JimOnMars wrote: The orks has a sad. Assaulting gunlines now got much harder, as the front bubblewrap units can fall back and leave the entire ork force open for annihilation. I guess the 8e honeymoon is now over.
Isn't it only a turn after the charge though? If so, you should have a turn to wail on them for a bit, and then shoot them when they try to retreat.
Well you should of killed them faster im fine with assault lines not having assault protection anymore. and besides its possible you might be able to attempt to catch them if they try and run off. we dont have the full rules.
Yes, we will kill their vanguard with our main force, but then our main force is eliminated, leaving their main force untouched.
Depending on the rules.
Edit: Having said that, i has a think. What if we attack their front liners with a tiny force of our own? then both vanguards die, but leaving our main force ready to assault theirs.
JimOnMars wrote: The orks has a sad. Assaulting gunlines now got much harder, as the front bubblewrap units can fall back and leave the entire ork force open for annihilation. I guess the 8e honeymoon is now over.
Isn't it only a turn after the charge though? If so, you should have a turn to wail on them for a bit, and then shoot them when they try to retreat.
Well you should of killed them faster im fine with assault lines not having assault protection anymore. and besides its possible you might be able to attempt to catch them if they try and run off. we dont have the full rules.
Yes, we will kill their vanguard with our main force, but then our main force is eliminated, leaving their main force untouched.
Depending on the rules.
Edit: Having said that, i has a think. What if we attack their front liners with a tiny force of our own? then both vanguards die, but leaving our main force ready to assault theirs.
Depending on the rules.
You just described standard Ironjaw tactics.
Sacrifice the boys, let the nobs and warbosses take the glory. If, and I'm hoping it is, 40k follows the path of AoS then it will be a golden age again for greenskins.
Cautious optimism from me and my buddies regarding this new edition. It'll be interesting to see how it pans out and if it's worth getting (back) into. If it becomes a (somewhat) strategic war game instead of the abomination it's been the past decade or so, I'm in.
On the livestream Q&A they mentioned vehicles and MC having the same rules.
@Jamopower: We can't judge the quality of playteting because we weren't involved that''s right. But the logistical nightmare of having mass playtesting in a speedy usefull fashion is huge. There's masive diminishing returns on playtesting if you can't acces the meta-data of the game.
H.B.M.C. wrote: GW: Hey Tyranid, Ork and Daemon players?
Tyranid, Ork & Daemon Players: Yeah?
GW: *holds up movement rules* Feth you guys!
You shouldn't be able to just run away from combat scot free.
It's not Scot free when you suffer penalties.
Didn't they say the unit gets to shoot them as they disengage? Or did I misinterpret what they wrote?
Either way, some kind of mechanic like free strikes in WMH would work and prevent people from disengaging with no consequences.
Obviously the final result of this rule will depend to some extent on other factors, but taken at face value "you can shoot at them as they run away" isn't that convincing a counterpoint to someone worried about their assault units. First, because most good assault units don't tend to have much shooting to begin with, and second because being able to put a few pistol shots into a fleeing enemy unit hardly compares to the giant rubber horse dangler that will be coming your assaulters' way in the following enemy turn when their whole very-shooty army responds.
Now, it seems like what GW are trying to do with these changes is encourage a shift away from single, bloated, hideous-amalgam deathstar assault units who can only really be stopped before they hit CC and are optimised to prevent exactly that, towards an interaction between multiple less-powerful and to a degree more disposable assault units on the one hand and carefully positioned and tactically withdrawn bubble wrap units on the other, which could be fantastic if they execute it well. The issue is that executing it well would require the wholesale rebalancing or just about every unit in the game, or else there will be some big losers - tilt the changes too far and more elite, expensive assault units become worthless relative to throwaway spam CC units; don't tilt them far enough and armies with elite CC will hilariously outperform those with non-elite CC; fail to adequately balance shooting both on a unit and an army scale and assault will become incredibly situational and pointless outwith those situations.
They do appear to be trying to do exactly that, the question is whether you trust GW to succeed, and I think people are entirely justified in being skeptical.
"If they execute it badly " can destroy any attempt or anything GW (or anyone) tries to do, so I find it sort of useless in this discussion: it doesn't mean anything.
H.B.M.C. wrote: GW: Hey Tyranid, Ork and Daemon players?
Tyranid, Ork & Daemon Players: Yeah?
GW: *holds up movement rules* Feth you guys!
You shouldn't be able to just run away from combat scot free.
It's not Scot free when you suffer penalties.
Didn't they say the unit gets to shoot them as they disengage? Or did I misinterpret what they wrote?
Either way, some kind of mechanic like free strikes in WMH would work and prevent people from disengaging with no consequences.
Obviously the final result of this rule will depend to some extent on other factors, but taken at face value "you can shoot at them as they run away" isn't that convincing a counterpoint to someone worried about their assault units. First, because most good assault units don't tend to have much shooting to begin with, and second because being able to put a few pistol shots into a fleeing enemy unit hardly compares to the giant rubber horse dangler that will be coming your assaulters' way in the following enemy turn when their whole very-shooty army responds.
Now, it seems like what GW are trying to do with these changes is encourage a shift away from single, bloated, hideous-amalgam deathstar assault units who can only really be stopped before they hit CC and are optimised to prevent exactly that, towards an interaction between multiple less-powerful and to a degree more disposable assault units on the one hand and carefully positioned and tactically withdrawn bubble wrap units on the other, which could be fantastic if they execute it well. The issue is that executing it well would require the wholesale rebalancing or just about every unit in the game, or else there will be some big losers - tilt the changes too far and more elite, expensive assault units become worthless relative to throwaway spam CC units; don't tilt them far enough and armies with elite CC will hilariously outperform those with non-elite CC; fail to adequately balance shooting both on a unit and an army scale and assault will become incredibly situational and pointless outwith those situations.
They do appear to be trying to do exactly that, the question is whether you trust GW to succeed, and I think people are entirely justified in being skeptical.
I would prefer the the disengaging unit to take an initiative test, really. If failed they stay in combat and the attackers act as though they charged that round.
My opinion on the fall back is that i think some mechanic for disengaging from combat is needed. There have been rules like hit and run or our weapons are useless, but they were not accessable by all factions or units.
But my problem would be a free fall back action. The reasons being, under the following assumptions:
assault is still random, it might still fail and the assaulting unit might be stuck in the open
The defending unit stil gets to overwatch, which is logical since one would always shoot at the attacker
So assault is high risk, since you might fail the charge and/ or take casualties on the way in.
What you gain is to strike first and have the chance to annihilate your opponent, which is the high gain part.
The survivers strike back and the attacker loses modells.
Than the battleshock, in my opinion a good mechanic, is rolled and additional casualties are dealt to the CC losing side. But this might as well be the attacking unit, so again high risk high gain.
But now comes the crucial point, which is the disengaging:
If the defender can just disengage and walk away, say the 3 surviving guardsmen, the rest of the guard army can open fire on the bloodthirsty butcherhorde they just barely survived.
In addition, templates are gone, and as long as we dont see minimum shooting distance, the whole guard army can open fire without the danger of scattering templates into their own troops.
I also cant think of a situation in which the bloodthirsty butcherhorde would just let the guardsmen walk away without stabbing or shooting the cowards in the back!
I would like to see a mechanic like hit&run, where you have to make a roll to disengage to get away and maybe if you miss the attacker gets a free shooting or cc attack. Or maybe even take the CC result into account so there would be a representation of orderly retreat vs fleeing combat.
In addition, what happens to the attacker left behind? is he allowed to consolidate or just standing there, scratching their head and wondering why the british left the battle to fetch some tea?!?
If you can just walk away and sacrifice the shooting of 3 guardsmen to gain the ability to annihilate the stupid butcherhorde with the full force of your shooty army, i really doubt assault will see a revival on the table!
If consolidate into combat comes back, that would actually mitigate that problem. If the assaulted unit retreats the attackers could just consolidate to a nearby squad. As the disengage is done at the start of the movement phase, the defender would not have a chance to move the nearby squads to safety.
I hope they are wise enough to import the whole close combat phase from AoS to 40k. It's very intuitive and good. Though it doesn't seem it will happen.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: If consolidate into combat comes back, that would actually mitigate that problem.
How?
"If you’re in combat at the start of your turn, you can Fall Back by moving away from the enemy."
My unit is in HTH combat with a super-combat enemy unit. I Fall Back by moving away. It's still my turn. I annihilate the combat unit with shooting before they can do anything. Unless you're saying that they get to consolidate immediately after I move my squad out of combat, effectively working as an out-of-phase movement during my movement phase?
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I would prefer the the disengaging unit to take an initiative test, really. If failed they stay in combat and the attackers act as though they charged that round.
That would a) put more random to the game b) require initiave test be done with something other than initiave because...well there's no more initiave!
CthuluIsSpy wrote: If consolidate into combat comes back, that would actually mitigate that problem.
How?
"If you’re in combat at the start of your turn, you can Fall Back by moving away from the enemy."
My unit is in HTH combat with a super-combat enemy unit. I Fall Back by moving away. It's still my turn. I annihilate the combat unit with shooting before they can do anything. Unless you're saying that they get to consolidate immediately after I move my squad out of combat, effectively working as an out-of-phase movement during my movement phase?
GW won't do this kind of turn interruption/ Never going to happen. If I' have to wager the rule will remain exactly the same as in proto-40k (AoS). It just bugs me to no end that they've been releasing the same proto-40k rules with the slogan "made for you". There's already Duncan's (hivefleetcharybdis) AoS scrolls for AoS. C'mon guys, you should've manned up and come up with something better :/
Remember, this is a teaser; you're not getting the full rules here. So there may be other criteria required, or other penalties.
To me, it encourages a more holistic approach. Instead of just pointing your melee monsters at the enemy's heavy weapon squads, now you need to think about their position; do you need to approach from an angle to avoid supporting fire, or does the rest of your army need to provide covering fire to support the assault? Do you try to surround the enemy to prevent their escape?
Regarding vehicles, monstrous creatures and characters; firstly, I'm assuming, based on analogies with Age of Sigmar, that every multi-wound model will have its own rules for how it takes progressive damage. Saying "vehicles have a chance to explode at some intermediate damage step" is irrelevant, because that might apply to all, some, a few or only one or two specific units. Space Marine vehicles (especially rhinos) might suffer less degradation early on than Imperial Guard to represent better self-repair systems, for example.
there was a set of experimental vehicle rules published in the Citadel Journal at the tail end of 2nd edition that did what these rules are now doing (1st edition also gave vehicles the same stats as everything else, but that's by the by). There, Wounds represented the physical size of the vehicle - a Land Raider had more Wounds than an Ork buggy. Toughness represented the general build quality, resilience and internal bracing and suchlike - Imperial Guard and Ork tanks were more solidly built than Space Marine or Eldar tanks. the save represented the quality of the armour - Space Marine and Eldar vehicles had better saves than Guard or Orks.
On top of that, there was a "critical damage" mechanic which allowed for "golden bb" lucky shots killing the vehicle in one hit. Importantly for this discussion, it also suggested applying this rule to anything with multiple Wounds; Tyranid Carnifexes, Space Marine Captains, ...
My point being, if some vehicles have a "your shot might penetrate the vehicle's power plant. Roll a dice: on a 6 the vehicle is destroyed", but then so might a Carnifex have "your shot penetrated the beast's brain ...".
Or it might not, and this entire tangent has been based on a hoax. I'll worry about that sort of thing when I see it.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: If consolidate into combat comes back, that would actually mitigate that problem.
How?
"If you’re in combat at the start of your turn, you can Fall Back by moving away from the enemy."
My unit is in HTH combat with a super-combat enemy unit. I Fall Back by moving away. It's still my turn. I annihilate the combat unit with shooting before they can do anything. Unless you're saying that they get to consolidate immediately after I move my squad out of combat, effectively working as an out-of-phase movement during my movement phase?
Isn't that how it was in 4th ed? I distinctly remember my units being murdered in assault, and the enemy squad consolidating into one of units during my turn. This is not a new concept I'm talking about.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: If consolidate into combat comes back, that would actually mitigate that problem.
How?
"If you’re in combat at the start of your turn, you can Fall Back by moving away from the enemy."
My unit is in HTH combat with a super-combat enemy unit. I Fall Back by moving away. It's still my turn. I annihilate the combat unit with shooting before they can do anything. Unless you're saying that they get to consolidate immediately after I move my squad out of combat, effectively working as an out-of-phase movement during my movement phase?
GW won't do this kind of turn interruption/ Never going to happen. If I' have to wager the rule will remain exactly the same as in proto-40k (AoS). It just bugs me to no end that they've been releasing the same proto-40k rules with the slogan "made for you". There's already Duncan's (hivefleetcharybdis) AoS scrolls for AoS. C'mon guys, you should've manned up and come up with something better :/
They already did turn interruption with horrendously broken Ynnari soulburst actions.
So who knows.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Isn't that how it was in 4th ed? I distinctly remember my units being murdered in assault, and the enemy squad consolidating into one of units during my turn. This is not a new concept I'm talking about.
That was 3rd ed and was done at the end of CC so if it happened on your turn they were already in combat at the start of your turn.
But yeah it existed then. Wasn't good then and doubtful they are going to reintroduce out of turn movements like that when they look to be simplifying game.
streetsamurai wrote: I've asked the question before but got no answer. Is it true that the game designer stated that vehicule could still randomly explode?
Thanks
There is yet to be any evidence of that. We looked through his tweets and came up empty.
thanks.
I know i'm probably in the minority, but I think it would be a cool rule. Would make their degradation less linear
It really depends how random it is. 9+ on 2D6? I can probably live with that. Just a 6+? Well, anti-tank weapons will need to be more expensive or else it could be frustrating.
Kirasu wrote: I'm sure gw believes CC will be viable. You just need to realize that they won't play the game the same as everyone else.
Luckily they mostly out sourced the play testing then....
>When your bashing of GW doesn't work
He is blissfully unaware that they used the big tournament organisations to play test the new rules(they have clearly stated this) the guys that know the game better then games workshop them selves, I have faith in the new Games workshop tm I really do, I wonder how many of the haters are still playing the game.
Bull0 wrote: There's bound to be some penalty - additional casualties as you break away would be my assumption.
Yod already covered that. A few extra casualties is no big deal compared to the full army starring at your (now totally exposed) HTH unit.
That already happens if you win the assault and the losers fall back anyway. It's perverse to charge a unit into combat but *try not to kill all the enemies* because *as long as at least one opponent is still engaged with us we're immune to gunfire*
Kirasu wrote: I'm sure gw believes CC will be viable. You just need to realize that they won't play the game the same as everyone else.
Luckily they mostly out sourced the play testing then....
>When your bashing of GW doesn't work
He is blissfully unaware that they used the big tournament organisations to play test the new rules(they have clearly stated this) the guys that know the game better then games workshop them selves, I have faith in the new Games workshop tm I really do, I wonder how many of the haters are still playing the game.
At least the 7th/8th Fantasy army books used to have lots of famous names from uk tournament scene listed as playtesters, so this shouldn't be so new thing.
Bull0 wrote: There's bound to be some penalty - additional casualties as you break away would be my assumption.
Yod already covered that. A few extra casualties is no big deal compared to the full army starring at your (now totally exposed) HTH unit.
You seem to be putting across a terrible straw man argument. You can't compare a single ccu against the entire opponents army. I think it's clear from these rules that you need to be more careful in your assaults, hitting multiple enemy units at once or not at all and staying back in cover. There's a significat difference between having a single unit left swinging in the breeze as their opponent runs away, leaving the rest of the enemy army to shoot at them and giving your opponent the choice of having half their army either stay in combat with killy units or pull back and do nothing.
Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
Movement wrote:"If you’re in combat at the start of your turn, you can Fall Back by moving away from the enemy. You’ll lose the ability to advance, shoot or charge that turn, and crucially, enemies will be able to shoot at you!"
Emphasis mine.
