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.

Well it's clear that a lot of people are un-satisfied by the rules. They are criticised on many threads here in "general", and especially in "you make da call". So does anyone have any suggestions on how to fix the rules?

Here's one for making vehicles more balanced. Not sure how well it would work.
Armour saves for vehicles. And go back to the old 6+ for explodes instead of the new 7+. A 3+ save for tanks, for example could prevent Autocannon spam from killing everything but land raiders.
Like I said, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. After all, Autocannons probably could destroy most things. You need a lot of shots to kill a tank, but against infantry you won't kill many, since you just don't have that many shots. But anyway, I digress. Just getting the thread started.

How would you fix 40k? Go!

I'd start with a basic level of proofreading.

Then I'd playtest the game before publishing the rules. I'd also get a beta test group of people outside the studio for a different perspective. Then I'd clear up all the vague and ambiguous rules that only need an extra word or two to be clear, like Psyker powers and mastery levels.

Those are just the basics.

Ideally, I'd redefine the game to be either a skirmish level/platoon based game, or make it into a sleeker company level game with rules to go with it. Currently it sits in an awkward in between where the model by model rules lend itself to platoon level gaming, but falls short when you play at the game's intended level of 1500 and up.

That's not even going into the balance issues. I'd also release all the codices with each new edition update, under the assumption the codices would be worked on simultaneously with the upcoming edition so all armies are on the same page.

Then I'd issue timely FAQs that address issues raised by the community, which would require interaction with the customer base and/or a dedicated beta test group for feedback.

Then I'd lower the prices to nearly half the current cost.

That's how I'd change the rules in a rough outline. There's too much in the way of little things that it wouldn't fit in a single post.

Well that stuff is all well and good, but I was thinking actual rules, not managerial decisions.

 Kavish wrote:
Well that stuff is all well and good, but I was thinking actual rules, not managerial decisions.

They're fairly intertwined. I could go through the current book and fix the wording on some problematic rules, but that doesn't fix or change the underlying issues with the rules.

1# of course, is to balance the codexes. But if we must futz with the rules themselves...


Assault out of stationary non-assault vehicles as a disorganized charge.

Assault when arriving from reserve as a disorganized charge. Probably have to make some exceptions (drop pods might be too effective with this rule).

Consolidate into close combat.

In addition to regular overwatch, have the option to forgo shooting on your turn and gain overwatch at full BS.

Bring back some of the 6th edition about terrain (barrage and templates only hit one level of a ruin, ability to jump down).

Tweak the psychic phase - not sure exactly what to do, but the current rules severely punish armies that only bring one or two psykers vs armies that spam warp dice.

Include better rules support for narrative play (even if they're optional).

Re-work the Kill Team rules and include them in the main rulebook.

Provide more options for integrating games of 40k into the RPG systems that FFG publishes.



And the big one...

Split up game turns into phases - Your movement, My movement, Your psychic, My Psychic, Your shooting, My shooting, Your Assaults, My Assaults. Also give players the option to seize the initiative at the beginning of each game turn.

Eliminate rolling and time consuming rules wherever possible:

- difficult terrain, no more rolling, infantry move a flat 4". Move through cover units are not slowed by difficult terrain.

- running, no more rolling, everyone can run 4". Fleet, crusader, etc add 2".

- over watch, no more rolling buckets of dice on snap shots. Templates and blast grenades inflict two automatic hits (only one model per squad can use a grenade in overwatch). Pistols fire at full BS. Anything else had its chance in the shooting phase, unless you specifically forgo shooting, as previously posted.

- eliminate pile in moves. Everyone in a combat within 6" of an enemy model fights (close combat, short range fire, etc). In the movement phase, models in engaged units must move into base to base contact with an enemy model, or as close as possible.

- look out sir rolls, only one per unit per turn. When allocating a wound to a character or IC, the player may take a leadership test on that character or ICs leadership. If passed, then for the rest of that turn the character or IC may only be allocated wounds after all other models in the unit have been removed as casualties (the character absorbs any spillover wounds). Only one character or IC per unit may LOS in a given player turn. This means players can no longer abuse an ICs invul save to protect the much more numerous grunts around him.

