rules tweeks to revitalize Eldar, for example, they grossly buffed their shooting while leaving ALMOST ALL (emphasis added to head off comments) of the close combat units relegated to either the shelf, or hoping and praying that your opponent doesnt sneeze at them before they get to assault something.

What you guys have done here is begin to bring in the brilliant parts of 5th, and there were many, with the brilliant parts of 6th, and there are many, leaving an all together more brilliant game experience. My only gripe is that you dont work for GW.

@ Negative Nancies: Play with the rules, then you can B**CH. Until then offer criticism and plan on trying them. The level of knee-jerk b**ching going on here is rediculous.

THANK YOU! Please try the rules out with your friends and report back with your experiences!

@ Ultimentra: "Seriously? "bi**chin" about the fact that you can outflank deathstar units and charge it into close combat with them easily, on top of buffs to things like furious charge, and a consolidation into combat? Kindly feth right off. If you want to play 5th then ask your opponent to play 5th. I don't like the fact that SM bike armies and Ork bike armies will literally be unstoppable now. Sounds like someone bought a gak ton of death company and rhinos and is buttdevastated that they can't use them anymore."

I cannot tell exactly what you are trying to convey here. I think your intent was to tell me that I should stop complaining but your wording wasn't exactly clear as you seem to vacillate between saying assault is already on par with shooting viability wise. I don't want to play fifth edition 40K. As I said in my post. The addition of overwatch to 40k was brilliant. BUT combined with random charge distances, terrain charge distance modification, remove from the front etc... assault is extraordinarily unreliable and if you disagree, well I would not know how to educate you otherwise as you seem determined to be obtuse on this issue. Feth off? Come off it "tough" guy. When was the last time you saw an ork army that was viable in 6th edition? It would be about time the poor ork players could have a strong codex again. Is your reading comprehension also abysmal? I listed all of the armies I played in 5th edition, did I mention blood angles?

@ Ultimentra: "You guys are acting like assault is completely dead in 6th edition. It isn't! I see White Scars/Raven Guard rhino rush get into CC all the time. Ork truck rush and biker mobs get in to CC all the time. Tyranids are still around. Sounds to me like you guys have some rose-colored glasses about how "good" 5th edition was. Assault isn't dead. Yes assault is nerfed, but it isn't dead. Try fighting someone besides screamstar, seer council and taudar or flying bakery if you guys are so upset about assault in 6th ed."

Assault isn't dead. Its just a side note in 40k now, barring a few select lists. Oh, congratulations on listing 2 of the 4 or so lists that can actually pull off CC in 40k as a core strategic doctrine. Then you oh so astutely go on to list tyranids, a decidedly shooty codex(On the table top) in the current edition that actually has the cannon fodder to allow stuff to reliably get into combat, a boon that no other codex can boast. 5th edition was good, it admittedly explained the "silly" wound allocations rules, casualty removal, LOS, movement rules etc... as matters of abstraction. The model on the table is an approximation of where the space marine with a lascannon is on the field of battle, the unit continues to push towards the enemy as it sustains casualties so just pull models from the rear, if the marine wielding a lascannon gets plasma rifled in the face, another marine is going to pick the thing up and apply some emperors wrath to the enemies hind parts generously. That was the beautiful part of 5th for me. Seeing 6th take a slight step away from its current setup would do wonders for this game.

Now your last sentence really takes the cake. How on earth did you figure listing the following was anything but nonsensical? Face beater, face beater, shooty as hell, shooty as hell and flyer spammy?! Really? Again, I would wager that I have much more experience, with vastly different codices, and wildly different list strategies than you do. So I find it quite hard to take the advice you bequeathed unto me... namely because I have already done it.

TLDNR: What in the world are you trying to say, try harder next time XD

Alright, the last few posts from feththatyournameistoolong along with "herp derp trukks and bikers can totally do CC guys" has swung it for me. I'll give the DRAL a go when club restarts in jan and report back

Have to agree, saying that Orks still win with CC invalidates your argument. Trukk rush still works?

I will admit that the rules seem somewhat cherry - picky of 5th to 6th, but you did basically invalidate flyers... Lots of stuff ignores cover now-a-days so giving them a 3+ cover save but allowing everything to shoot at them also invalidates the necessity for sky fire.. again bringing us back an edition.

I've only played the game in 5th and 6th.. and very little 6th as I quit when flyers became a thing... so I hate flyers as much as the next guy, but now that almost all books have the answer, I find it strange to nerf them into oblivion. I probably won't play with the ruleset because I don't get any casual games in, but I would be interested in seeing some battle reports using the system if you've got some.

I will have to save a final judgment to when I see some hard evidence that it fixes 6th problems.

 Matt1785 wrote:
Have to agree, saying that Orks still win with CC invalidates your argument. Trukk rush still works?

I will admit that the rules seem somewhat cherry - picky of 5th to 6th, but you did basically invalidate flyers... Lots of stuff ignores cover now-a-days so giving them a 3+ cover save but allowing everything to shoot at them also invalidates the necessity for sky fire.. again bringing us back an edition.

I've only played the game in 5th and 6th.. and very little 6th as I quit when flyers became a thing... so I hate flyers as much as the next guy, but now that almost all books have the answer, I find it strange to nerf them into oblivion. I probably won't play with the ruleset because I don't get any casual games in, but I would be interested in seeing some battle reports using the system if you've got some.

I will have to save a final judgment to when I see some hard evidence that it fixes 6th problems.

remember though, blasts and templates still cannot hit a flyer!

And of course it is cherry picked, that is the point! to "fix" or otherwise improve the game! We wouldn't pick a poor mechanic if we thought it was poor to begin with and call it a fix would we?

Enjoy!

For: G2, you've royally fked the CSM dex for psy powers there.

 Selym wrote:
For: G2, you've royally fked the CSM dex for psy powers there.

I should reword that. I am sure that the CSM Codex expressly says that psychers have access to certain rulebook disciplines.

The intent behind G2 is to avoid unanticipated interaction with older codices. An example is Mephiston with Iron Arm. C:BA was not written with 6th Ed in mind. Meph has access to all the BA powers in the codex. The DRAL Rules seek to maintain that internal balance GW wrote into the codex at the time.

So no worries, 6th Ed CSM has the same psychic powers available to them under the DRAL Rules as they would under pure 6th Ed rules.