Does that mean that while Falling Back at beginning of MY turn the opponent gets free shoot (during my turn) at Falling Back unit?
I hope so. Falling Back should be a costly maneuver. Turning your back on the enemy is a dangerous move. Either that or it should cost Command Points to do. It should definitely not come free otherwise we will be back to CC units sucking against gunlines.
So, had a look at the new profiles again, and I just noticed they dropped initiative.
Which means there's a good chance that sweeping advance no longer exists. If so, I like it. I hated that rule.
Megaknob wrote: He is blissfully unaware that they used the big tournament organisations to play test the new rules(they have clearly stated this) the guys that know the game better then games workshop them selves, I have faith in the new Games workshop tm I really do, I wonder how many of the haters are still playing the game.
Ah right...Like GW hasn't before used tournament organizers as playtesters before! Oh no! Wait...Except they have.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: So, had a look at the new profiles again, and I just noticed they dropped initiative.
Which means there's a good chance that sweeping advance no longer exists. If so, I like it. I hated that rule.
Why? Because it was just about the only way to remove a unit of Necrons from the field?
nintura wrote: Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
Extra wounds and rend, with reduced cost would be good enough. I also have a Thousand son army that I never have bothered to finish due to them being so pityfully poor in the game and also the 7th ed rules in general. I'm not holding my breath that they get them right though
Related to this, I have a fear that one of the gripes I had in the game hasn't changed at all. That is the viability of basic marines. I had wished that they would have given them S/T 5 now when there is no high limit to make them actually elite. Now with the survivability staying as it is and perhaps even worse with lower rend weapons being more dangerous and as the effectiveness of their bolters and close combat prowess seems not to have changed they seem to be just worse now. It would be nice if the poster boys of the game would be more than objective huggers. They succeeded in AoS to make Liberators actually worth their fluff so I had high hopes, but they seem to disappear with every revelation. Well, maybe the truescale marines will have better stats, but of course that's not helping me as a CSM player...
Bull0 wrote: There's bound to be some penalty - additional casualties as you break away would be my assumption.
Yod already covered that. A few extra casualties is no big deal compared to the full army starring at your (now totally exposed) HTH unit.
That already happens if you win the assault and the losers fall back anyway. It's perverse to charge a unit into combat but *try not to kill all the enemies* because *as long as at least one opponent is still engaged with us we're immune to gunfire*
Yes it happened but it was not on defenders choice.
As it is if you can simply walk out of it at will that's something shooty armies WILL do as even extra casualties won't be much of issue. Frankly many shooty armies would easily give up entire unit to allow shooting into the enemy again! What's extra dead model or two when you would happily give out entire unit...
Yes it's illogical that you would want to hold back but as it is it has been one of the essentials for h2h armies and allowing retreat from combat at will, whether or not unit can act is irrelevant(since shooter would be happy to trade off entire unit anyway), is a nerf to assault armies so either assault armies needed a nerf(hah) or they have to hope they get something hefty in return elsewhere to compensate for this.
Regarding the close combat, what I'd be really interested seeing is the weapons. Previously striking last was a big balancing factor for more powerful weapons, but that probably isn't a thing anymore with presumed alternative activation... So how will a power sword and power fist be differentiated, without the latter being just flat out better? (Also, I really still hope that chainswords will get their own dedicated profile, I want them to be better than standard CC weapons, they're iconic.)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CthuluIsSpy wrote: So, had a look at the new profiles again, and I just noticed they dropped initiative.
Which means there's a good chance that sweeping advance no longer exists. If so, I like it. I hated that rule.
It probably doesn't exist but is instead handled by the new (boring) morale system (i.e. you lose some dudes, fail morale, and lose some more dudes.)
CthuluIsSpy wrote: So, had a look at the new profiles again, and I just noticed they dropped initiative.
Which means there's a good chance that sweeping advance no longer exists. If so, I like it. I hated that rule.
Why? Because it was just about the only way to remove a unit of Necrons from the field?
...yes Seriously though, I don't like "make this roll and kill everyone" mechanics. The pass or die spells were terrible designs in 8th ed WHFB, and sweeping advance was no better, as all you needed to do was pass an initiative test and you can wipe out whole squads, with no saves permitted. It gets especially egregious when you have a tiny squad of soldiers somehow wiping out a squad several times their number, just because they had a higher initiative value, and that somehow allows them to use Time Stop and kill a bunch of dudes in a single moment, despite what armor the slain were wearing.
Related to this, I have a fear that one of the gripes I had in the game hasn't changed at all. That is the viability of basic marines. I had wished that they would have given them S/T 5 now when there is no high limit to make them actually elite. Now with the survivability staying as it is and perhaps even worse with lower rend weapons being more dangerous and as the effectiveness of their bolters and close combat prowess seems not to have changed they seem to be just worse now. It would be nice if the poster boys of the game would be more than objective huggers. They succeeded in AoS to make Liberators actually worth their fluff so I had high hopes, but they seem to disappear with every revelation. Well, maybe the truescale marines will have better stats, but of course that's not helping me as a CSM player...
Oh silly you! You need to buy Guilliman's new Superultramarines if you want that!
There's a lot of complains about assault considering we know almost none of the rules for it. For all we know, all assaulting units get +2 attacks on the charge, can consolidate into combat and charges are always their move value (on top of move+run in movement phase). Units fleeing combat might confer heavy cover to the unit which assaulted them for the whole turn. Heck, there could even be substantial victory point gains per unit killed in combat, which would be devastating to shooting armies. We just don't know enough to judge, let alone panic. What we know is that locked in combat, a rule limiting design space (makes consolidating into combat too good, makes first turn charges too good, makes assault from reserves too good, etc) is now gone thanks to units now having the tactical choice to retreat at the expense of doing anything for a turn. That, plus the initiative change, is ALL we know.
Frankly many shooty armies would easily give up entire unit to allow shooting into the enemy again
Then if that's a cost efficient trade for the assaulter, job done anyway right? Now imagine having 4+ assaults in one turn vs a gun line, which doesn't seem unrealistic at all - you've basically just stopped all those units doing ANYTHING: going for objectives, dealing any damage, repositioning, etc. That's a really big deal, because those units are effectively dead for a turn where you've lost no ground. Being shot in return sucks, but I really doubt, given the playtesters histories of complaining about the useless footslogging assault units, that assault will not be viable or strong.
Kirasu wrote: I'm sure gw believes CC will be viable. You just need to realize that they won't play the game the same as everyone else.
Luckily they mostly out sourced the play testing then....
>When your bashing of GW doesn't work
He is blissfully unaware that they used the big tournament organisations to play test the new rules(they have clearly stated this) the guys that know the game better then games workshop them selves, I have faith in the new Games workshop tm I really do, I wonder how many of the haters are still playing the game.
read back other posts on this topic over last few pages.
nintura wrote: Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
considering a lascannon doesent even ignore a pwoer suit anymore I doubt it.
nintura wrote: Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
(speculation)
Inferno Bolts will be an additional -1 rend to the weapon using them. So Heavy Bolters will presumably be -2.
If Rapid Fire is now double your shots if you don't move and Rubrics ignore that then we'll be double tapping at 24" with a -1...good stuff.
If ward saves are gone then extra wounds are possible, but I really doubt they would remove that mechanic entirely.
Cultists will make great bubble wrap to retreat and let us hammer chargers, but who knows what formations we might wind up with.
Crimson wrote: Regarding the close combat, what I'd be really interested seeing is the weapons. Previously striking last was a big balancing factor for more powerful weapons, but that probably isn't a thing anymore with presumed alternative activation... So how will a power sword and power fist be differentiated, without the latter being just flat out better? (Also, I really still hope that chainswords will get their own dedicated profile, I want them to be better than standard CC weapons, they're iconic.)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CthuluIsSpy wrote: So, had a look at the new profiles again, and I just noticed they dropped initiative.
Which means there's a good chance that sweeping advance no longer exists. If so, I like it. I hated that rule.
It probably doesn't exist but is instead handled by the new (boring) morale system (i.e. you lose some dudes, fail morale, and lose some more dudes.)
Weapons will be interesting, points costs might be one thing. If Power fists cost 25 points and power swords cost 5 it will make it an interesting choice. Swords also allow for extra attacks with dual wielding. Weapons could also have to hit modifiers built in to show "speed" if your opponent gets +1 to hit against you with a fist or -1 with a sword that will matter.
nintura wrote: Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
Extra wounds and rend, with reduced cost would be good enough. I also have a Thousand son army that I never have bothered to finish due to them being so pityfully poor in the game and also the 7th ed rules in general. I'm not holding my breath that they get them right though
Related to this, I have a fear that one of the gripes I had in the game hasn't changed at all. That is the viability of basic marines. I had wished that they would have given them S/T 5 now when there is no high limit to make them actually elite. Now with the survivability staying as it is and perhaps even worse with lower rend weapons being more dangerous and as the effectiveness of their bolters and close combat prowess seems not to have changed they seem to be just worse now. It would be nice if the poster boys of the game would be more than objective huggers. They succeeded in AoS to make Liberators actually worth their fluff so I had high hopes, but they seem to disappear with every revelation. Well, maybe the truescale marines will have better stats, but of course that's not helping me as a CSM player...
For what it is worth 40k community commented that 1k sons are hard to kill in new edition. A poster asked since termies get 2 wounds will rubric power armor get 2 wounds and scarab termies get 3. That was their answer, preceeded by a "trust us".
Bull0 wrote: There's bound to be some penalty - additional casualties as you break away would be my assumption.
Yod already covered that. A few extra casualties is no big deal compared to the full army starring at your (now totally exposed) HTH unit.
That already happens if you win the assault and the losers fall back anyway. It's perverse to charge a unit into combat but *try not to kill all the enemies* because *as long as at least one opponent is still engaged with us we're immune to gunfire*
Yes it happened but it was not on defenders choice.
As it is if you can simply walk out of it at will that's something shooty armies WILL do as even extra casualties won't be much of issue. Frankly many shooty armies would easily give up entire unit to allow shooting into the enemy again! What's extra dead model or two when you would happily give out entire unit...
Yes it's illogical that you would want to hold back but as it is it has been one of the essentials for h2h armies and allowing retreat from combat at will, whether or not unit can act is irrelevant(since shooter would be happy to trade off entire unit anyway), is a nerf to assault armies so either assault armies needed a nerf(hah) or they have to hope they get something hefty in return elsewhere to compensate for this.
Do we know what phase the fall back is in? I hope that the fall back move happens in the opponents assault phase, so after their shooting phase. You assault, wreck havok. They manage a couple hits back.Then, in the opponents assault phase they can choose to fall back or get slaughtered. If this is the case, you shouldn't be staring down the barrels of guns. (At least that's how it would work in my mind). Also means the defender can choose to sacrifice their guns if they believe they can hold you up or disengage whilst they have manoeuvred their own melee unit for a counter charge. (Assault phase might be disengage, then charges.) Still we don't know the finer points yet or even what phase this all happens in. (Unless I have missed something, which is entirely possible in this behemoth of a thread.)
@tneva I don't think we can judge it as a rule change without knowing all the other changes in the new edition, ultimately. What I'm hearing is "that would be a big nerf to assault armies assuming it's the only rule that changes", which is sort of silly at this point. Worrying rule for assault players? Fine, no argument. Bad rule? Not in the least.
Do we know what phase the fall back is in? I hope that the fall back move happens in the opponents assault phase, so after their shooting phase. You assault, wreck havok. They manage a couple hits back.Then, in the opponents assault phase they can choose to fall back or get slaughtered. If this is the case, you shouldn't be staring down the barrels of guns. (At least that's how it would work in my mind). Also means the defender can choose to sacrifice their guns if they believe they can hold you up or disengage whilst they have manoeuvred their own melee unit for a counter charge. (Assault phase might be disengage, then charges.) Still we don't know the finer points yet or even what phase this all happens in. (Unless I have missed something, which is entirely possible in this behemoth of a thread.)
You can only fall back in your own movement it seems.
nintura wrote: Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
(speculation)
Inferno Bolts will be an additional -1 rend to the weapon using them. So Heavy Bolters will presumably be -2.
If Rapid Fire is now double your shots if you don't move and Rubrics ignore that then we'll be double tapping at 24" with a -1...good stuff.
If ward saves are gone then extra wounds are possible, but I really doubt they would remove that mechanic entirely.
Cultists will make great bubble wrap to retreat and let us hammer chargers, but who knows what formations we might wind up with.
Psychic Phase is today, so cross your fingers!
I actually think that the standard Thousand Sons bolter may be -2 rend. They're meant to really put the hurt on MEQs. Heavy bolters might not have more rend, but maybe would be higher Strength with more shots to compensate. It seems like there's a lot GW can do with the rend/S ratings to adjust how the weapons work. It would also mean that the entire army isn't hosed simply by virtue of the opponent fielding some Sisters of Silence; no army should have a hard counter like that.
In terms of the ward save, maybe the Thousand Sons will have a rule that rend can only affect their armor saves up to a certain point (i.e., their saves can never be worse than 5+ or 6+ no matter what they're getting hit with), or they'll get an unmodifiable "save after the save" as per AoS (although that may be encroaching on Nurgle territory).
And yes, please, for the love of Tzeentch, address their points cost issues! The Thousand Sons were always the smallest legion, granted, but this is ridiculous!
nintura wrote: Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
(speculation)
Inferno Bolts will be an additional -1 rend to the weapon using them. So Heavy Bolters will presumably be -2.
If Rapid Fire is now double your shots if you don't move and Rubrics ignore that then we'll be double tapping at 24" with a -1...good stuff.
If ward saves are gone then extra wounds are possible, but I really doubt they would remove that mechanic entirely.
Cultists will make great bubble wrap to retreat and let us hammer chargers, but who knows what formations we might wind up with.
Psychic Phase is today, so cross your fingers!
I'm guessing the rend will be other way around. I feel like they're probably using the current ap values of weapons to determine rend amounts so a weapon with ap 4 I'm expecting rend 1 and a weapon that was ap 3 would probably be rend 2. Falls in line with lascannon being ap 2 and rend 3 so melta could even get rend 4 if they follow that logic.
8th needs to see an end to Overwatch! Overwatch was at best a mechanic to introduce more interaction between players in the assault phase and at worst (and more realistically) a way to punish CC armies. Alternate activation takes care of the former argument now, let's hope CC doesn't remain GW's whipping boy.
So, one thing I keep seeing mentioned is people unsure as to how "Hit and Run" themed units now would function under the new rules.
Envision something like this:
Gryph Hounds wrote:Darting Attacks: Gryph-hounds attack in a series of darting strikes. Immediately after this unit attacks in the combat phase, roll a dice and move each model in the unit up to that many inches.
So you could have a unit that, thanks to the "Chargers Strike First" and alternating activation can attack and then remove itself from the combat immediately.
I think my biggest concern so far is tracking wounds. Its easy enough when your vehicles are one shot half the time, and you only need to remember one or two hull points here and there, but with large wound pools, things could get difficult.
For what it is worth 40k community commented that 1k sons are hard to kill in new edition. A poster asked since termies get 2 wounds will rubric power armor get 2 wounds and scarab termies get 3. That was their answer, preceeded by a "trust us".
I hope they still get a ward, because then those terminators are prime targets for anti-tank weapons...
secretForge wrote: I think my biggest concern so far is tracking wounds. Its easy enough when your vehicles are one shot half the time, and you only need to remember one or two hull points here and there, but with large wound pools, things could get difficult.
v0iddrgn wrote: 8th needs to see an end to Overwatch! Overwatch was at best a mechanic to introduce more interaction between players in the assault phase and at worst (and more realistically) a way to punish CC armies. Alternate activation takes care of the former argument now, let's hope CC doesn't remain GW's whipping boy.
I'm quite sure that we are not going to see Overwatch in 8th. They will probably import the charge mechanics of AOS, which means that a charge does not have a target.