Reintroduce movement characteristics, save modifiers and to-hit modifiers.

Decide whether you want a large scale game or a skirmish scale game and adjust the rules appropriately.

You can charge after disembarking from all vehicles.
Assault vehicles are the only ones to give the charge bonus.

Charge distance is d6 + initiative.

2+ re rollables are re rolled on a 4+.

Choosing to Over watch forces you to hit at initiative 1

I'd make far less random stuff to allow for more player control, balance the codexes internally and externally. If this was so, things like LOW or unbound wouldn't be an issue. Streamline the game so it doesn't take so long and allow for smaller sized armies for beginners and larger armies for veterans. (Maybe more two on one type scenarios.)
Also, I'd add in narrative campaigns and rules such as special rules for fighting the same enemy more than once, campaign maps where victories and defeats matter for the next game, etc.

I actually think the majority of the core rules are ok, or would be with a little more clarification.

What I would change:

- Dispense with cover saves in favour of to hit modifiers
- Replace random rolls for tactical decisions (warlord traits, psychic powers) - this may require balancing of some of those to prevent "no brainer" choices.
- Introduce a degree of certainty to assault, without necessarily making it a fixed range
- Make Overwatch a trade off based choice, not a right, or make a test necessary.

Otherwise, most of what I've always liked about 40K is still in the game,mor has been reintroduced in the last two editions.

Many of the problems inherent to the game lie in the supplements and codexes, and I think they're the thing that needs addressing most with cost adjustments and rules corrections.

 DanielBeaver wrote:


Assault out of stationary non-assault vehicles as a disorganized charge.

Assault when arriving from reserve as a disorganized charge. Probably have to make some exceptions (drop pods might be too effective with this rule).

Consolidate into close combat.

In addition to regular overwatch, have the option to forgo shooting on your turn and gain overwatch at full BS.

Bring back some of the 6th edition about terrain (barrage and templates only hit one level of a ruin, ability to jump down).

This is great stuff! I might see if I can get my regular opponent to agree to use these. Since he plays Blood Angels I'd say he'd be very keen!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I wonder if assault would become too powerful? I hope not.

Well, I I would simplify anything where I could. 40k is good, but it's very bloated and plays very slow. So I'd make the following changes:

*Blast markers are removed entirely. Instead the weapon either hits or misses like normal, if it hits it gets x amount of wounds on the target unit.

*Wounds are always allocated by the controlling player unless stated otherwise

*Challenges removed (remain as an optional extra)

*Difficult terrain reduces movement by x (specified on the terrain piece)

*Abstract line of sight. All terrain is either clear, heavy, light or impassable. It is also tall, flat or opaque. For an example woodland would be light(-2 movement, +2 cover)/tall(does not need to go to ground for cover bonus). A rocky outcrop would be heavy (-3 movement, +3 cover)/flat (needs to go to ground for cover bonus).

Also more personal tastes -

*Terminator armour becomes 3+ on two dice. No real reason other than I think terminators are cool

*Warlord traits are choosable, probably reduce to 6 or so varients to compensate. So a generic shooty bonus, generic assault bonus, etc etc. Expand on this more in the codexes too.

*Optional weather modes

*Optional big-mob ruleset to make battles with a large model count quicker. So optional rules for condensing shooting attacks down to make that a lot quicker for one.

An activation system. This would be where instead of one player moving all their units and the next player moving all of their units, the players take turns activating a unit at a time.

Proofreading.

A playtesting system where prominent gamers can sign up early to receive a beta-copy of the rules, and submit their comments/opinions.

Less randomness. Specifically, let psykers choose their powers.

I'd begin at the beginning again. I'd trim down the stats, you don't need 4 stats to determine your melee skill.

I would remove the skirmish game elements left in 40k and turn it into a proper mass battle game.

I would turn units into a unit leader + his extra wounds. Everything would be measured from the sgt, the rest of the models just have to stay next to him. If he is in range everyone is, if he makes it to melee everyone does.

The distinction between walker and monstrous creature would be removed and they would both work of the same system, something between the two where a dreadnought would have HP, but a hive tyrant could also lose an arm.

