went down to the local store and played a game vs a new player that had never played in a store we had a great game that went down to a draw a super fun time had by all.

After the game there was a big war machine tourney going on and one of the players that was on a by had just bought he deamon dex and I we were chatting and I was flipping through it. As I was doing so we were talking about cool units and what not and then I stumbled on the Warp Storm Chart.

For those of you that don't know if Chaos Deamons are your primary detachment you must roll on this random chart before each of your shooting phases. As I was reading the effects of the chart I came to this one and I think that this will really upset people and this will not be fun at all.

Imagine its a Saturday and you have met one of your buddies at the store and you set up your table and get set to play your buddy is paying Chaos Deamons and you are playing SW and you have a Rune Priest as your Warlord and HQ.

The deamon player gets first turn he moves all his models and then he moves to the shooting phase. He rolls an 11 on the chart and points to your warlord he makes you take a leadership test on 3d6 with no saves of any kind allowed and if you fail your Rune priest is dead and a Herald of the deamon players choice is set up 6 inches away from the RP.

I would like to ask how is this fun? Think how fun it would be if it were the swarmlord it's any enemy phyker BTW.

Other Jems on the chart include that the deamon army must demonic insatiability test on each unit in the army. Oh look my army just kicked it's own ass that seems fun huh?!?!?

If you roll box cars you get a free scoring unit! That deep strikes on to the table immediately. Wow that would be super fun for your buddy that is smashing you on his way to victory on turn 6 you box cars and deep strike a unit on an objective or you pick line breaker that would super fun.

I understand that GW wanted Chaos Deamons to be chaotic and I can dig that I get it I really do but sometimes you need to adjust what you want to do for the sake of game play.

It's a game it's supposed to be fun how is it fun when things are this drastically random? The other dynamic I have an issue with is that this warp storm chat is compulsory this is not some cheese SC like the Doom or Mephiston this is how every deamon player must play.

I think this book has some smash face units in it and can do some really cool things but this chart makes me very sad not just for deamon players but everyone that has to play them.

Think this is really bad for the game.f

It's cinematic.

You're not forced to use it, try asking your opponent if he would mind not using it. If you have a regular gaming group you might be able to come to an accord.

I don't see a problem with it. Only 3 of the effects really screw you over, 1 does nothing, and the rest screw your opponent over to varying degrees.Considering this is already a game where the vast majority of things are decided by dice rolls, why are people complaining about *gasp* more dice rolls being added?

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I don't see a problem with it. Only 3 of the effects really screw you over, 1 does nothing, and the rest screw your opponent over to varying degrees.Considering this is already a game where the vast majority of things are decided by dice rolls, why are people complaining about *gasp* more dice rolls being added?

Because it's a major game-changing event with a 1/36 probability. Most of the time it won't happen, and then it randomly shows up to swing the game and negate all of the complex strategy both players have done. It's just one more step away from interesting choices and closer to "roll to see who wins".

And also because the game has too much rolling involved already. There is no need for more charts of random effects.

 Peregrine wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I don't see a problem with it. Only 3 of the effects really screw you over, 1 does nothing, and the rest screw your opponent over to varying degrees.Considering this is already a game where the vast majority of things are decided by dice rolls, why are people complaining about *gasp* more dice rolls being added?

Because it's a major game-changing event with a 1/36 probability. Most of the time it won't happen, and then it randomly shows up to swing the game and negate all of the complex strategy both players have done. It's just one more step away from interesting choices and closer to "roll to see who wins".

And also because the game has too much rolling involved already. There is no need for more charts of random effects.

Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils? Or you fail a leadership test? Or a reserve test? Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking? Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch? Same with Rending?

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:


Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils? Or you fail a leadership test? Or a reserve test? Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking? Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch? Same with Rending?

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Every single example you just said there can be influenced by the actions of the player and can be controlled, the random warpstorm table can't be controlled.

I hate it.