In AOS your roll 2d6 for move and then you can go toward any enemy unit, even more than one. If you can get a model within half an inch of an unit, then you have started a melee. Overwatch in all this will hardly be present, except as a special rule for some models. AOS has quite a lot of those (razordons, handguneers, maidens of the everqueen etc), and they Overwatch when a model ends a charge move withing 3 inches of the unit.
If with a 2d6 move you can't reach any enemy unit, the charge fails and you don't move.
nintura wrote: Can't wait to see 1k Sons. I wonder if their bolters will ignore SM armor still? Or just make it harder. And if they'll still be super expensive to the point where you can't really play a full army. And if there are no invuln saves (just assuming here), then what does their mark do now?
(speculation)
Inferno Bolts will be an additional -1 rend to the weapon using them. So Heavy Bolters will presumably be -2.
If Rapid Fire is now double your shots if you don't move and Rubrics ignore that then we'll be double tapping at 24" with a -1...good stuff.
If ward saves are gone then extra wounds are possible, but I really doubt they would remove that mechanic entirely.
Cultists will make great bubble wrap to retreat and let us hammer chargers, but who knows what formations we might wind up with.
Psychic Phase is today, so cross your fingers!
If a bolter is -0 to save, then a heavy bolter would be -1. I imagine Inferno Bolts would be -2 given they were AP 3 and Heavy Bolters were AP 4.
For what it is worth 40k community commented that 1k sons are hard to kill in new edition. A poster asked since termies get 2 wounds will rubric power armor get 2 wounds and scarab termies get 3. That was their answer, preceeded by a "trust us".
I hope they still get a ward, because then those terminators are prime targets for anti-tank weapons...
They have a save of a 5+ against lascannons. Exactly what they had before.
v0iddrgn wrote: 8th needs to see an end to Overwatch! Overwatch was at best a mechanic to introduce more interaction between players in the assault phase and at worst (and more realistically) a way to punish CC armies. Alternate activation takes care of the former argument now, let's hope CC doesn't remain GW's whipping boy.
I'm quite sure that we are not going to see Overwatch in 8th. They will probably import the charge mechanics of AOS, which means that a charge does not have a target.
In AOS your roll 2d6 for move and then you can go toward any enemy unit, even more than one. If you can get a model within half an inch of an unit, then you have started a melee. Overwatch in all this will hardly be present, except as a special rule for some models. AOS has quite a lot of those (razordons, handguneers, maidens of the everqueen etc), and they Overwatch when a model ends a charge move withing 3 inches of the unit.
If with a 2d6 move you can't reach any enemy unit, the charge fails and you don't move.
If there is no overwatch then given the changes all ready mentioned(assualt out of any vehicle, charger hits 1st, abysmal fall back rule, AoS crappy morale system,less chance to bypass/reduce saves) shooting armies need.not bother turning up for 8th.
v0iddrgn wrote: 8th needs to see an end to Overwatch! Overwatch was at best a mechanic to introduce more interaction between players in the assault phase and at worst (and more realistically) a way to punish CC armies. Alternate activation takes care of the former argument now, let's hope CC doesn't remain GW's whipping boy.
I'm quite sure that we are not going to see Overwatch in 8th. They will probably import the charge mechanics of AOS, which means that a charge does not have a target.
In AOS your roll 2d6 for move and then you can go toward any enemy unit, even more than one. If you can get a model within half an inch of an unit, then you have started a melee. Overwatch in all this will hardly be present, except as a special rule for some models. AOS has quite a lot of those (razordons, handguneers, maidens of the everqueen etc), and they Overwatch when a model ends a charge move withing 3 inches of the unit.
If with a 2d6 move you can't reach any enemy unit, the charge fails and you don't move.
If there is no overwatch then given the changes all ready mentioned(assualt out of any vehicle, charger hits 1st, abysmal fall back rule, AoS crappy morale system,less chance to bypass/reduce saves) shooting armies need.not bother turning up for 8th.
Nonsense posts like this are my favorite. Who needs to actually know small things like the rules and points? Totally broken already.
v0iddrgn wrote: 8th needs to see an end to Overwatch! Overwatch was at best a mechanic to introduce more interaction between players in the assault phase and at worst (and more realistically) a way to punish CC armies. Alternate activation takes care of the former argument now, let's hope CC doesn't remain GW's whipping boy.
I'm quite sure that we are not going to see Overwatch in 8th. They will probably import the charge mechanics of AOS, which means that a charge does not have a target.
In AOS your roll 2d6 for move and then you can go toward any enemy unit, even more than one. If you can get a model within half an inch of an unit, then you have started a melee. Overwatch in all this will hardly be present, except as a special rule for some models. AOS has quite a lot of those (razordons, handguneers, maidens of the everqueen etc), and they Overwatch when a model ends a charge move withing 3 inches of the unit.
If with a 2d6 move you can't reach any enemy unit, the charge fails and you don't move.
If there is no overwatch then given the changes all ready mentioned(assualt out of any vehicle, charger hits 1st, abysmal fall back rule, AoS crappy morale system,less chance to bypass/reduce saves) shooting armies need.not bother turning up for 8th.
Glad you were able to glean that seeing less than a fifth of the games rules in vague previews; want me to take your army off your hands so that you don't have to bother burning it yourself?
v0iddrgn wrote: 8th needs to see an end to Overwatch! Overwatch was at best a mechanic to introduce more interaction between players in the assault phase and at worst (and more realistically) a way to punish CC armies. Alternate activation takes care of the former argument now, let's hope CC doesn't remain GW's whipping boy.
I'm quite sure that we are not going to see Overwatch in 8th. They will probably import the charge mechanics of AOS, which means that a charge does not have a target.
In AOS your roll 2d6 for move and then you can go toward any enemy unit, even more than one. If you can get a model within half an inch of an unit, then you have started a melee. Overwatch in all this will hardly be present, except as a special rule for some models. AOS has quite a lot of those (razordons, handguneers, maidens of the everqueen etc), and they Overwatch when a model ends a charge move withing 3 inches of the unit.
If with a 2d6 move you can't reach any enemy unit, the charge fails and you don't move.
If there is no overwatch then given the changes all ready mentioned(assualt out of any vehicle, charger hits 1st, abysmal fall back rule, AoS crappy morale system,less chance to bypass/reduce saves) shooting armies need.not bother turning up for 8th.
Where was it confirmed that you can charge out of any vehicle? Also considering that many people consider shooting quite strong in Age of Sigmar, I don't see much of a problem here.
If there is no overwatch then given the changes all ready mentioned(assualt out of any vehicle, charger hits 1st, abysmal fall back rule, AoS crappy morale system,less chance to bypass/reduce saves) shooting armies need.not bother turning up for 8th.
Nonsense posts like this are my favorite. Who needs to actually know small things like the rules and points? Totally broken already.
Especially when compared to all the posts saying the new fall back rules makes CC armies redundant! Guess that makes all armies broken
I am happy with the rules previews so far, it seems that they will do it right (or at least try) this time.
1. Give models a chance to save by reducing the ap of weapons (even better if they make the cover save a modifier to the armour save or the balistic skill)
2. Make leadership tests apply to all and probably nerf rules such as fearless and ATSKNF
3. The free fall back move iplies that they will let us charge from deep strike, transports and reserves
4. removed templates and running from shooting phase which made the game take longer
5. Made vehicles and MCs more thematic with the new damage tables
If there is no overwatch then given the changes all ready mentioned(assualt out of any vehicle, charger hits 1st, abysmal fall back rule, AoS crappy morale system,less chance to bypass/reduce saves) shooting armies need.not bother turning up for 8th.
Success! We have covered the spectrum from shooting is totally broken to CC is totally broken. Good job Dakka!
It's SeanDrake. His job is to see the negative in every positive, to extrapolate and assume the worst, to judge the whole based on incomplete information and to never, ever give the benefit of a doubt. At least I assume it's his job or I don't know how he manages to keep it up!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Psychic Phase!
- Basically it's the same as AoS, beat the Warp Charge cost on 2D6.
- Chance to unbind within 24"
- Mortal wounds just like in AoS, confirmed!
- Also invulnerable saves!
- Example is Smite, WC5, D3 mortal wounds on unit within 18", D6 if roll is 10 or more
- Perils of the Warp is still in, no details
- tomorrow's article covers Warzones, Sunday's will be shooting
On top of that, there was a "critical damage" mechanic which allowed for "golden bb" lucky shots killing the vehicle in one hit. Importantly for this discussion, it also suggested applying this rule to anything with multiple Wounds; Tyranid Carnifexes, Space Marine Captains, ...
My point being, if some vehicles have a "your shot might penetrate the vehicle's power plant. Roll a dice: on a 6 the vehicle is destroyed", but then so might a Carnifex have "your shot penetrated the beast's brain ...".
Or it might not, and this entire tangent has been based on a hoax. I'll worry about that sort of thing when I see it.
I'd like to see some kind of crit mechanic, mostly because I like neither the current instant death system in 40K nor the mortal wounds system in AoS. Maybe high strength weapons have a chance of dealing additional dmg on a roll of six?
Edit: Darn, mortal wounds are in. I like the simpler psychic phase though.
Hmmm... I hope they don't go full Mortal Wound spam. Warhammer40k has many options to take down high save models, so Mortal Wounds should remain something very very rare here.
On top of that, there was a "critical damage" mechanic which allowed for "golden bb" lucky shots killing the vehicle in one hit. Importantly for this discussion, it also suggested applying this rule to anything with multiple Wounds; Tyranid Carnifexes, Space Marine Captains, ...
My point being, if some vehicles have a "your shot might penetrate the vehicle's power plant. Roll a dice: on a 6 the vehicle is destroyed", but then so might a Carnifex have "your shot penetrated the beast's brain ...".
Or it might not, and this entire tangent has been based on a hoax. I'll worry about that sort of thing when I see it.
I'd like to see some kind of crit mechanic, mostly because I like neither the current instant death system in 40K nor the mortal wounds system in AoS. Maybe high strength weapons have a chance of dealing additional dmg on a roll of six?
Unfortunately for you but rather well timed, Mortal Wounds are in.
Well, not a deal breaker in most games, but mortal wounds is something that definitely does not scale well when you want to play very small games. Not impossible, just takes some extra tweaking.
Mymearan wrote: It's SeanDrake. His job is to see the negative in every positive, to extrapolate and assume the worst, to judge the whole based on incomplete information and to never, ever give the benefit of a doubt. At least I assume it's his job or I don't know how he manages to keep it up!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Psychic Phase!
- Basically it's the same as AoS, beat the Warp Charge cost on 2D6.
Daedalus81 wrote: Success! We have covered the spectrum from shooting is totally broken to CC is totally broken. Good job Dakka!
That is a certainty, that is, until the rules are officially released and then all bets are off.
My gaming group always tries to modify the rules immediately "out of the box".
I demanded/begged/cajoled a freeze on house rules until we play three full games straight-up.
It is surprising how often the light bulb goes off and you think "So that is why they did that strange rule/wording/condition.".
I will be more than happy to take the boots to GW (what little I can) only after those couple games are done.
It may require more due to the 3 methods of play... (9 games??).
It is impossible (or at least difficult to do thoroughly) to evaluate all these bits and pieces until we see them interact as a whole.
We could still be assuming some "core" mechanics are at play that may no longer be there.
Despite the pointing out of negativity, what IS unanimous is that people are quite excited about this release.
I can barely keep up with this 5 or more pages posted a day.
I would dare say it may be the most exciting release to-date.
WarhammerCommunity wrote:In the new system, the Psychic phase has been re-worked from the ground up.
I lol-d hard. Yeah, it's been thoroughly reworked. Here's a fictional dialogue:
-"Guys, you want a new system in the design of which you can participate? It's for the fans after all!"
-"Yeah, we'd really love to! We have alot of suggestions, both on fixing the current one and on introducing completely new system and mechanics..."
-Nah, don't bother. Just choose 2 or three small things to tweak in AoS and we're done" (dusting off hands)
Not-not-kenny wrote: Well, not a deal breaker in most games, but mortal wounds is something that definitely does not scale well when you want to play very small games. Not impossible, just takes some extra tweaking.
Given that we're moving to AoS-style psychic powers, I'll wager that Tzeentch daemons and Thousand Sons will work very similarly to how Disciples of Tzeentch work in AoS. It'll be dead-easy for these kinds of armies to get bonuses to cast and block psychic powers, with casting basically being automatic for stuff like Magnus and the Lord of Change.
It DOES worry me a little that each army is getting its own lore, since Tzeentch-specific powers in 40K have traditionally sucked.
The game needs overwatch. It makes a lot of sense, and it's one of the few rules that I support 100%.
Yes, if you're getting charged, and drawing your sword, you're obviously hurried and maybe even panicked, but getting a pistol shot off, with a negative modifier, is very fair and reasonable in my book.
Even if charged from the flank or rear, troops in a lose formation can turn instantly and still fire. If you were packed into a 17th century style formation, I could see the argument against allowing overwatch if charged, but loose military formations, like in 40k, should have overwatch, and hopefully 360 degree line of sight is still there.
Every faction will have its own psychic lore with a range of thematic powers.
So... Tau Psykers confirmed?
I really hope this means that Necron C'tan will get a power list that work like Psychics but with different limitations. The stupid table they have right now is horrible.
Alpharius wrote: Maybe the 8E version of "Eternal Warrior" will allow the model to make saves vs. "Mortal Wounds"?
Sounds plausible to me. I wonder if there will be a rule of 1 as well...a ton of 1K Sons sorcerers spamming Smite would be quite deadly to tanks or anything else for that matter.
Alpharius wrote: Maybe the 8E version of "Eternal Warrior" will allow the model to make saves vs. "Mortal Wounds"?
It's possible Feel No Pain/Reanimation Protocols will give a save as well. Nurgle Daemons and Phoenix Guard have the AoS version of FNP and it lets you ignore MWs.
There is still a psychic phase, which still (presumably) comes after the movement phase... unlike AOS where hero phase comes before movement.
This is reflected in the default "Smite" power which is not targetable - it hits THE NEAREST unit within X... so you must have to use your move to target it rather than just saying "that one"
There is still a psychic phase, which still (presumably) comes after the movement phase... unlike AOS where hero phase comes before movement.
This is reflected in the default "Smite" power which is not targetable - it hits THE NEAREST unit within X... so you must have to use your move to target it rather than just saying "that one"
oooh, I missed that one.
Though it would be interesting if it came before Movement. You could "counter" Smite by positioning your units smartly.
There is still a psychic phase, which still (presumably) comes after the movement phase... unlike AOS where hero phase comes before movement.
This is reflected in the default "Smite" power which is not targetable - it hits THE NEAREST unit within X... so you must have to use your move to target it rather than just saying "that one"
oooh, I missed that one.
Though it would be interesting if it came before Movement. You could "counter" Smite by positioning your units smartly.
Spells are still worded like this in AoS so there is no guarantee that the Psychic Phase comes after movement.
Ah, so we are getting 40K versions of AoS's Realms.
Goody.
What are Realms???
In the lore, Age of Sigmar is set up with "Realms" based upon the old Winds of Magic. Realm of Life, Beasts, Metal, Shadow, Light, Death, and Fire. They've given us special rules for fighting within a few of those Realms so far. For example, in the Realm of Fire? Any kind of terrain is effectively line of sight blocking. Bushes can't be seen over, since they're assumed to be on fire and generating clouds of smoke and the like.
It really shouldn't surprise anyone that we're getting "Updated Warzones", since they flatout said that Planetfall, Cities of Death, Death From the Skies, and Stronghold Assault were going to get reworked for this edition.
Oh and they have a section detailing 6 different Warzones. We have Cadia(or presumably, the ruined planetoids leftover of Cadia Prime and the surrounding planets), Armageddon, Ultramar, Damocles, Fenris, and Baal.
I guess we can also look forward to no more free summoning. People will need to carve points from their list to bring units onto the table. This also likely means deepstrike will no longer be random, but will come with a 9" bubble from enemy units (no more d-scythe drop and wipe).
Psychic phase changes themselves seem OK. I like that lesser psykers are no longer just batteries for the big guys.
Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
Ah, so we are getting 40K versions of AoS's Realms.
Goody.
What are Realms???
In the lore, Age of Sigmar is set up with "Realms" based upon the old Winds of Magic.
Realm of Life, Beasts, Metal, Shadow, Light, Death, and Fire.
They've given us special rules for fighting within a few of those Realms so far.
For example, in the Realm of Fire? Any kind of terrain is effectively line of sight blocking. Bushes can't be seen over, since they're assumed to be on fire and generating clouds of smoke and the like.
It really shouldn't surprise anyone that we're getting "Updated Warzones", since they flatout said that Planetfall, Cities of Death, Death From the Skies, and Stronghold Assault were going to get reworked for this edition.
Oh and they have a section detailing 6 different Warzones. We have Cadia(or presumably, the ruined planetoids leftover of Cadia Prime and the surrounding planets), Armageddon, Ultramar, Damocles, Fenris, and Baal.
That's actually a pretty cool game mechanic and maybe we'd see more inclusions of those different Warzones in our games.
Crimson wrote: Psychic phase changes themselves seem OK. I like that lesser psykers are no longer just batteries for the big guys.
Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
This concerns me as well. But, I'll wait and see what they give us.
Mortal wounds ignoring invulnerable is ugly, AoS has rare but present saves against mortal wounding that are effectively the AoS version of invulnerable saves.
I assume this is essentially the strength D replacement, and if every Psyker can do it, then likely just as overused.
Don't be surprised if Wraithguard have range 8 auto-hit D6 mortal wounds.
I'd also be concerned with the deep striking rules. There should always be that 1 in 100 chance where sadly, your terminators teleport into a mountain or something.
It's been their fluff for years, so I hope they keep that.
Realms are very rarely used. They're stated in the Core Rules, but I don't think they've ever been expanded upon outside of some Narrative Books. They're there for Open/Narrative primarily. I don't think I've ever seen a BatRep use them.
Alpharius wrote: Maybe the 8E version of "Eternal Warrior" will allow the model to make saves vs. "Mortal Wounds"?
Yes, we totally need a system where there are Saves and Invulnerable Saves which cannot be bypassed... except they can be bypassed by Mortal Wounds! Then we can have Eternal Save which can save Mortal Wounds... at least until they introduce Eternally Mortal Wounds!
changemod wrote: Mortal wounds ignoring invulnerable is ugly, AoS has rare but present saves against mortal wounding that are effectively the AoS version of invulnerable saves.
I assume this is essentially the strength D replacement, and if every Psyker can do it, then likely just as overused.
Don't be surprised if Wraithguard have range 8 auto-hit D6 mortal wounds.
To be fair, casters are waaaay toned down in Age of Sigmar compared to 8th.
Each model only being able to cast a certain number of spells/powers is a Big Deal rather than just throwing a model with a low number of spells to cast and a huge amount of dice getting thrown at it.
And let's not forget that in AoS, some of the armies that are light on casters instead have things that let them neutralize spells hitting them instead.
Wood Elves, for example, at the launch had a Battle Standard Bearer with a rather hefty 'umbrella' of letting you roll a D6 against Mortal Wounds caused by spells.
Crimson wrote: Psychic phase changes themselves seem OK. I like that lesser psykers are no longer just batteries for the big guys.
Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
I fully anticipate the rule of 1. Also the wording of this particular spell does make it hard to target exactly what you want.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I'd also be concerned with the deep striking rules. There should always be that 1 in 100 chance where sadly, your terminators teleport into a mountain or something.
It's been their fluff for years, so I hope they keep that.
Well, as you can probably tell from my posts in this thread if you've seen them, I'm in favour of reliability and against excess randomness beyond basics like to hit and to wound.
So I'd be quite happy with terminators just getting to set up within a certain distance. Especially since terminators are one of several units that are meant to be iconically elite but underwhelm.
I similarly hope carnifexes are good, for example. Sure they've been overtaken by bigger beasts, but they're still the iconic one. Even something like it being easy to spam carnifexes would be awesome.
Psychic pahse looks good - no more warp charge dice nonsence
Wierd that non psychic races getting psychic stuff unless its otehr stuff that acts like psychic?
Mortal Wounds ingnoring Invulnable - ah now thats a shame. There are plenty of AOS units that can save or ignore Mortal wounds, hopefully 40k has the same.
Ah just read on face book that non psychic factios do get a psychic phase but can;t do anything it in.........
Crimson wrote: Psychic phase changes themselves seem OK. I like that lesser psykers are no longer just batteries for the big guys.
Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
This concerns me as well. But, I'll wait and see what they give us.
Maybe it is just me but I hope Mortal wounds will be somewhat more spread out. This mechanic is basically anti-deathstars/GMC/SHV! I never liked those in normal 40k games. But interesting times ahead
Crimson wrote: Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
I thought when I read that "Oh, like the flamethrower."... NOPE, that was D6 auto-hits for the "unit".
This is basically auto-wounds to a unit with no saves of any kind.
Potentially scrape 3 or 6 one wound guys out of a unit or 3 or 6 wounds from a big model... yeowch!
This is the new D-weapon, that new rule is mortally offensive!
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I'd also be concerned with the deep striking rules. There should always be that 1 in 100 chance where sadly, your terminators teleport into a mountain or something.
It's been their fluff for years, so I hope they keep that.
Well, as you can probably tell from my posts in this thread if you've seen them, I'm in favour of reliability and against excess randomness beyond basics like to hit and to wound.
So I'd be quite happy with terminators just getting to set up within a certain distance. Especially since terminators are one of several units that are meant to be iconically elite but underwhelm.
I similarly hope carnifexes are good, for example. Sure they've been overtaken by bigger beasts, but they're still the iconic one. Even something like it being easy to spam carnifexes would be awesome.
A lot of 40k battlegrounds are fought in systems where the warp has an undue influence on things, and teleportation is often the first to suffer.
Even if it's only included as a specific rule in a specific scenario, it would be good if it featured somewhere, although I admit it's no fun losing your terminators that way.
Mr Morden wrote: Psychic pahse looks good - no more warp charge dice nonsence
Wierd that non psychic races getting psychic stuff unless its otehr stuff that acts like psychic?
Mortal Wounds ingnoring Invulnable - ah now thats a shame. There are plenty of AOS units that can save or ignore Mortal wounds, hopefully 40k has the same.
Those units that can save/ignore Mortal Wounds have it set on their profile.
Mr Morden wrote: Psychic pahse looks good - no more warp charge dice nonsence
Wierd that non psychic races getting psychic stuff unless its otehr stuff that acts like psychic?
Mortal Wounds ingnoring Invulnable - ah now thats a shame. There are plenty of AOS units that can save or ignore Mortal wounds, hopefully 40k has the same.
As somebody once said, magic is indistinguishable from advanced science, so perhaps the Tau 'physic' powers is nothing more them using, er, advanced science
It would fit in with the Tau background.
There was a Babylon 5 episode with those techno mages? The name escapes me, and that theme cropped up in it.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I'd also be concerned with the deep striking rules. There should always be that 1 in 100 chance where sadly, your terminators teleport into a mountain or something.
It's been their fluff for years, so I hope they keep that.
A commonly forgotten rule in 2nd ed. was really cool. If you were playing against Daemons (i.e. the Chaos player had Daemons being held - waiting to be summoned), any model teleporting would become a Daemon in a roll of 1 on a D6. Making it far more dangerous to teleport Terminators or Warp Spiders or a model with a Warp Generator etc. Obviously Grey Knights were immune to this, but it was a nice added danger.
PPFFFZZZZZT "Ultramarines, report!"
"Two here!"
"Three here!"
"Four here, for the Emperor!"
"..."
(turns slowly...sees a Greater Daemon standing where Terminator five should be standing)
As somebody once said, magic is indistinguishable from advanced science, so perhaps the Tau 'physic' powers is nothing more them using, er, advanced science
It would fit in with the Tau background.
There was a Babylon 5 episode with those techno mages? The name escapes me, and that theme cropped up in it.
So yeah, I'd buy the Tau having 'psychic' powers.
All well and good, but they would still have to interact with the warp in some way. Perhaps some new Tau research will unveil a solution.
Crimson wrote: Psychic phase changes themselves seem OK. I like that lesser psykers are no longer just batteries for the big guys.
Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
this is a concern I have as well, though I otherwise dont mind the other changes. At least with Smite however it's a bit wonky to deploy, it targets the nearest unit, not the unit of your choice, so you have to at least do some minimal work to acquire an optimal target for it.
Crimson wrote: Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
I thought when I read that "Oh, like the flamethrower."... NOPE, that was D6 auto-hits for the "unit".
This is basically auto-wounds to a unit with no saves of any kind.
Potentially scrape 3 or 6 one wound guys out of a unit or 3 or 6 wounds from a big model... yeowch!
This is the new D-weapon, that new rule is mortally offensive!
Wait, I thought in the Weapon section it said that wounds don't spill over. i.e., a 3 Wound weapon hitting a unit of single-wound models will only kill one model.
If that's the case, Smite is only scary against big things. Or maybe Psychics work differently.
Mr Morden wrote: Psychic pahse looks good - no more warp charge dice nonsence
Wierd that non psychic races getting psychic stuff unless its otehr stuff that acts like psychic?
Mortal Wounds ingnoring Invulnable - ah now thats a shame. There are plenty of AOS units that can save or ignore Mortal wounds, hopefully 40k has the same.
As somebody once said, magic is indistinguishable from advanced science, so perhaps the Tau 'physic' powers is nothing more them using, er, advanced science
It would fit in with the Tau background.
There was a Babylon 5 episode with those techno mages? The name escapes me, and that theme cropped up in it.
So yeah, I'd buy the Tau having 'psychic' powers.
This is essentially how Tyranids have workes for the last 3 editions, so no problems there
Crimson wrote: Mortal Wounds though... urgh... This I don't like. They have all the same scalability problems as D weapons. I'd hope they'd be used extremely sparingly, but given that the standard psychic power accessible by everyone already dishes them out, the prospects won't look good...
I thought when I read that "Oh, like the flamethrower."... NOPE, that was D6 auto-hits for the "unit".
This is basically auto-wounds to a unit with no saves of any kind.
Potentially scrape 3 or 6 one wound guys out of a unit or 3 or 6 wounds from a big model... yeowch!
This is the new D-weapon, that new rule is mortally offensive!
Wait, I thought in the Weapon section it said that wounds don't spill over. i.e., a 3 Wound weapon hitting a unit of single-wound models will only kill one model.
If that's the case, Smite is only scary against big things. Or maybe Psychics work differently.
My best guess is that Mortal Wounds will spill over. Or that it depends on the wording. This one says: "D3 MW to the unit." Maybe another will say: "D3 MW to a model."
Ah, so we are getting 40K versions of AoS's Realms.
Goody.
Yeah, Warzone Valedor, Warzone Pandorax and Warzone Armaggeddon all came after Age of Sigmar's publication and were totally influenced by the concept of the Realms.
Wait, I thought in the Weapon section it said that wounds don't spill over. i.e., a 3 Wound weapon hitting a unit of single-wound models will only kill one model.
If that's the case, Smite is only scary against big things. Or maybe Psychics work differently.
The power says unit in it's description, so it could easily be different than the basic rule. It's even possible different powers will target a model and not a unit.
Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
I mean we just played through 20 years where 95% of the units in the game had no save from AP2 and suddenly this mechanic is cancer?!
I like it, it allows for more devastating attacks while not even coming CLOSE to D or stomps now, so hearing the comparisons is laughable. A mortal wound or 2 here and there is nothing compared to removed from play. Remember lots of wounds are a thing now, a marine character could have 5 wounds on average.
Oh and another laugh at the guy saying wraith guard with D-scythes wioll do d6 mortal wounds each... LOL. You have no idea what ANY elday unit of weapon does yet and porting the stuff over from 7th with no alteration is silly.
Its concerning because its actually better than current D (which is only on a roll of a 6 to ignore inv), and in the back of our mind I'm sure some of us are thinking please GW dont give this to wraith weaponry.
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
I mean we just played through 20 years where 95% of the units in the game had no save from AP2 and suddenly this mechanic is cancer?!
I like it, it allows for more devastating attacks while not even coming CLOSE to D or stomps now, so hearing the comparisons is laughable. A mortal wound or 2 here and there is nothing compared to removed from play. Remember lots of wounds are a thing now, a marine character could have 5 wounds on average.
Oh and another laugh at the guy saying wraith guard with D-scythes wioll do d6 mortal wounds each... LOL. You have no idea what ANY elday unit of weapon does yet and porting the stuff over from 7th with no alteration is silly.
Also look at the relative ranges of the abilities, 18" cast range means you pretty much have to get into unbinding range to use it.
So, the psychic phase appears to be working pretty much identical to AoS. An example of this can be seen on the Lord of Change. Who will probably have the same abilities in 40k.
Spoiler:
MAGIC A Lord of Change is a wizard. It can attempt to
cast two different spells in each of your own hero
phases, and attempt to unbind two spells in each
enemy hero phase. It knows the Arcane Bolt,
Mystic Shield and Infernal Gateway spells.
INFERNAL GATEWAY The Lord of Change opens a portal to the Realm
of Chaos, pulling warriors to their doom. Infernal
Gateway has a casting value of 7. If successfully
cast, pick a visible enemy unit within 18" of the
caster and roll 9 dice. For each roll that equals
or beats the number shown on the damage table
above, the unit suffers a mortal wound.
Chaos Wizards know the Summon Lord of
Change spell, in addition to any others they know.
SUMMON LORD OF CHANGE Summon Lord of Change has a casting value of
10. If successfully cast, you can set up a Lord of
Change within 18" of the caster and more than
9" from any enemy models. The unit is added
to your army but cannot move in the following
movement phase
If you replace the word Wizard with Sorcerer. And Arcane Bolt with Smite.
You would pretty much have the rules for Lord of Change.
As somebody once said, magic is indistinguishable from advanced science, so perhaps the Tau 'physic' powers is nothing more them using, er, advanced science
It would fit in with the Tau background.
There was a Babylon 5 episode with those techno mages? The name escapes me, and that theme cropped up in it.
So yeah, I'd buy the Tau having 'psychic' powers.
All well and good, but they would still have to interact with the warp in some way. Perhaps some new Tau research will unveil a solution.
As somebody once said, magic is indistinguishable from advanced science, so perhaps the Tau 'physic' powers is nothing more them using, er, advanced science
It would fit in with the Tau background.
There was a Babylon 5 episode with those techno mages? The name escapes me, and that theme cropped up in it.
So yeah, I'd buy the Tau having 'psychic' powers.
All well and good, but they would still have to interact with the warp in some way. Perhaps some new Tau research will unveil a solution.
whembly wrote:So... I'm assuming that psychic "heavy" units, ie Librarius Conclave, Magnus, Eldrad, etc... would have some sort of bonus to make it easier to cast?
Wonder how that would look...
Mm, so psychic aside, there should be another FAQ stream today, right? How far off is that?
secretForge wrote: Its concerning because its actually better than current D (which is only on a roll of a 6 to ignore inv), and in the back of our mind I'm sure some of us are thinking please GW dont give this to wraith weaponry.
It actually isn't, like at all. D weapons sucked against the average joe, they were no more threatening then a las canon, nothing has changed here. Only now you consistently might do more damage to big scary things BUT YOU NEVER REMOVE THEM ENTIRELY IN ONE SHOT! Major difference here. You also need to consider everything is getting more wounds, so which is worse, a wraith knight that can be hit with D and 16% of the time is flat out removed with no chance of survival OR a wraith knight with 15 wounds that takes D3 wounds without save?
v0iddrgn wrote: Not sure if this has been covered but do we know (or based on AoS) if psychic powers are random still?
AoS you get to choose whether they are random or not. Most tournament have you choose your powers at the beginning of the tournament and keep it for the whole thing.
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
As somebody once said, magic is indistinguishable from advanced science, so perhaps the Tau 'physic' powers is nothing more them using, er, advanced science
It would fit in with the Tau background.