I would reintroduce modifiers for dice rolls. An ultramarine standing in the open should not be as easy to hit as a guardsman vet with a camo cloak hiding in the jungle. Nor should a marine in the open be equally as easy to kill with a lasgun than one inside a fortification. Cover would turn into a negative to hit and a positive save mod. Instead of AP being completley useless until it utterly breaks through armour I would make it a neg modifier to the save. Feel No Pain and Invun saves would also be modifiers, so a termi captain with an iron halo might end up with a 2+ save even when being shot by a plasmagun just from the extra protection he has, or if he has a storm shield he might still be taking that 2 against a demolisher round.

Overall I would just try to streamline the game, make it so that a 2,000 point game can be played in an hour, hour and a half.

Complete reboot with the normal game size being about 30-45 miniatures + a few vehicles for a non-elite army.

Some sort of alternating activation or turn structure where both players are making decisions all the time rather than sitting there waiting and maybe rolling some dice.

Delete 6E and 7E entirely and go back to a point where the game was nearly balanced itself. Allies don't work until you get the core books alone to work.

Then define the game as a 28mm skirmish game, as it should be. If you want armies of tons of tanks, 100s of guys, and giant machines, that belongs in a 6mm to 10mm realm of Epic. The game is getting too big and too expensive. Thus, cut back to what 40k is, and get back to battle basics.

I would make HQs more a linch pin unit to the army design; having your HQ slain should be a big deal, not seen as a 100pt tax that might do something useful. It would also place a strong counter-weight towards building beefy melee HQs. They are super powerful, but come with a great risk; a mark of a good strategy game. I would also make it that the highest points costing HQ has to be your leader, but they give a discount to another section of your army. A buff leader could give you a free troop unit while and combat unit could get a reduced priced elite unit.

Make every single unit get a force allowance. Unless you take a special commander, many units will be 0-1. More common units will be 0-2, and specific commanders will unlock the now known 0-3. The Force Organization will get completely dumped by this happening and replaced with theme armies. If you follow a commanders theme, you will get bonus'. Fluff armies will suddenly become very potent when they match their theme. "Unbound" armies will be the common way to play as to not dissuade them. Troops will either be tweaked to be more useful or have a mandatory requirement of 2 units and/or % based.

The dice mechanics will be streamlined as to not require massive amounts of tables. Make it so you don't have to memorize a bunch of crap and normal most dice rolls to be "high roll" is the goal. BS2 = hits on 2+. BS3 = hits on 3+. WS 2 = hits on 2+. WS3 = hits on 3+. So on. These need to be simplified.

Delete all random tables. Make psychic powers either fixed for certain characters or purchasable off tables; discount psykers to make up for the fact they are purchasing powers. Delete warlord traits and give either characters fixed ones, like now, or select from a pre-set, fluff driven series given the scenario.

Make all missions either hard symmetrical in play, such as steamroller, or purely asymmetrical which involves each individual choosing an objective from a pool of generated ones, such as malifaux.

There are plenty more, but it all boils down to make them game less a frustrating pile of drivel and random. And making it back to the appropriate scale as it's far too bloated and costs way to much to play where the game feels designed (1500~pts).

Also, Av is a complicated and crap mechanic that's arbitrarily thrown around. Delete the entire Av though process and make tanks have toughness and wounds. Make AT weapons cause multiple wounds to singular targets. Delete the instant death mechanic since high strength weapons now cause multiple wounds. Make etnernal warrior become reduce all multi-wound weapons to 1W maximum. Bam, I just made Tyranid Warriors good.

Also, screw flyers and their hard to hit roll and ditch overwatch. Slows down the game.

Well for me, there would be no more, I move, I shoot, I assault, you move, you shoot, you assault.

I would make it more like Lord of the Rings or even have an Initiative goes first. Then he can shoot/move. If there is a tie, then who every has "priority" that turn gets to choose which person can select one unit, then the next person can select then next unit.

Maybe even have "cool down" when you can shoot. Say 6". Move 6" then shoot, or move and shoot at the end of your turn. Since you moved at the end of your turn you can't shoot again until you moved 6" first.