A lot of people seem to be using the pathetic excuse that you shouldn't complain about randomness in a game based around dice rolling. This ofcourse ignores the fact that every other roll in a game I make is because of decisions I have made. I can increase or decrease my chance of success by the decisions I make while playing game. This warpstorm table I have no power over.

For me personally this warpstorm table and a lot of the other randomness in the daemons codex breaks a personal game design philosphy that a game should never take control away from the player. If I lose or win a game I want it to be because I made the right decisions at the right time not because I got luck or unlucky on a random table that I have no control over. The CSM codex and their forced challenges is another example of taking control away from the played and I have seen many a player complain about things not going their way because they were forced to issue the challenge.

I'm actually very worreid about the direction GW is taking with the game and I am very worried about what a future Ork codex will look like.

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils?

Which results in one wound on (usually) a multi-wound model. It's no more game-changing than failing a save against a bolter shot.

Or you fail a leadership test?

Given how many armies have some way of re-rolling leadership or automatically regrouping or whatever, not really. It's annoying but missing a turn with a unit is not usually something that will instantly change the game.

Or a reserve test?

Not game-changing since you usually have multiple units in reserve and failing to get a specific one is rarely a big deal (and if it is you need to put more redundancy in your list).

Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking?

Potentially game-changing, but you also have a lot of control over it through the risk vs. reward tradeoff in picking your target point. You don't just randomly roll 2D6 and lose the unit on a 2.

Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch?

Not really, since it's just a few dead meatshields and if your entire strategy depends on not losing an extra model or two on overwatch you have only yourself to blame.

Same with Rending?

Not really, since rending is fairly predictable on average and if you fail to account for it you're just a bad player.

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Of course it is. Most rolls in 40k are either predictable (through sheer numbers of dice rolled ensuring a reasonable average most of the time) or not game-changing (a single reserve roll). The table, on the other hand, has the horrible combination of huge effects and huge luck factor in whether they happen or not.

 Madcat87 wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:


Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils? Or you fail a leadership test? Or a reserve test? Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking? Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch? Same with Rending?

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Every single example you just said there can be influenced by the actions of the player and can be controlled, the random warpstorm table can't be controlled.

I hate it.

A lot of people seem to be using the pathetic excuse that you shouldn't complain about randomness in a game based around dice rolling. This ofcourse ignores the fact that every other roll in a game I make is because of decisions I have made. I can increase or decrease my chance of success by the decisions I make while playing game. This warpstorm table I have no power over.

For me personally this warpstorm table and a lot of the other randomness in the daemons codex breaks a personal game design philosphy that a game should never take control away from the player. If I lose or win a game I want it to be because I made the right decisions at the right time not because I got luck or unlucky on a random table that I have no control over. The CSM codex and their forced challenges is another example of taking control away from the played and I have seen many a player complain about things not going their way because they were forced to issue the challenge.

I'm actually very worreid about the direction GW is taking with the game and I am very worried about what a future Ork codex will look like.

The very fact that you are playing with DICE means luck will always either help you or hurt, planning and tactics be damned. You can talk all you want about "mitigating" it, you will still role 1s or 12s on your dice. And you CAN mitigate the effects of Warpstorm, just take a LoC or Kairos and you can reroll it if you don't like it, on top of that you get a level 3 psyker MC with access to divination.

And if adding all this luck that you seem to hate means that TFGs can no longer build WAAC lists due to it screwing over their "perfect" lists, again, what is the problem?

The Chart seems in character for the Chaos demon army, having chaotic things happen to a all warp spawned demons of chaos force seems pretty flavorful.

And likely TO will forbid it at events if it causes to much of a hubbub, for friendly games I think it would be fun, but then again I only play for fun.

I love what I have seen of the warpstorm table, it looks awesome and I think it will make for really bizarre and interesting games. I'm looking forward to using it!

It reminds me of the days of Necromunda, rolling on the serious injury table to see what had happened to your gangers. It's great!