There was a Babylon 5 episode with those techno mages? The name escapes me, and that theme cropped up in it.
So yeah, I'd buy the Tau having 'psychic' powers.
All well and good, but they would still have to interact with the warp in some way. Perhaps some new Tau research will unveil a solution.
Tyranids don't use the warp, though?
eh? Shadow of the Warp?
They're casters too...
I haven't read the background fluff in-depth for years.
I always thought that like Orks, the more Tyranids, the more energy is generated, which is then channelled into psychic energy and controlling the smaller creatures etc etc.
Hi warhammer tv. I know it's too late now but this system is essentially the same as the old system, but with a set value you roll above rather than beneath. That system was changed to the current warp charge system, which was bad to say the least (incidentally that was also from a prior fantasy system that didn't work properly). To my point, you will come across a lot of issues as you carry this new system on, I urge your designers to look at the prior systems and see why they didn't work, the best "magic" phase that has been made so far was the 8th fantasy one, This "new" system will work mechanically but it will have the same problems the ones from 3rd, 4th and 5th had.
Hey Tony - that's good feedback and we shall indeed pass it on
whembly wrote:So... I'm assuming that psychic "heavy" units, ie Librarius Conclave, Magnus, Eldrad, etc... would have some sort of bonus to make it easier to cast?
Wonder how that would look...
Mm, so psychic aside, there should be another FAQ stream today, right? How far off is that?
They said there would be another FAQ stream, but I don't think they ever announced when it would happen. I have no idea where people got the idea it was today.
As somebody once said, magic is indistinguishable from advanced science, so perhaps the Tau 'physic' powers is nothing more them using, er, advanced science
It would fit in with the Tau background.
There was a Babylon 5 episode with those techno mages? The name escapes me, and that theme cropped up in it.
So yeah, I'd buy the Tau having 'psychic' powers.
All well and good, but they would still have to interact with the warp in some way. Perhaps some new Tau research will unveil a solution.
Tyranids don't use the warp, though?
eh? Shadow of the Warp?
They're casters too...
I haven't read the background fluff in-depth for years.
I always thought that like Orks, the more Tyranids, the more energy is generated, which is then channelled into psychic energy and controlling the smaller creatures etc etc.
What the dakka do I know?
Close...
Tyranids ARE psychic beings... it's just that they're so massive in the their swarm, that their presence creates a "shadow" in the warp that makes other psyhic being's life a wee bit difficult.
Orks' gestalt presence is derived from their Waaagh... that is, the bigger the brawl, the more potent orks (and their warphead) tend to be.
whembly wrote: So... I'm assuming that psychic "heavy" units, ie Librarius Conclave, Magnus, Eldrad, etc... would have some sort of bonus to make it easier to cast?
Wonder how that would look...
Judging by how the most spell-heavy army in AoS (Disciples of Tzeentch) works, it'll be a mixture of things. The Lord of Change, for example, grants everyone friendly wizard around it (including itself) a flat bonus to casting and dispelling roles. The Lord of Change itself can also change the lower die on its roll to match the higher die (so, if the LoC rolled a 6 and a 1, it'd cast at a 13 (12+1)). The army also has other units that can offer similar flat bonuses to spellcasting, either inherently or through spells of their own.
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
Mortal Wounds ignore wounds. Sometimes they proc on a dice roll, other times they are automatic. There are abilities that ignore them, such as Nurgle Daemeons with Disgustingly Resilient, which ignore any wounds on a 6.
The worry with D-Scyhes is that they will be similar to a Stormfiend's Warpfire Thrower which currently outputs 2D6 Mortal Wounds to a unit within 8". They're big in the meta as a Chaos unit called Sayl can effectively "throw" them across the board as a spell. That said, they don't work so well against tarpits, or split deployment.
Formosa wrote: Hi warhammer tv. I know it's too late now but this system is essentially the same as the old system, but with a set value you roll above rather than beneath. That system was changed to the current warp charge system, which was bad to say the least (incidentally that was also from a prior fantasy system that didn't work properly). To my point, you will come across a lot of issues as you carry this new system on, I urge your designers to look at the prior systems and see why they didn't work, the best "magic" phase that has been made so far was the 8th fantasy one, This "new" system will work mechanically but it will have the same problems the ones from 3rd, 4th and 5th had.
Hey Tony - that's good feedback and we shall indeed pass it on
At least i got a reply
8th edition fantasy magic phase was the best? Hmmm... I assume that if for best you value a overpowered destruction values and all of that...
whembly wrote: So... I'm assuming that psychic "heavy" units, ie Librarius Conclave, Magnus, Eldrad, etc... would have some sort of bonus to make it easier to cast?
Wonder how that would look...
Judging by how the most spell-heavy army in AoS (Disciples of Tzeentch) works, it'll be a mixture of things. The Lord of Change, for example, grants everyone friendly wizard around it (including itself) a flat bonus to casting and dispelling roles. The Lord of Change itself can also change the lower die on its roll to match the higher die (so, if the LoC rolled a 6 and a 1, it'd cast at a 13 (12+1)). The army also has other units that can offer similar flat bonuses to spellcasting, either inherently or through spells of their own.
That'd be great... I'm very optimistic about this now!
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
So, everything in AoS has a save value (for example, a unit may have a 4+ save value). Rend can reduce that save (an attack from a -1 rend weapon reduces that save, effectively, to a 5+). Mortal wounds bypass the save completely; they're automatically applied to the model. HOWEVER, some models (such as Plaguebearers) have a "save-after-the-save" that they can take to cancel mortal wounds or wounds they otherwise would have suffered from failing their save roll. A Plaguebearer, for example, cancels a wound it suffers, whether it's a mortal wound or just a wound from a failed normal save, on a straight 5+.
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
Mortal Wounds ignore wounds. Sometimes they proc on a dice roll, other times they are automatic. There are abilities that ignore them, such as Nurgle Daemeons with Disgustingly Resilient, which ignore any wounds on a 6.
The worry with D-Scyhes is that they will be similar to a Stormfiend's Warpfire Thrower which currently outputs 2D6 Mortal Wounds to a unit within 8". They're big int he meta as a Chaos unit called Sayl can effectively "throw" them across the board as a spell. That siad, they don't work so well against tarpits, or split deployment.
Yeah they're a type of DAMAGE not a type of weapon or attack.
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
Mortal wounds are just normal wounds where you don't get any sort of armor save. They come from a variety of sources. There is no standard situation where a wound becomes a mortal wound. It's always tied to wargear/abilities/special rules. Most armies/factions in AoS have one or two ways of generating mortal wounds, but it's generally uncommon.
Examples...
1. Arcane Bolt is a spell that does d3 mortal wounds.
2. Several different units do mortal wounds instead of regular wounds on a to wound roll of 6 or more (after modifiers).
3. etc...
Note that unlike 40K, AoS doesn't have a Perils of the Warp equivalent, so we don't know how that will impact the psychic stuff in 40K (although Perils may be as simple as "If you roll double 1s, take a mortal wound").
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
So, everything in AoS has a save value (for example, a unit may have a 4+ save value). Rend can reduce that save (an attack from a -1 rend weapon reduces that save, effectively, to a 5+). Mortal wounds bypass the save completely; they're automatically applied to the model. HOWEVER, some models (such as Plaguebearers) have a "save-after-the-save" that they can take to cancel mortal wounds or wounds they otherwise would have suffered from failing their save roll. A Plaguebearer, for example, cancels a wound it suffers, whether it's a mortal wound or just a wound from a failed normal save, on a straight 5+.
Jambles wrote: The real big thing I'm hoping they clarify is whether or not we'll be rolling for our powers. I'd muchly prefer to pick them like wargear.
Me too. Hopefully they take a page from AoS here, which lets you pick or roll (your choice).
Formosa wrote: Hi warhammer tv. I know it's too late now but this system is essentially the same as the old system, but with a set value you roll above rather than beneath. That system was changed to the current warp charge system, which was bad to say the least (incidentally that was also from a prior fantasy system that didn't work properly). To my point, you will come across a lot of issues as you carry this new system on, I urge your designers to look at the prior systems and see why they didn't work, the best "magic" phase that has been made so far was the 8th fantasy one, This "new" system will work mechanically but it will have the same problems the ones from 3rd, 4th and 5th had.
Hey Tony - that's good feedback and we shall indeed pass it on
At least i got a reply
8th edition fantasy magic phase was the best? Hmmm... I assume that if for best you value a overpowered destruction values and all of that...
the powers were the problem, not the mechanics, the two things are clearly different, the phase worked quite well and the rules around it were also good, better than any previous system, GW just messed up the abilities.
Formosa wrote: Hi warhammer tv. I know it's too late now but this system is essentially the same as the old system, but with a set value you roll above rather than beneath. That system was changed to the current warp charge system, which was bad to say the least (incidentally that was also from a prior fantasy system that didn't work properly). To my point, you will come across a lot of issues as you carry this new system on, I urge your designers to look at the prior systems and see why they didn't work, the best "magic" phase that has been made so far was the 8th fantasy one, This "new" system will work mechanically but it will have the same problems the ones from 3rd, 4th and 5th had.
Hey Tony - that's good feedback and we shall indeed pass it on
At least i got a reply
I'm not seeing how it is at all the same as the old system. Old system all powers needed you to roll below the same number (your leadership), new system all powers require you to roll above a given number. So Stronger powers could have very low probability to cast, and weaker powers could be very easy/reliable to cast. For example in old 40k an LD 10 psyker cast every power ~92% of the time. In the new system Smite the power we know goes off on a 5+ which means it casts 83% of the time. A stronger power might cast on a 10+ which means it would cast only 16% of the time. So in the old editions 3-6 you ended up with a lot of basically meaningless rolls (formalities that rarely failed), now some the rolls are much less reliable and thus have more meaning. It also means you might take say pyromancy powers that cast on a 5+ instead of invisibility that casts on an 11.
Formosa wrote: Hi warhammer tv. I know it's too late now but this system is essentially the same as the old system, but with a set value you roll above rather than beneath. That system was changed to the current warp charge system, which was bad to say the least (incidentally that was also from a prior fantasy system that didn't work properly). To my point, you will come across a lot of issues as you carry this new system on, I urge your designers to look at the prior systems and see why they didn't work, the best "magic" phase that has been made so far was the 8th fantasy one, This "new" system will work mechanically but it will have the same problems the ones from 3rd, 4th and 5th had.
Hey Tony - that's good feedback and we shall indeed pass it on
At least i got a reply
I acutally like the Age of Sigmar casting system more than fantasy 8th's. One of the things I hated with 40k's casting was how time consuming it became just to decide how many dice to cast or deny with. The bigger the pools and the more complex the situations (like tzeentch daemons with siphon magic) the longer it took. I like the balance more of just adjusting the sum needed on two dice rather than having to calculate varying stats on the fly. Now the process is just choosing what powers you want to get off and it will go much faster.
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
So, everything in AoS has a save value (for example, a unit may have a 4+ save value). Rend can reduce that save (an attack from a -1 rend weapon reduces that save, effectively, to a 5+). Mortal wounds bypass the save completely; they're automatically applied to the model. HOWEVER, some models (such as Plaguebearers) have a "save-after-the-save" that they can take to cancel mortal wounds or wounds they otherwise would have suffered from failing their save roll. A Plaguebearer, for example, cancels a wound it suffers, whether it's a mortal wound or just a wound from a failed normal save, on a straight 5+.
So FnP
Basically, although IIRCFnP can be canceled by certain attacks. The save-after-the-save in AoS generally works against everything.
Jambles wrote: The real big thing I'm hoping they clarify is whether or not we'll be rolling for our powers. I'd muchly prefer to pick them like wargear.
If they follow AoS then psykers will each have a unique spell to use on their dataslate. The lore spells will be able to be chosen, or, rolled for (I.e. Matched play will likely adopt choosing).
Every faction will have its own psychic lore with a range of thematic powers.
So... Tau Psykers confirmed?
hah - yes and what about Necrons too?
Tau will probably get Nicassar (those are the psychic bears, right?), and Necrons probably won't get psykers per se, but they will most likely get stuff that craps on psykers, like they usually do. Or maybe C'tan and Crypteks will work like psykers, but they have rules that distinguish them from witches.
At least, I hope that's how it is with necrons, and they aren't given access to the warp. That's kind of a big deal with them thematically, how they are purely of the material realm.
Every faction will have its own psychic lore with a range of thematic powers.
So... Tau Psykers confirmed?
hah - yes and what about Necrons too?
Tau will probably get Nicassar (those are the psychic bears, right?), and Necrons probably won't get psykers per se, but they will most likely get stuff that craps on psykers, like they usually do.
At least, I hope that's how it is with necrons, and they aren't given access to the warp. That's kind of a big deal with them thematically, how they are purely of the material realm.
Maybe the C'Tan will have TOTALLY NOT PSYCHIC POWERS, JUST ADVANCED REALITY MANIPULATION...that work exactly like psychic powers.
AoS style physic powers and mortal wounds confirmed? Happy days!
I do like that double power for rolling a 10. Very thematic! And not to brag, but they've done exactly what I've proposed in the proposed rules thread several times. Same name for it and everything.
So, everything in AoS has a save value (for example, a unit may have a 4+ save value). Rend can reduce that save (an attack from a -1 rend weapon reduces that save, effectively, to a 5+). Mortal wounds bypass the save completely; they're automatically applied to the model. HOWEVER, some models (such as Plaguebearers) have a "save-after-the-save" that they can take to cancel mortal wounds or wounds they otherwise would have suffered from failing their save roll. A Plaguebearer, for example, cancels a wound it suffers, whether it's a mortal wound or just a wound from a failed normal save, on a straight 5+.
It should also be noted that AoS allows you any number of saves. My chaos warriors have an armor save, a mortal wound save, and a bubble save from a warshrine.
Every faction will have its own psychic lore with a range of thematic powers.
So... Tau Psykers confirmed?
hah - yes and what about Necrons too?
Tau will probably get Nicassar (those are the psychic bears, right?), and Necrons probably won't get psykers per se, but they will most likely get stuff that craps on psykers, like they usually do.
At least, I hope that's how it is with necrons, and they aren't given access to the warp. That's kind of a big deal with them thematically, how they are purely of the material realm.
Maybe the C'Tan will have TOTALLY NOT PSYCHIC POWERS, JUST ADVANCED REALITY MANIPULATION...that work exactly like psychic powers.
maybe they will work like psychic powers but with no perils because they aren't using the warp.
Every faction will have its own psychic lore with a range of thematic powers.
So... Tau Psykers confirmed?
hah - yes and what about Necrons too?
Tau will probably get Nicassar (those are the psychic bears, right?), and Necrons probably won't get psykers per se, but they will most likely get stuff that craps on psykers, like they usually do.
At least, I hope that's how it is with necrons, and they aren't given access to the warp. That's kind of a big deal with them thematically, how they are purely of the material realm.
Maybe the C'Tan will have TOTALLY NOT PSYCHIC POWERS, JUST ADVANCED REALITY MANIPULATION...that work exactly like psychic powers.
maybe they will work like psychic powers but with no perils because they aren't using the warp.
Just don't call it "perils of the warp"... just call it "perils of reality"!
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
I mean we just played through 20 years where 95% of the units in the game had no save from AP2 and suddenly this mechanic is cancer?!
I like it, it allows for more devastating attacks while not even coming CLOSE to D or stomps now, so hearing the comparisons is laughable. A mortal wound or 2 here and there is nothing compared to removed from play. Remember lots of wounds are a thing now, a marine character could have 5 wounds on average.
Oh and another laugh at the guy saying wraith guard with D-scythes wioll do d6 mortal wounds each... LOL. You have no idea what ANY elday unit of weapon does yet and porting the stuff over from 7th with no alteration is silly.
From the sounds of it even the marine mooks will start getting more wounds
i can only imagine the rest of the roster for all factions. d3 wounds might not really do anything.