Once in Base to Base movement stops and then you will be assaulting.

I would also say throw in some movement stats, but a lot of people would be upset that Space Marines could only move 4" turn and Terminators only 3" or 2" per turn. So I guess will not throw in any movement stats.

I'd nuke it from orbit. Sometimes it's best just to put things out of our misery. Then they'd be rewritten from the ground up with:
- Much greater points variance, ie. turning 2k lists into 10k.
- Swap to d8's, d10's, d12's, d20's. Something larger than d6 to allow for greater variations in outcomes without needing to roll extra dice.
- Re-balance the game to be more "fluffy", as in 1 SM both costs more and is more effective than 3 guardsmen.
- To go with the above, consider optional addition of movement trays for horde based armies (and Apoc style) such as IG, 'nids, Orks. Goal is to speed up game whilst allowing lots of models. Could include things like increased mitigation of pie plate damage to make them worth using.
- Re-write and balance the various unit types well from the start (walkers, MCs etc). Possible removal of AV / toughness separation.
- Ensure all available close combat and ranged styles are both equally viable and fun to play.
- Either separate the game into skirmish, army and apocalypse scales or ensure the game is written from the ground up to be workable at all 3 scales. It would probably be doable with some minor rules modifications, such as with the optional inclusion of movement trays at army and apoc scales as mentioned above.
- Release the raw rules free online. Release nice collectors (ie. current production quality) rulebooks as physical copies and as purchased ebooks for 33-50% of the hard copy price. Ensure purchased copies do not just include recycled fluff and are not intentionally poorly laid out.

For me:

Restore To Hot rolls for Blasts, with scatter only being rolled on a miss.

Replace the from-the-closest casualty removal with owner-chooses, restore the old torrent of fire rule.

Restore cover saves to being calculated by unit instead of per model.

Remove the penalty for declining a challenge, but have the result of a fought challenge determine who wins or loses that round of combat.

Allow psykers to choose their powers.

Allow Warlords to choose their Warlord trait.

One method of army selection - remove the Battle Forged vs Unbound nonsese. Either have a FoC or Percentage based system that requires you to build coherent armies, or have an 'anything goes' system with bonuses for selecting specific detachments. Don't try and put both systems into one game.

Remove the separate statline for vehicles, and just give them similar rules to MCs instead.

Have MC's (and anything else with 3 or more wounds) stats degrade with each wound inflicted.

If an entire army is kept in Reserve, have them start coming on in turn one.

Add a long-odds 'lucky shot' mechanic so that no unit is completely invulnerable to any given attack.

And the big ones: Proof-read the damn rules prior to publication, and release a complete set of rules for a new edition, rather than having obsolete codexes running through multiple edition changes.

 insaniak wrote:
And the big ones: Proof-read the damn rules prior to publication, and release a complete set of rules for a new edition, rather than having obsolete codexes running through multiple edition changes.

It's sad that this isn't a given ; /

 Las wrote:
Charge distance is d6 + initiative.

2+ re rollables are re rolled on a 4+.

Choosing to Over watch forces you to hit at initiative 1

I like these ideas. It's a shame they didn't give assault a little more live in 7th

Wow, it surprises me how much I disagree with a lot of points raised here. As OP asks, what'd I change:

 Las wrote:
Charge distance is d6 + initiative.

2+ re rollables are re rolled on a 4+.

Choosing to Over watch forces you to hit at initiative 1

This, I agree with this.

Charging out of non-assault vehicles forces you to hit at initiative 1 and doesn't grant additional attack to show how clumsy is running out of a crowded rear/side hatch and trying to reach the enemy before he gets to aim properly.

Fixed run distance. Silo's idea of +4"(+6") makes sense. No more "RUN FOR IT AS FAST AS YOU CAN!" and then move one inch.

Look Out, Sir! rolls only with models within 2" of the model and not from blasts. They could give 5+ or 4+ cover against blast, though.

Make a nice, balanced list of powers and traits that people can choose from, rather than roll. As it is now they usually give no worthwhile bonuses while the lucky player gets the advantage.