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
I love what I have seen of the warpstorm table, it looks awesome and I think it will make for really bizarre and interesting games. I'm looking forward to using it!

It reminds me of the days of Necromunda, rolling on the serious injury table to see what had happened to your gangers. It's great!

Now that brings back some memories.

I watched the Storm Chart blast a necron Lord into cinders after the unfortunate bastard detached from his unit. It is a hell of a game changer. I built a list for my friend using the new codex and the game was over in Turn 2. Seriously.

Sure, bad thingsa can happen to your Daemons but then... they're evil badness and bad things SHOULD happeen to them. it's when that chart hurts the enemy, and I mean it can HURT the HELL outta the enemy.

And if adding all this luck that you seem to hate means that TFGs can no longer build WAAC lists due to it screwing over their "perfect" lists, again, what is the problem?

If someone doesn't like too much randomness it's far not equal that he is a TFG with a WAAC list. Foot guard numbers compensate randomness, but it would be foolish to call a list with sentinels and without fliers or allies a WAAC list.

Have fun with the randomness if you want, but don't call others TFGs just because they don't like it.

I think that the armies which worship a force with a name like, oh, say, Chaos should rely a little more on randomness, and the Warp Storm Chart seems like a good way to do that. Orks, Chaos Marines, and Chaos Daemons should have these random tables, I think. Personally, I think that it adds flavor to their army, and I wouldn't have a problem playing against it. I think it would be a barrel of laughs, especially in friendly games. And if someone should happen to have all his random table rolls go his way in a tournament, I'd applaud him the same way I'd applaud anyone on an incredible lucky streak.

Now I can't wait to play against this myself.

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
The very fact that you are playing with DICE means luck will always either help you or hurt, planning and tactics be damned. You can talk all you want about "mitigating" it, you will still role 1s or 12s on your dice. And you CAN mitigate the effects of Warpstorm, just take a LoC or Kairos and you can reroll it if you don't like it, on top of that you get a level 3 psyker MC with access to divination.

And, again, there's a difference between things like shooting which involve dice but are fairly predictable and average out in the long run and random tables with game-changing events that occasionally and unpredictably screw over one player.

And if adding all this luck that you seem to hate means that TFGs can no longer build WAAC lists due to it screwing over their "perfect" lists, again, what is the problem?

That the game is even less fun when TFG rolls well on the random table and gains a huge advantage just because the dice said so.

I think it's ok. The results are not as bad as many other things in the game. The OP mentioned the 11 result, which we have seen before with mind worm, Zogwart and others. Maybe it's just me, but I laugh hard when my 333 point fateweaver gets transformed into a squig! In a game very much focused on luck, I don't think that this is a problem. Besides, it is there really to hold back the Daemons themselves, who have some really strong combos. I'd laugh my ads off if I kept destroying my khorne units again and again! But maybe it's because I do not play competitively, in which case I can't say anything because that seems to ruin the hobby for me.

Just my two cents

The challenge then is to be able to respond to the random occurrence and still triumph. Sounds like fun to me

It's cinematic, and it makes up for the very little amount's of shooting there are in the daemon book.

If it were me, I wouldn't find that psyker thing too scary. you have around a 1/2 chance of getting that result per game, then a 1/2 chance of killing them near enough, which means it will only ever actually happen, in 1/4 games. And if you have no psykers, like many armies, it will never happen. And unless it happens on the first few turns, your psyker might be dead anyway, making it null and void.

Plus, I do not believe the flying hive tyrant is affected by it, as it's not a snapshot, but this may well be a whole other can of FAQ worms I am opening.

Point being, daemon's benefit from the fact that the warpstorm can soften up unit's. The 5 most likely result's on 2d6, are either the randomly hurting unit's on a 6+, or the result's that do nothing. It's only on a big fluke, do they get any of the good ones like the psyker popper. And they are just as likely to get the -1 to their own saves, or the whole , you know, armywide instability test, which could mutilate all your units

Guys I do play in tourneys but I am not a waac player in fact I have won best sports man over 5 times.