I do like that double power for rolling a 10. Very thematic! And not to brag, but they've done exactly what I've proposed in the proposed rules thread several times. Same name for it and everything.
Dakka needs a smug face emoticon.
I'm not going to go into the merits of AOS and argue about is it good or bad? That's neither here nor there.
None the less, I would be slightly concerned if a lot of AOS elements were being adopted for 40k.
Why? Because Fantasy is Fantasy, and 40K is 40K, and that distinction between them, that has been there for years, should remain.
Hopefully, it will still remain. Hope that makes sense.
I wonder if Shadow of the Warp for Nids will still be the old "roll 3d6 for a power." Perhaps now you pick the lowest 2 instead of having the result of all 3?
40k was Fantasy in space... I remember my Chaos Lord in Fantasy killing Empire lords with a Plasma Pistol.
Do_I_Not_Like_That, I have seen that you are a lore freak like me, and I'll give you an advice that I apply to myself after seeing how Blizzard killed the Lore of Warcraft, a universe I loved:
Enjoy the bits of lore that you like, and ignore the ones you not like. They will crap all about their own lore for whatever reasons they feel worth it, so don't create anguish for yourself when the own owners of the Lore don't care about it.
If you believe 40K should be different from Fantasy, fair enough. They are two different styles of game. But they haven't always been that way. I remember early versions being almost exactly the same, and if I remember correctly, one of the fantast siege books even suggested a scenario with Fantasy vs. 40K.
Future War Cultist wrote: What edition was it that had customisable c'tan shards with powers you could pick yourself? They could bring that back.
Actually this is a good chance to make those not pyshic powers work differently to actual pyshic powers.
The edition previous to this one (5e codex, 5th/6th edition). I liked that quite a bit as well, but honestly I like the idea of them having a similar power table they have now but with the ability to pick from it instead of getting random powers.
Galas wrote: 40k was Fantasy in space... I remember my Chaos Lord in Fantasy killing Empire lords with a Plasma Pistol.
Do_I_Not_Like_That, I have seen that you are a lore freak like me, and I'll give you an advice that I apply to myself after seeing how Blizzard killed the Lore of Warcraft, a universe I loved:
Enjoy the bits of lore that you like, and ignore the ones you not like. They will crap all about their own lore for whatever reasons they feel worth it, so don't create anguish for yourself when the own owners of the Lore don't care about it.
Red Corsair wrote: Really not understanding the big deal with mortal wounds. I would assume things that utilize the mechanic are rare and expensive. I mean so far look at smite, it targets the closest thing lol, you need to successfully cast it, not have it unbound/dispelled THEN it's only d3 wounds the majority of the time... WOW, super broken lol. It looks like archane bolt from AoS, I would guess everyone can use smite by defalt, there is probably a power the same as mystic shield that everyone can use too.
Can someone explain what mortal wounds actually do in AOS? Do they just completely ignore saves? Cause a dX number of wounds? Is it an always "on" ability or does it need to be activated on a roll of a 6 like a stomp? All of the above? None of the above? I'm getting bits and pieces along with speculation and a bit of conflicting info from various posts on the past two pages but nothing all in one spot.
So, everything in AoS has a save value (for example, a unit may have a 4+ save value). Rend can reduce that save (an attack from a -1 rend weapon reduces that save, effectively, to a 5+). Mortal wounds bypass the save completely; they're automatically applied to the model. HOWEVER, some models (such as Plaguebearers) have a "save-after-the-save" that they can take to cancel mortal wounds or wounds they otherwise would have suffered from failing their save roll. A Plaguebearer, for example, cancels a wound it suffers, whether it's a mortal wound or just a wound from a failed normal save, on a straight 5+.
So FnP
Basically, although IIRCFnP can be canceled by certain attacks. The save-after-the-save in AoS generally works against everything.
another difference is that you take the save after save against wounds, so if you would suffer a single hit that causes three mortal wounds, you would need to make 3 save after saves... So it is worse then feel no pain or a 5++ as in AOS there are a lot of multiwound attacks and I am sure this new version of 40k will have too.
Smellingsalts wrote: If you believe 40K should be different from Fantasy, fair enough. They are two different styles of game. But they haven't always been that way. I remember early versions being almost exactly the same, and if I remember correctly, one of the fantast siege books even suggested a scenario with Fantasy vs. 40K.
I've nothing against both games having similarities when it comes to generic things like a shooting phase or a movement.
e.g in AOS there is an opportunity to shoot bow and arrow and in 40k, you'll be blasting lasguns at landraiders or whatever
But I feel that both games need to maintain the uniqueness of their respective systems, as that's what sets them apart.
If I want AOS, I'll play AOs. If I want 40K, I'll play 40k etc etc
I just hope they don't blur that line of distinction between the two, but I've no problem with having orcs and orks.
I think they're going to cut down the subfaction nonsense for at least in the beginning, so probably not. They should wait at least couple of years before they bloat the heck out of it.
People are also being too literal with "Every faction" -thing. But as said, Tau auxiliaries (Kroot, Nicassar, Gue'Vesa etc) certainly do have Psykers so it wouldn't be strange. In current Tau Codex, Tau ally races are horribly underutilized anyway.
Galas wrote: 40k was Fantasy in space... I remember my Chaos Lord in Fantasy killing Empire lords with a Plasma Pistol.
Do_I_Not_Like_That, I have seen that you are a lore freak like me, and I'll give you an advice that I apply to myself after seeing how Blizzard killed the Lore of Warcraft, a universe I loved:
Enjoy the bits of lore that you like, and ignore the ones you not like. They will crap all about their own lore for whatever reasons they feel worth it, so don't create anguish for yourself when the own owners of the Lore don't care about it.
Requizen wrote: The edition previous to this one (5e codex, 5th/6th edition). I liked that quite a bit as well, but honestly I like the idea of them having a similar power table they have now but with the ability to pick from it instead of getting random powers.
Ah yes, it was 5th ed.
What if they had one or two generic powers listed on their data slate, and then a table of six additional powers listed in the codex that they can pick one more from. Like prayers from AoS? And as these are not pyshic powers they can't be unbound and don't suffer from perils either.
Formosa wrote: Hi warhammer tv. I know it's too late now but this system is essentially the same as the old system, but with a set value you roll above rather than beneath. That system was changed to the current warp charge system, which was bad to say the least (incidentally that was also from a prior fantasy system that didn't work properly). To my point, you will come across a lot of issues as you carry this new system on, I urge your designers to look at the prior systems and see why they didn't work, the best "magic" phase that has been made so far was the 8th fantasy one, This "new" system will work mechanically but it will have the same problems the ones from 3rd, 4th and 5th had.
Hey Tony - that's good feedback and we shall indeed pass it on
At least i got a reply
I'm not seeing how it is at all the same as the old system. Old system all powers needed you to roll below the same number (your leadership), new system all powers require you to roll above a given number. So Stronger powers could have very low probability to cast, and weaker powers could be very easy/reliable to cast. For example in old 40k an LD 10 psyker cast every power ~92% of the time. In the new system Smite the power we know goes off on a 5+ which means it casts 83% of the time. A stronger power might cast on a 10+ which means it would cast only 16% of the time. So in the old editions 3-6 you ended up with a lot of basically meaningless rolls (formalities that rarely failed), now some the rolls are much less reliable and thus have more meaning. It also means you might take say pyromancy powers that cast on a 5+ instead of invisibility that casts on an 11.
And you can try to dispel all of the spells, not just the ones targeting you, which is the big thing.
Every faction will have its own psychic lore with a range of thematic powers.
So... Tau Psykers confirmed?
hah - yes and what about Necrons too?
Tau will probably get Nicassar (those are the psychic bears, right?), and Necrons probably won't get psykers per se, but they will most likely get stuff that craps on psykers, like they usually do.
At least, I hope that's how it is with necrons, and they aren't given access to the warp. That's kind of a big deal with them thematically, how they are purely of the material realm.
Maybe the C'Tan will have TOTALLY NOT PSYCHIC POWERS, JUST ADVANCED REALITY MANIPULATION...that work exactly like psychic powers.
maybe they will work like psychic powers but with no perils because they aren't using the warp.
Just don't call it "perils of the warp"... just call it "perils of reality"!
Perils of Reality - The model who suffers from this remembers he has taxes to do and kids to feed. Immediately remove from play.
Galas wrote: 40k was Fantasy in space... I remember my Chaos Lord in Fantasy killing Empire lords with a Plasma Pistol.
Do_I_Not_Like_That, I have seen that you are a lore freak like me, and I'll give you an advice that I apply to myself after seeing how Blizzard killed the Lore of Warcraft, a universe I loved:
Enjoy the bits of lore that you like, and ignore the ones you not like. They will crap all about their own lore for whatever reasons they feel worth it, so don't create anguish for yourself when the own owners of the Lore don't care about it.
Oooooh, so close and yet so far.
At first I was a little angry about all of this changes to 40k lore and even from the Death of the old World. But after that, I just realize that I was making me angry for no reason. So now I enjoy the lore of the Old World whenever I roleplay or play fantasy, I enjoy the new AoS lore when I read it, and I enjoy both pre-Guilliman 40k state of the universe and probably I'll enjoy different things of the new lore they will do.
So, If you interpret my advice to Do_I_Not_Like_That as hating AoS, 8th edition, etc... nothing more far from my intention!
A game is a game and the lore is the lore, many things will change with time. We should all embrace Tzeentch teachings. The Nurgle way is one of anguish and resentment.
Sinful Hero wrote: I am hyped for this new edition. They can't release it soon enough.
100% Agree. I haven't been this excited for an edition release since.. well ever. I think they have totally turned this ship around. The releases, the community engagement, the support of the local tourneys and all the teasers has been awesome.
And this is coming from someone who sort of stopped supporting the hobby for a bit simply because I didn't like the direction it was heading. I am back on 100% now. Dusting off my 40k armies as we speak!
I think they're going to cut down the subfaction nonsense for at least in the beginning, so probably not. They should wait at least couple of years before they bloat the heck out of it.
People are also being too literal with "Every faction" -thing. But as said, Tau auxiliaries (Kroot, Nicassar, Gue'Vesa etc) certainly do have Psykers so it wouldn't be strange.
In current Tau Codex, Tau ally races are horribly underutilized anyway.
I wouldn't bet too heavily on there being a "cut down" on the subfaction stuff, at least in the way you're thinking.
I could see some factions not having many subfactions, but some might get quite a bit.
For example, I could see Orks getting keywords for specific Clans and the like.
Youn wrote: Hmm, so, it really is a question of can Characters join units? If they cannot, they will be easy to kill if you have lascannons or your own psychers.
Maybe the new rules will prevent individual characters being targeted if there are other threats nearby or perhaps the are other rules preventing it
Given some of the outside GW fellas that have play tested the rules, I'm sure such an issue came up and hopefully was addressed. Will have to wait and see
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I don't like the mortal wounds ignoring invulnerable save.
Also why don't the flamethrower make mortal wound? Do the melta make mortal wounds?
Why would a bog standard flamer cause Mortal Wounds?
The new psychic phase is almost a carbon copy of useing spells in the AoS command phase. Right down to Smite being the analogue to magic- I mean Arcane missile. Just missing the 40k version of magic shield.
TBH, I think this is a improvement over the current psychic phase.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I don't like the mortal wounds ignoring invulnerable save.
Also why don't the flamethrower make mortal wound? Do the melta make mortal wounds?
Mortal Wounds generally represent attacks that are very powerful and/or other worldly in AoS. In 40k, I get a feeling they are more or less the replacement for the strength D rule. I could also see it replacing the Instadeath mechanic in that doubling out someone's toughness might cause the inflicted wounds to become mortal. This wound mean well a +2sv monster/tank would get a +5Sv from a Lascannon hit, it would paste a Terminator with no saves. Would make the weapons scale better ageist their targets.
Their realy wouldn't be any reason for the rule to effect flame throwers in the end, when all flame thrower hits already auto-hits.
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
Lockark wrote: The new psychic phase is almost a carbon copy of useing spells in the AoS command phase. Right down to Smite being the analogue to magic- I mean Arcane missile. Just missing the 40k version of magic shield.
TBH, I think this is a improvement over the current psychic phase.
Yeah, it appears to much simpler. Its actually closer to how pre-6th ed handled psychic powers, in that its a 2d6 roll to cast, except its not based on ld but on a specified requirement for the power.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I don't like the mortal wounds ignoring invulnerable save.
Also why don't the flamethrower make mortal wound? Do the melta make mortal wounds?
Why would a bog standard flamer cause Mortal Wounds?
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
BUUUUURN!
Jerry! Jerry! JERRY!
Seriously though, I do hope Tau gets some sort of defense at least. I know necrons will, because that's traditionally their deal, but Tau tend to have no answer to psy, right?
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
BUUUUURN!
Jerry! Jerry! JERRY!
Seriously though, I do hope Tau gets some sort of defense at least. I know necrons will, because that's traditionally their deal, but Tau tend to have no answer to psy, right?
Yes, their answer is...TO DIE!!!
I like just about everything revealed so far, looking forward to that all important release date info now!
Yeah. I'm extremely glad with what they did with psychic powers. 7ed psychic phase got so tedious that I actually got tired of playing my Thousand Sons. The psychic phase just took forever.
I'm also pleased that invulnerable saves seem to still be a thing.
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
BUUUUURN!
Jerry! Jerry! JERRY!
Seriously though, I do hope Tau gets some sort of defense at least. I know necrons will, because that's traditionally their deal, but Tau tend to have no answer to psy, right?
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
BUUUUURN!
Jerry! Jerry! JERRY!
Seriously though, I do hope Tau gets some sort of defense at least. I know necrons will, because that's traditionally their deal, but Tau tend to have no answer to psy, right?
They have a great answer. it's called DYING.
More likely it's called "Not being in range".
The wording on Smite is pretty important:
Closest visible unit.
Kriswall wrote: Mortal wounds are just normal wounds where you don't get any sort of armor save. They come from a variety of sources. There is no standard situation where a wound becomes a mortal wound. It's always tied to wargear/abilities/special rules. Most armies/factions in AoS have one or two ways of generating mortal wounds, but it's generally uncommon.
DynamicCalories wrote: Mortal Wounds ignore wounds. Sometimes they proc on a dice roll, other times they are automatic. There are abilities that ignore them, such as Nurgle Daemeons with Disgustingly Resilient, which ignore any wounds on a 6.
The worry with D-Scyhes is that they will be similar to a Stormfiend's Warpfire Thrower which currently outputs 2D6 Mortal Wounds to a unit within 8". They're big in the meta as a Chaos unit called Sayl can effectively "throw" them across the board as a spell. That said, they don't work so well against tarpits, or split deployment.
Brian888 wrote: So, everything in AoS has a save value (for example, a unit may have a 4+ save value). Rend can reduce that save (an attack from a -1 rend weapon reduces that save, effectively, to a 5+). Mortal wounds bypass the save completely; they're automatically applied to the model. HOWEVER, some models (such as Plaguebearers) have a "save-after-the-save" that they can take to cancel mortal wounds or wounds they otherwise would have suffered from failing their save roll. A Plaguebearer, for example, cancels a wound it suffers, whether it's a mortal wound or just a wound from a failed normal save, on a straight 5+.
Thanks for the explanations. I was worried that they were instakill wounds like D weapons or somesuch negating the point of giving vehicles multiple wounds in the first place if some random weapon/spell can one shot them anyways.
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
BUUUUURN!
If only the Necron shooting phase was actually that strong :(
Maybe that means it'll be much more potent in 8th? We'll have to wait and see.
Tau doesn't have to worry about smite. It's range is 18" and the weaboos can just shoot them from 48"-72" away. I don't think many psykers will ever get off smite against Tau.
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
BUUUUURN!
If only the Necron shooting phase was actually that strong :(
Maybe that means it'll be much more potent in 8th? We'll have to wait and see.
Probably. I suspect they'll port over the rules from kill team.