Force Ld test to even be able to fire Overwatch.

Increase point cost for AP2 weapons that ruin terminator armies.

 insaniak wrote:
If an entire army is kept in Reserve, have them start coming on in turn one.

So much this!

I'm itching to comment on how much I disagree with stuff some of you wrote here, but I won't, given the fact that this thread is all about subjective opinions. I'm just glad that both me and the rules disagree on the vision of how 40k should play.

To change 40k I would lower the prices of everything, especially the... oh you mean the rules. Yes well still the price so I can buy the rulebook and learn them!

 Blacksails wrote:
I'd start with a basic level of proofreading.

Then I'd playtest the game before publishing the rules. I'd also get a beta test group of people outside the studio for a different perspective. Then I'd clear up all the vague and ambiguous rules that only need an extra word or two to be clear, like Psyker powers and mastery levels.

Those are just the basics.

Ideally, I'd redefine the game to be either a skirmish level/platoon based game, or make it into a sleeker company level game with rules to go with it. Currently it sits in an awkward in between where the model by model rules lend itself to platoon level gaming, but falls short when you play at the game's intended level of 1500 and up.

That's not even going into the balance issues. I'd also release all the codices with each new edition update, under the assumption the codices would be worked on simultaneously with the upcoming edition so all armies are on the same page.

Then I'd issue timely FAQs that address issues raised by the community, which would require interaction with the customer base and/or a dedicated beta test group for feedback.

Then I'd lower the prices to nearly half the current cost.

That's how I'd change the rules in a rough outline. There's too much in the way of little things that it wouldn't fit in a single post.

HERESY!!!


As far as rules go:

-platoon/skirmish level, as that seems to be the way most games are going these days
-movement values on stat line (ALA WHFB, Warmachine, etc). And have some of them different (ie: a guardsman should not be able to move as fast as a 9' tall, genetically altered superhuman who is made even stronger by his armor)
-formations/Lords of War: as cool as they are in both theory and aesthetic, "normal" games don't need them.

Apart from that, 7th seems to have been a slight step in the right direction, IMO, as most of the special rules are actually in the main rule book, and they haven't released any armies with new special rules that significantly screw everything up (Well, there is that WAAGH! Which can, for one turn,make Orks the only army in the game that can run and charge...)

Daemonology wasnt very well thought out. We have house-ruled it so that any CSM Psyker with a particular mark can summon daemons of the same mark wihtout the extra doubles-penalty.

On the flip side, we have made it so that if a Daemon tries to summon Daemons that he's supposed to Hate, he suffers the full perils-of-the-warp risk.

Saw this rule on the Proposed Rule forum, brought it up to my gaming group, and we implemented with zero arguments, since it makes sense and the rules should have been this way from the get-go.

(not exactly a game-changer like most of the posts here, I know)

The rules and codex's would have to be all thrown out. A total reboot of the game is what it really needs.

Dump allies.

Dump Lords of War.

Update and Release codices at the same time the new rules drop.

We have an entire forum for proposed rules.

-Change the WS Chart...
-Add a static element for charging.
-Add a random element for over watch
-Open up Tyranids from the confines of their codex WL traits / Powers
- Some sort of different movement system for horde armies to streamline them.

Pretty much it, I would have removed the EW missions and just popped in the new missions but that's just me. I feel T Objectives make the game just that - more tactical. It adds so many other variables to the game you have to think about turn on turn rather than just relying on taking down threats and sitting on objectives.

What I don't want;

Skirmish - the market is dripping wet in skirmish games, Kickstarter is popping up more and more -40k doesn't need to change, not everyone like skirmish. As they are very limited in their options and play styles within a system I get bored with them quickly, I want epic battles.

A lot of people don't like some rules. A lot of people like a lot of rules also, house rules within a FLGS or tournament are more than adequate to deal with them - not everyone wants the rules changing in the same way, so there are always going to be a lot of people who don't like some rules. While some with be unpopular with more people than others, already evidenced by this thread people are not always on the same page around changes wanted. For example other than Insaniaks first and last point, I disagree with the rest