Gauss is rerolls to wound and all of their weapons have at least -1 save modifiers, iirc.
Chaos Legionnaire wrote: Yeah. I'm extremely glad with what they did with psychic powers. 7ed psychic phase got so tedious that I actually got tired of playing my Thousand Sons. The psychic phase just took forever.
I'm also pleased that invulnerable saves seem to still be a thing.
Yep, I had to print out a grid on which psykers had which spells just to make sure I didn't forget to cast something. Just rolling up spells before the game was a nightmare.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I've nothing against both games having similarities when it comes to generic things like a shooting phase or a movement.
e.g in AOS there is an opportunity to shoot bow and arrow and in 40k, you'll be blasting lasguns at landraiders or whatever But I feel that both games need to maintain the uniqueness of their respective systems, as that's what sets them apart.
If I want AOS, I'll play AOs. If I want 40K, I'll play 40k etc etc
I just hope they don't blur that line of distinction between the two, but I've no problem with having orcs and orks.
At first glance, I really would not care if a fantasy game or a science fiction game share the same mechanics / game engine.
Where it would be bad is trying to shoe-horn a system that seems geared / optimized toward one type of game and feels forced for another.
40k tends to have big lumbering vehicles as well as large beasts so some gaming mechanics will have to give them some serious consideration (more-so for troop transport).
I hope when they talk about AOS it is more about "lessons learned" from building a new system "from the ground up" and applying that (possibly hard-won) knowledge to the 40k rebuild.
So-far, it seems they might (holding breath!) have succeeded from what I have seen so far.
Many things seem reasonable at first blush, at least cleaning up some of the strange hangers-on of the old system is helpful for anyone new starting.
I would say the #1 tactic for releasing the main rules free is if they goof-up in a BIG way the outcry would be received and they can promptly write a rules change.
No refunds, no crying that they revised it too soon.
It is a "living" document that they can rapidly revise until the moaning is down to a dull roar.
Then they can put together a "greatest hits" BRB compendium and charge a fortune for that!
Again, the plans make sense and are far too reasonable, who the heck is in charge of GW and where is the pod they crawled out of?
Smite looks quite powerful. It will be interesting to see how that interacts with units of psykers (for example Eldar Warlocks if each one gets a Smite attack). A decent sized unit of these will could make life a misery for any unit. Characters are definitely going to have to be wary about coming out into the open. A unit of 6 (assuming they all do get Smite) would have a good chance of killing Guillemot if he was the nearest target in one turn, or otherwise seriously harming him.
Also just had a thought - it says closest visible target...does that mean if you had Guillemot hiding behind some Marines and the Warlocks can't see the Marines (suppose they are standing behind their own Wraithguard or a strategically placed low wall) does that mean they can attack Guillemot as he would then be the closest *visible* target?
Smite looks quite powerful. It will be interesting to see how that interacts with units of psykers (for example Eldar Warlocks if each one gets a Smite attack). A decent sized unit of these will could make life a misery for any unit. Characters are definitely going to have to be wary about coming out into the open. A unit of 6 (assuming they all do get Smite) would have a good chance of killing Guillemot if he was the nearest target in one turn, or otherwise seriously harming him.
Honestly, it's not hard to figure out how these probably are going to work.
In AoS, units of casters can only do one spell per unit, with units of certain sizes getting +1 to casting/dispelling rolls.
Also given that Warlocks are currently characters? I wouldn't expect them to be a "unit" of just Warlocks.
Smite looks quite powerful. It will be interesting to see how that interacts with units of psykers (for example Eldar Warlocks if each one gets a Smite attack). A decent sized unit of these will could make life a misery for any unit. Characters are definitely going to have to be wary about coming out into the open. A unit of 6 (assuming they all do get Smite) would have a good chance of killing Guillemot if he was the nearest target in one turn, or otherwise seriously harming him.
Also just had a thought - it says closest visible target...does that mean if you had Guillemot hiding behind some Marines and the Warlocks can't see the Marines (suppose they are standing behind their own Wraithguard or a strategically placed low wall) does that mean they can attack Guillemot as he would then be the closest *visible* target?
Potentially, but most factions will have psychers to unbind which just required matching their roll IIRC and I don't think there is a limit on how many spells you can unbind. SO Tigurious for example could be well placed in order to try to stifle most powers coming into your lines.
Potentially, but most factions will have psychers to unbind which just required matching their roll IIRC and I don't think there is a limit on how many spells you can unbind. SO Tigurious for example could be well placed in order to try to stifle most powers coming into your lines.
No there is a limit...
Enemy psykers will then have a chance to block these powers if they are within 24″, and again, the mastery of the psyker will dictate how often they can block a power each turn.
Potentially, but most factions will have psychers to unbind which just required matching their roll IIRC and I don't think there is a limit on how many spells you can unbind. SO Tigurious for example could be well placed in order to try to stifle most powers coming into your lines.
No there is a limit...
Enemy psykers will then have a chance to block these powers if they are within 24″, and again, the mastery of the psyker will dictate how often they can block a power each turn.
Thanks for the details! That seems more reasonable actually. Sp a higher level duder like Arhiman can block more then your average bloke which makes sense to me, while still having a limit against say, a whole grey knight army.
Potentially, but most factions will have psychers to unbind which just required matching their roll IIRC and I don't think there is a limit on how many spells you can unbind. SO Tigurious for example could be well placed in order to try to stifle most powers coming into your lines.
No there is a limit...
Enemy psykers will then have a chance to block these powers if they are within 24″, and again, the mastery of the psyker will dictate how often they can block a power each turn.
Yes, and that also applies to units of Psykers.
So Tigurius might be able to cast and unbind 3 powers while a unit of Warlocks can only cast and unbind 1 or 2.
Don't expect craziness like units of Warlocks dishing out 5 or 6 powers a turn because there's 5 or 6 models in there. Expect something like:
A Warlock Council can cast or attempt to unbind 2 powers. If the unit size is 5 or more, add +1 to their casting and unbind rolls.
Jambles wrote: The real big thing I'm hoping they clarify is whether or not we'll be rolling for our powers. I'd muchly prefer to pick them like wargear.
I'd like to know more about this as well. Having a set list of powers to choose from that are either individually costed or rolled into the psykers base cost would be my personal preference.
So Tigurius might be able to cast and unbind 3 powers while a unit of Warlocks can only cast and unbind 1 or 2.
Don't expect craziness like units of Warlocks dishing out 5 or 6 powers a turn because there's 5 or 6 models in there.
Expect something like:
A Warlock Council can cast or attempt to unbind 2 powers. If the unit size is 5 or more, add +1 to their casting and unbind rolls.
Of course thinking about it, Warlocks are allowed to join units of guardians so this becomes less of an issue - Small guardian caddie squads might become a thing. Still it will a big nerf to the lore of Warlocks if they basically become akin to a unit spellcaster (but can see why).
I like these changes. While I liked being able to spend dice to manage powers, it quickly became way too cumbersome for some armies. This is a nice middle ground. More granularity than passing a simple Ld check like in 6th, but less complexity than 7th. It allows for some powers to be powerful, but hard to get off, and easy powers to be much more reliable.
Mortal Wounds are also a welcome addition. d3 wounds is nothing compared to the levels of damage output from armies in 7th. But being able to have access to abilities than ignore armor saves is really useful and helps prevent ridiculous death stars and unkillable units. It really helps every army have resources to be able to face every other army on the battlefield.
rollawaythestone wrote: I like these changes. While I liked being able to spend dice to manage powers, it quickly became way too cumbersome for some armies. This is a nice middle ground. More granularity than passing a simple Ld check like in 6th, but less complexity than 7th. It allows for some powers to be powerful, but hard to get off, and easy powers to be much more reliable.
Mortal Wounds are also a welcome addition. d3 wounds is nothing compared to the levels of damage output from armies in 7th. But being able to have access to abilities than ignore armor saves is really useful and helps prevent ridiculous death stars and unkillable units. It really helps every army have resources to be able to face every other army on the battlefield.
It's more the sniping capability that might be problematic for some units. You can easily hide a farseer so it can't be targeted. It's a not easy to hide Guillemot behind a unit of Marines or the tau commander behind the tau gunline etc.
Guilleman and other big-bads will have counters and will fear mortal wounds and heavy weapons like Lascannons. Sounds like a nice balancing mechanic to me. They also have tons of wounds, though, so it's not like a single Smite is going to kill your big-bad.
rollawaythestone wrote: Guilleman and other big-bads will have counters and will fear mortal wounds and heavy weapons like Lascannons. Sounds like a nice balancing mechanic to me. They also have tons of wounds, though, so it's not like a single Smite is going to kill your big-bad.
No but two good roles can (Guillemot has 9 wounds IIRC) and for those armies that can include multiple individual psykers like Eldar, Tyranids? etc it seems a powerful mechanic.
Anyway I've said my piece on this so won't go round the houses. Just stating it seems that for some armies even the Smite power looks quite powerful.
rollawaythestone wrote: Guilleman and other big-bads will have counters and will fear mortal wounds and heavy weapons like Lascannons. Sounds like a nice balancing mechanic to me. They also have tons of wounds, though, so it's not like a single Smite is going to kill your big-bad.
No but two good roles can (Guillemot has 9 wounds IIRC) and for those armies that can include multiple individual psykers like Eldar, Tyranids? etc it seems a powerful mechanic.
Anyway I've said my piece on this so won't go round the houses. Just stating it seems that for some armies even the Smite power looks quite powerful.
The likelihood of rolling a 10 followed by a decent number twice is pretty slim though. If you do manage do it once, you can expect that your opponent wont give you another chance.
Remember that its only 18" range, which is not really a safe distance. Also, its nearest enemy; you can't choose your target. So the marine player can just put cannon fodder in front of Guilleman.
Poster on FB: I play Necrons and Tau and i always felt left out of the Pys phase. Like my hands are tied and my opponent is just having thier way. Sucks to not play part of the game.
Like · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs
Warhammer 40,000 That's what every other race feels when Necrons and Tau have their shooting phase... Like · Reply · 15 · 1 hr
BUUUUURN!
Jerry! Jerry! JERRY!
Seriously though, I do hope Tau gets some sort of defense at least. I know necrons will, because that's traditionally their deal, but Tau tend to have no answer to psy, right?
They have a great answer. it's called DYING.
More likely it's called "Not being in range".
The wording on Smite is pretty important:
Closest visible unit.
I think people are really overlooking this key point. As a CSM player I know the value of bubble wrap and waves of units. Feel free to smite my Flesh Hounds and Spawn, the real threats are charging right behind them and you can't smite them until the front lines are toasted.
rollawaythestone wrote: Guilleman and other big-bads will have counters and will fear mortal wounds and heavy weapons like Lascannons. Sounds like a nice balancing mechanic to me. They also have tons of wounds, though, so it's not like a single Smite is going to kill your big-bad.
No but two good roles can (Guillemot has 9 wounds IIRC) and for those armies that can include multiple individual psykers like Eldar, Tyranids? etc it seems a powerful mechanic.
Anyway I've said my piece on this so won't go round the houses. Just stating it seems that for some armies even the Smite power looks quite powerful.
I'm wondering what Railguns are going to look like with these weapon profiles. Maybe Broadside railguns might see a comeback if they actually become useful compared to the HYMP. That would be cool.
Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
I'm fully expecting General's Handbook style "Rules of One". In other words, only one instance of each power may be attempted each turn... per army, not per psyker.
For those of you who don't play AoS, the three rules of one (paraphrased) are as follows...
1. Each spell can be attempted once per turn per army... not once per turn per wizard.
2. Rolls of 1 to hit, to wound and to save always fail.
3. Extra attacks generated by an effect can't, themselves, generate more extra attacks.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Tzeentch will most assuredly has Bolt, Pink Fire, Blue Fire, and Treason. I doubt they would reinvent the wheel on the others either.
I am very keen to know if there will be buff/debuff spells that we can get some nice combos out of without being like a stupid invis-a-star. AoS lacks a general pool of spells like that - at least DoT got two lores with a couple handy buffs.
rollawaythestone wrote: Guilleman and other big-bads will have counters and will fear mortal wounds and heavy weapons like Lascannons. Sounds like a nice balancing mechanic to me. They also have tons of wounds, though, so it's not like a single Smite is going to kill your big-bad.
No but two good roles can (Guillemot has 9 wounds IIRC) and for those armies that can include multiple individual psykers like Eldar, Tyranids? etc it seems a powerful mechanic.
Anyway I've said my piece on this so won't go round the houses. Just stating it seems that for some armies even the Smite power looks quite powerful.
I'm wondering what Railguns are going to look like with these weapon profiles. Maybe Broadside railguns might see a comeback if they actually become useful compared to the HYMP. That would be cool.
I think almost certainly you'll see HYMP be a weapon to distribute single wounds amongst multiple models in a unit, whereas the railgun will be all about putting a lot of wounds on one target, so it will be a question of outfitting for roles rather than an outright better choice.
Kriswall wrote: I'm fully expecting General's Handbook style "Rules of One". In other words, only one instance of each power may be attempted each turn... per army, not per psyker.
For those of you who don't play AoS, the three rules of one (paraphrased) are as follows...
1. Each spell can be attempted once per turn per army... not once per turn per wizard.
2. Rolls of 1 to hit, to wound and to save always fail.
3. Extra attacks generated by an effect can't, themselves, generate more extra attacks.
Maybe. These spells are also affected by perils where AoS has no such mechanic. It could even be 'any roll of doubles when casting a spell for a subsequent time this turn causes Perils'.
I'm especially certain that we won't be limited, because of armies like Thousand Sons. There are just way more casters in that army than you would ever see in AoS.
Kriswall wrote: I'm fully expecting General's Handbook style "Rules of One". In other words, only one instance of each power may be attempted each turn... per army, not per psyker.
For those of you who don't play AoS, the three rules of one (paraphrased) are as follows...
1. Each spell can be attempted once per turn per army... not once per turn per wizard.
2. Rolls of 1 to hit, to wound and to save always fail.
3. Extra attacks generated by an effect can't, themselves, generate more extra attacks.
This would be good. Great even. Might be a bit odd though given that there are whole armies of psykers in 40K. Don't like mortal wounds, since you only need them if high invulnerable saves with rerolls are a thing (otherwise why not have high rend values?), and I REALLY don't want them to be a thing. That said, works OK as long it is built into the lists in the right way.
So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Tzeentch will most assuredly has Bolt, Pink Fire, Blue Fire, and Treason. I doubt they would reinvent the wheel on the others either.
I am very keen to know if there will be buff/debuff spells that we can get some nice combos out of without being like a stupid invis-a-star. AoS lacks a general pool of spells like that - at least DoT got two lores with a couple handy buffs.
I'll be shocked if the Sons don't get a Boon of Tzeentch-type power a la the Blue Scribes.
EDIT - Also, if they give Tzaangors in 40K the same Icon they get in AoS, I'll never, ever stop laughing.
rollawaythestone wrote: Guilleman and other big-bads will have counters and will fear mortal wounds and heavy weapons like Lascannons. Sounds like a nice balancing mechanic to me. They also have tons of wounds, though, so it's not like a single Smite is going to kill your big-bad.
No but two good roles can (Guillemot has 9 wounds IIRC) and for those armies that can include multiple individual psykers like Eldar, Tyranids? etc it seems a powerful mechanic.
Anyway I've said my piece on this so won't go round the houses. Just stating it seems that for some armies even the Smite power looks quite powerful.
I'm wondering what Railguns are going to look like with these weapon profiles. Maybe Broadside railguns might see a comeback if they actually become useful compared to the HYMP. That would be cool.
I would buy a new set of broadsides just for that. i think the rail guns look super bitching on them.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K? - Not at all. - Why should I trust you? - You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
oh please we all know most people only ever took 1 or 2 disciplines ever.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
I can get mad about anything, too, if I base my reality on my personal interpretations of what words mean and whether or not things fit my worldview! REEEEEEEEEEEE!
Even with incomplete information. Double REEEEEEEEEE!
zamerion wrote: In faeit are speaking about some interesting things..
To save people giving them clicks, since it is largely clickbait
Spoiler:
PENDING 40k Rumors - Apr 2017
via Sources on Faeit 212
Starter Set
The starter set goes live the 17th and is going to be Death Guard Vs. Ultramarines, $120 box. Chaos gets a blob of cultists, a few terminators, a few plague marines, a lord, and drones. Loyalists get 2 tactical squads, a devastator, an assault squad, plus a librarian and a captain. Comes with dice and rulers as well.
In addition, there will be the standard soft cover core rules booklet and a small campaign book. The campaign book has the stats for all the dudes in the box, plus a series of narrative missions that set up the ground floor for the first real story arc of the new edition.
Codex
AoS was very much a test kitchen for what to expect of the “New Warhammer 40k”. AoS had a rocky start, but they learned from their mistakes, and recently even AoS has surpassed 40k in some regards.
The battle tome will become the template for the codex, not the other way around. Each dex will get the special army wide rules, 6-12 relics, 6 warlord traits, and 6 psychic powers, only now it’s written that you can chose to ether select or roll on warlord/psychic charts. It will also contain full rules and points for all the old and new units in a given army, and special rules for things like warbands, campaigns, narrative missions and the like.
Formations are back, but they cost points now, and so are decurons, but they will be a lot more flexible and take cues from their AoS counterparts.
Overview
6th and 7th edition suffered from growing pains and an identity crisis. GW spent a good amount of time and money figuring out what they want 8th edition to really feel like, and are using what they learned in 40k 6th-7th edition and AoS V1.0-1.2 to rebuild 40k from the ground up. They want new players to feel less intimidated by the dense lore and setting, but want to keep returning players invested in the storyline. Black library is going to do a soft reboot for some of the new 40k lore books, with a gimmicky “New Warhammer” type flagship launch to, as I said before, laydown a ground floor for the upcoming 8th edition.
June 10th launch, they’re going to drip feed us rumors for the rest of May. Expect to see full Space Marine datasheets sometime around the end of next week, with a couple of fluff pieces talking about how the galaxy got ripped in half and how all the marines got taller.
For those of you who are saving your pennies, here’s what the launch schedule looked like so far.
About 1-2 weeks beforehand all 7th edition exclusive products are being pulled from stores for good. Codex’s, Rulebooks, Dark Vengeance, not the new campaign books such as Gathering Storm sense those are still fluff pieces, but expect those to become much harder to find.
Than on day 1: 5 new, free soft cover/PDFs launch with all the core 8th edition rules.
They are:
The Rules: Containing your prophesized 12 pages of core rules, plus outlines for open play and the 14 universal FoC, ranging from 1 HQ and 1 Troop choice 1 command point allies to massive 20+ slot charts that grants a fist full of command. The new force org charts are pitched as a great way customize your army, one of them is a big guns esqu 1 troop/HQ 5+ Heavy support, but really they’re just designed to scale command points to game size.
A few of the wilder ones, such as the aforementioned big guns list, have restrictions and special rules that might sway player one way or the other in terms of army composition, but the more well-rounded ones grant the most command points (which are such a big deal. I cannot stress this enough, proper use of command points can make or break strategies), and the real meat and potato special rules granting armies are going to be built from the FoC structures found in your army codex, once they bring those back.
The free PDF version of the following books will be sectioned up amongst
faction lines, but the paper ones are going to be the mashups listed below.
Armies of the Imperium: Exactly what it says on the cover, a splash of lore
and datasheets for every imperial unit in the game.
Armies of chaos: The spiky version of the above.
Armies of Xenos: Split up among proper faction lines (Eldar, Tau, Necron, Nids), and containing datasheets and rules for the rest.
A galaxy in flames: Art and fluff book. Brings everyone up to speed on the setting, pushing the story forward by a few weeks and setting up the opening of a AoS style narrative campaign.
DO NOT READ BELOW IF YOU DO NOT WANT SPOILERS
Seriously though, who is not going to want spoilers.
Spoilers: the “official” story is something about Guilliman’s gene seed,
but it’s heavily hinted at that there’s some kind of tech heresy at play
and Mars is having a mini end times of their own. And some of the new
imperial units are going to be new, like honest to goodness, we swear they
didn’t fish these out of a closet, someone just invented these new.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
If by "classic' you mean "was only introduced in 6th ed, and just added bloat to an already bloated rule set" sure, classic.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
I see this as the opposite, BRB powers lead to dumbing down of the game, when every army ends up with the same powers. it also leads to balance issues. Why fluff wise does it not make sense to have army specific disciplines for things like Marines or Eldar?
Requizen wrote: Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?
Yes, and I actually was quite happy when they cut them off and added one set of five disciplines from the actual lore, because it really make no sense for Ultramarine Librarian, Blood Angel Librarian and IG Primaris Psyker to have different power pools when in the fluff they all learn from the five classic disciplines. I wasn't happy with those powers being generated randomly though, as it makes even less sense fluff-wise and takes from immersion and "forging the narrative". When they started pulling bs disciplines (superior to the classic 5) out of thin air it was all the way back to old unfluffy ways, only now with shizo crunch on top.
What I'd like is for all but Orks and Nids to buy powers from the classic disciplines with some bonuses for specializing in one discipline, and select few armies having their own disciplines.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Disciples of Tzeentch have a boatload of ways of boosting their casting rolls. Five gets you ten that Tzeentch daemons and Thousand Sons in 40K will have similar methods.
Yeah. Thats a NICE starter if true. Also, everyone is giving different dates for this release. Makes me really skeptical about all the release date speculation going on. I find it kind of unlikely they will string us along for all of May and lose a month's worth of sales.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
Classic?! mate they have been out 5 years of 30, hardly classic, especially when they altered them for 4 of those 5.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Err, well, 8+ is everything 8 and above... so 42%.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Err, well, 8+ is everything 8 and above... so 42%.
In AoS you pass a casting check by hitting or exceeding the target number. The spoiler we got today makes it sound like you have to beat the target number to cast the power in 40K, but I'm not sure if that's actually true.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Err, well, 8+ is everything 8 and above... so 42%.
In AoS you pass a casting check by hitting or exceeding the target number. The spoiler we got today makes it sound like you have to beat the target number to cast the power in 40K, but I'm not sure if that's actually true.
Yeah, it explicitly states that you have to beat the warp charge level, which is different than before.
Not sure if that's actually how its going to be, or if they didn't phrase it right. Interesting though. That means you actually need a 6 on 2d6 to cast smite, and 11 to get the powered up version.
Doesn't that mean though that powers with a 6 and higher don't have powered up versions, as you can't roll a 13 on a 2d6?
Classic?! mate they have been out 5 years of 30, hardly classic, especially when they altered them for 4 of those 5.
In the crunch yes, but they have consistently been in the fluff for decades. And while 3-5 E powers could at lest be fluffed as specific powers from classic disciplines favored by certatin factions, gak like "interromancy", "phantasmancy" or "geomancy" were pulled out of the ass trumping thousands of pages of the established fluff for no other reasons but to boost sales.
Wasnt the rumor that the leaked photo corresponded to a starter box? If so we just have to go count the respective blue/greenish blobs and see if they correspond.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?
But I suppose it is time to get mad again.
No, they haven't. Rogue Trader had a set of universal psychic powers in the main rule book and when it was released there was no such thing as faction specific powers.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Err, well, 8+ is everything 8 and above... so 42%.
In AoS you pass a casting check by hitting or exceeding the target number. The spoiler we got today makes it sound like you have to beat the target number to cast the power in 40K, but I'm not sure if that's actually true.
Yeah, it explicitly states that you have to beat the warp charge level, which is different than before.
Not sure if that's actually how its going to be, or if they didn't phrase it right. Interesting though. That means you actually need a 6 on 2d6 to cast smite, and 11 to get the powered up version.
Doesn't that mean though that powers with a 6 and higher don't have powered up versions, as you can't roll a 13 on a 2d6?
Excellent questions for the rumored second online FAQ session!
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Disciples of Tzeentch have a boatload of ways of boosting their casting rolls. Five gets you ten that Tzeentch daemons and Thousand Sons in 40K will have similar methods.
OK sure, doesn't matter much as long as there is balance else where. I hardly every field psychers in 7th because I find it tedious, boring and too much bookeeping yet I win way more often then I lose. Point being, many ways to skin the same cat. I have no problem with a planet of sorcerors being good at magic. Maybe they suck at assault.
davou wrote: Wasnt the rumor that the leaked photo corresponded to a starter box? If so we just have to go count the respective blue/greenish blobs and see if they correspond.
I counted 23 blue smudges before my eyes bled
This was the speculation, because it looks awful like a starter set.
Yeah, it explicitly states that you have to beat the warp charge level, which is different than before.
Not sure if that's actually how its going to be, or if they didn't phrase it right. Interesting though. That means you actually need a 6 on 2d6 to cast smite, and 11 to get the powered up version.
Doesn't that mean though that powers with a 6 and higher don't have powered up versions, as you can't roll a 13 on a 2d6?
Well, it only says you need to beat 10 to get the D6. I haven't seen anything on if we need to beat the warp charge for the regular cast.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Err, well, 8+ is everything 8 and above... so 42%.
Derp, yes you are correct, I knew I had to be wrong when I arrived at that number but my brain is running like a car on water today. Still hardly game breaking being on the losing side of a coin toss.
zamerion wrote: In faeit are speaking about some interesting things..
To save people giving them clicks, since it is largely clickbait
The free PDF version of the following books will be sectioned up amongst
faction lines, but the paper ones are going to be the mashups listed below.
Armies of the Imperium: Exactly what it says on the cover, a splash of lore
and datasheets for every imperial unit in the game.
Armies of chaos: The spiky version of the above.
Armies of Xenos: Split up among proper faction lines (Eldar, Tau, Necron, Nids), and containing datasheets and rules for the rest.
A galaxy in flames: Art and fluff book. Brings everyone up to speed on the setting, pushing the story forward by a few weeks and setting up the opening of a AoS style narrative campaign.
Eldar, Tau, Necron, Nids What!? No orks... i really hope this is just made up stuff.
This was the speculation, because it looks awful like a starter set.
Yea Faeit literally squinted their eyes can counted what they could see and stated that as a rumor. Man they annoy me to no end.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
rollawaythestone wrote: Any new word on this FAQ session? I'm sitting here at work.. not working.. being distracted by you all and the potential for a live FAQ.
Classic?! mate they have been out 5 years of 30, hardly classic, especially when they altered them for 4 of those 5.
In the crunch yes, but they have consistently been in the fluff for decades. And while 3-5 E powers could at lest be fluffed as specific powers from classic disciplines favored by certatin factions, gak like "interromancy", "phantasmancy" or "geomancy" were pulled out of the ass trumping thousands of pages of the established fluff for no other reasons but to boost sales.
Right, because we all know once you create a lore and setting you can NEVER expand upon it while running a business or else we can be SURE the motives are a money grab... Dude, your straight out of a Saturday morning cartoon with these claims.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?
But I suppose it is time to get mad again.
No, they haven't. Rogue Trader had a set of universal psychic powers in the main rule book and when it was released there was no such thing as faction specific powers.
From a game play stand point faction specific disciplines are far superior. They add variety to the game and are better for balance. Now I would have little issue if the imperium gets one set of disciplines, but everyone having the same leads to all the issues we have now.
Breng77 wrote: From a game play stand point faction specific disciplines are far superior. They add variety to the game and are better for balance. Now I would have little issue if the imperium gets one set of disciplines, but everyone having the same leads to all the issues we have now.
I agree even if I'll miss the variety. It keeps many shenanigans in check. I just want armor rerolls for my scarabs.
Brian888 wrote: Just as a point of potential comparison, in the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome for AoS, one of the spells that both daemons and Tzeentch mortals can take is Bolt of Tzeentch. It's a casting value of 8, that lets the caster inflict d6 mortal wounds on a visible enemy unit of the caster's choice within 18".
So, compared to Smite, it's a straight upgrade in terms of targeting (you get to pick the target instead of the somewhat-random targeting of Smite), and you get d6 mortal wounds on an 8 instead of an 11. However, Smite is still more likely to go off (5 versus 8). There's no guarantee that those are the kinds of faction-specific powers we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised.
13.89% chance at rolling an 8 on 2d6, hardly game busting IMHO.
Disciples of Tzeentch have a boatload of ways of boosting their casting rolls. Five gets you ten that Tzeentch daemons and Thousand Sons in 40K will have similar methods.
OK sure, doesn't matter much as long as there is balance else where. I hardly every field psychers in 7th because I find it tedious, boring and too much bookeeping yet I win way more often then I lose. Point being, many ways to skin the same cat. I have no problem with a planet of sorcerors being good at magic. Maybe they suck at assault.
I can almost assure you that aside from a small handful of models, the Thousand Sons will suck at assaulting.
Breng77 wrote: From a game play stand point faction specific disciplines are far superior. They add variety to the game and are better for balance. Now I would have little issue if the imperium gets one set of disciplines, but everyone having the same leads to all the issues we have now.
I agree even if I'll miss the variety. It keeps many shenanigans in check. I just want armor rerolls for my scarabs.
I think you'll actually see more variety in practice. Right now I basically see the same powers all the time.
Classic?! mate they have been out 5 years of 30, hardly classic, especially when they altered them for 4 of those 5.
In the crunch yes, but they have consistently been in the fluff for decades. And while 3-5 E powers could at lest be fluffed as specific powers from classic disciplines favored by certatin factions, gak like "interromancy", "phantasmancy" or "geomancy" were pulled out of the ass trumping thousands of pages of the established fluff for no other reasons but to boost sales.
Right, because we all know once you create a lore and setting you can NEVER expand upon it while running a business or else we can be SURE the motives are a money grab... Dude, your straight out of a Saturday morning cartoon with these claims.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?
But I suppose it is time to get mad again.
No, they haven't. Rogue Trader had a set of universal psychic powers in the main rule book and when it was released there was no such thing as faction specific powers.
Yes they have, he said longer not what was first.
I was responding directly to this line: "Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?"
And the answer to that question is certainly: "No they haven't. Army specific powers did not exist when the first Big Rule Book (Rogue Trader) was published.
Classic?! mate they have been out 5 years of 30, hardly classic, especially when they altered them for 4 of those 5.
In the crunch yes, but they have consistently been in the fluff for decades. And while 3-5 E powers could at lest be fluffed as specific powers from classic disciplines favored by certatin factions, gak like "interromancy", "phantasmancy" or "geomancy" were pulled out of the ass trumping thousands of pages of the established fluff for no other reasons but to boost sales.
Right, because we all know once you create a lore and setting you can NEVER expand upon it while running a business or else we can be SURE the motives are a money grab... Dude, your straight out of a Saturday morning cartoon with these claims.
Mezmerro wrote: So they dump 5 classic disciplines, instead give every army specific discipline (which fluff-wise only makes sense with Chaos, Orks and Nids) and dumb down Psy phase to AoS level...
- Have you dumbed down 40K?
- Not at all.
- Why should I trust you?
- You really shouldn't. Also we lied to your previous question.
Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?
But I suppose it is time to get mad again.
No, they haven't. Rogue Trader had a set of universal psychic powers in the main rule book and when it was released there was no such thing as faction specific powers.
Yes they have, he said longer not what was first.
I was responding directly to this line: "Army specific powers have been in the game longer than BRB powers, no?"
And the answer to that question is certainly: "No they haven't. Army specific powers did not exist when the first Big Rule Book (Rogue Trader) was published.
I don't think you understand the concept here.
By your logic 12 sided dice have been existed in 40k for over 20 years now.
Seriously here; is the only way for you to think a chance is positive for it to be an active benefit to one of the armies you personally play? Cause it seems like you don't want a game and instead would just like to have other people line stuff up for your to flick at.
im fine with assault lines not having assault protection anymore. and besides its possible you might be able to attempt to catch them if they try and run off. we dont have the full rules. 