So I think I have some cred when talking about this from a casual gamers POV. Read the OP you are playing a buddy you took the time on a Saturday to get a game in and now because of one dice roll before any shots have been fired lets say the deamon player has the lord of change he dies thats 250pts in your list dead before any shots have been fired I think that would be incredibly frustrating and not any fun for both players.

 MDizzle wrote:
Guys I do play in tourneys but I am not a waac player in fact I have won best sports man over 5 times.

So I think I have some cred when talking about this from a casual gamers POV. Read the OP you are playing a buddy you took the time on a Saturday to get a game in and now because of one dice roll before any shots have been fired lets say the deamon player has the lord of change he dies thats 250pts in your list dead before any shots have been fired I think that would be incredibly frustrating and not any fun for both players.

It's exactly the same as getting a flukey shot with a tank weapon and instant killing their HQ turn one. Unlikely? Yes. Frustrating? ...No I'd say it would be a "OMGWTF, that was just...wow xD" moment.

A roll of 11 on the Warp Storm Table is not nearly as annoying as mind shackle scarabs or that stupid Necron pokemon ball.

 Madcat87 wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:


Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils? Or you fail a leadership test? Or a reserve test? Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking? Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch? Same with Rending?

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Every single example you just said there can be influenced by the actions of the player and can be controlled, the random warpstorm table can't be controlled.

I hate it.

A lot of people seem to be using the pathetic excuse that you shouldn't complain about randomness in a game based around dice rolling. This ofcourse ignores the fact that every other roll in a game I make is because of decisions I have made. I can increase or decrease my chance of success by the decisions I make while playing game. This warpstorm table I have no power over.

For me personally this warpstorm table and a lot of the other randomness in the daemons codex breaks a personal game design philosphy that a game should never take control away from the player. If I lose or win a game I want it to be because I made the right decisions at the right time not because I got luck or unlucky on a random table that I have no control over. The CSM codex and their forced challenges is another example of taking control away from the played and I have seen many a player complain about things not going their way because they were forced to issue the challenge.

I'm actually very worreid about the direction GW is taking with the game and I am very worried about what a future Ork codex will look like.

I think this is a really good comment and well phrased; an exalt to you sir.

I agree with your sentiments: randomness (and therefore dice rolling) is acceptable; but should ideally have an element of control. It's when it gets taken out of your hands that it becomes questionable IMHO; particularly if the effects are widespread/influential.

 Just Dave wrote:

 Madcat87 wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:


Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils? Or you fail a leadership test? Or a reserve test? Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking? Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch? Same with Rending?

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Every single example you just said there can be influenced by the actions of the player and can be controlled, the random warpstorm table can't be controlled.

I hate it.

A lot of people seem to be using the pathetic excuse that you shouldn't complain about randomness in a game based around dice rolling. This ofcourse ignores the fact that every other roll in a game I make is because of decisions I have made. I can increase or decrease my chance of success by the decisions I make while playing game. This warpstorm table I have no power over.

For me personally this warpstorm table and a lot of the other randomness in the daemons codex breaks a personal game design philosphy that a game should never take control away from the player. If I lose or win a game I want it to be because I made the right decisions at the right time not because I got luck or unlucky on a random table that I have no control over. The CSM codex and their forced challenges is another example of taking control away from the played and I have seen many a player complain about things not going their way because they were forced to issue the challenge.

I'm actually very worreid about the direction GW is taking with the game and I am very worried about what a future Ork codex will look like.

I think this is a really good comment and well phrased; an exalt to you sir.

I agree with your sentiments: randomness (and therefore dice rolling) is acceptable; but should ideally have an element of control. It's when it gets taken out of your hands that it becomes questionable IMHO; particularly if the effects are widespread/influential.

Mysterious objectives, your objective explodes and kills your scoring unit.

Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

The point of the warpstorm table, is that it has the potential to be powerful, or detrimental. Rather than giving you yet another thing to choose from, they instead said "Right, understand if you are playing daemons, you are playing an unpredictable force. While what you -could- do is powerful, you have no guarantees, and will have to work around the bad, to utilize the good.

Having an army that can't be predicted, like say, I can predict how a marine army will work the moment I see it on the board, but with daemons it will be different every time, is an advantage, one that is unique to daemons. Other armies get their own advantages (Scoring terminators, being good at range, being able to bring lots of tanks, being able to spam troops, ex, ex.), the advantage of daemons, is that they are unpredictable.

 Madcat87 wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:


Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils? Or you fail a leadership test? Or a reserve test? Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking? Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch? Same with Rending?

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Every single example you just said there can be influenced by the actions of the player and can be controlled, the random warpstorm table can't be controlled.

Fateweaver.

If you guys that like the warp storm chart are so in to it I have a deamon army for sale BTW!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/200901477801?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649

I like the idea of it, considering that Daemons are supposed to be very chaotic, very unpredictable to fight, it works exactly as intended.

Setting up a strategy to kill a horde of Daemons fails because of the warp storm chart, because now your Daemons have chewed on a key part of your foce and switched positions across the table.

So what? This is what Daemons should do.

Random choices like this will certainly effect the game. Like the CSM boon chart. Or generating your psyker abilities from the new charts. The warp, pyskers, daemons, are meant to be chaotic, random, and very unpredictable.

Those using them, and fighting against them, will probably have to change their game plan mid fight due to a massive random occurance.

Randomness, however, will make them less a Competetive team to play as, but I still find it fun.

It's annoying and unnecessary, I really wish Phil didn't add it in.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Madcat87 wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:


Major game-changing event, you mean like when a psyker perils? Or you fail a leadership test? Or a reserve test? Or get a bad scatter roll for deepstriking? Or your opponent gets a lot of 6s on overwatch? Same with Rending?

Dude, EVERY role you make in 40k is potentially game changing. Adding ONE MORE isn't going to make it that much worse...

Every single example you just said there can be influenced by the actions of the player and can be controlled, the random warpstorm table can't be controlled.

Fateweaver.

Or any warlord that rolls for Lord of Fate on th Warlord table...

 MDizzle wrote:
If you guys that like the warp storm chart are so in to it I have a deamon army for sale BTW!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/200901477801?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649

If you were selling the individual units I might have bought some off you.

I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

Sounds fun to me.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

And we need something against eldar, as now eldrad is seriously scary for anyone not playing khorne, or pure hordes.

 Evileyes wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

And we need something against eldar, as now eldrad is seriously scary for anyone not playing khorne, or pure hordes.

Don't forget Slaanesh stuff like fiends can also mess up psykers.

 MDizzle wrote:
Guys I do play in tourneys but I am not a waac player in fact I have won best sports man over 5 times.

So I think I have some cred when talking about this from a casual gamers POV. Read the OP you are playing a buddy you took the time on a Saturday to get a game in and now because of one dice roll before any shots have been fired lets say the deamon player has the lord of change he dies thats 250pts in your list dead before any shots have been fired I think that would be incredibly frustrating and not any fun for both players.

If everything is that agreeable between you and your opponent, then just ignore the result. Between friends the rules are more like guidelines anyway

Alternatively, suck it up and see what you can pull out of the hat with a disadvantage.

 Evileyes wrote:
Mysterious objectives, your objective explodes and kills your scoring unit.

Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

You know that most people hate mysterious objectives/terrain and don't play with them, right? The reasons are exactly the same.

I am starting a demon army because of how much I like the warp storm table and the gifts table. It adds so much variety from game to game I think it would be really fun. I also love the screaming bell from fantasy that thing is so much fun.

 gaovinni wrote:
Sounds fun to me.

This is the book summed up. You can build tricky lists and play with the best of them, but at the end of the day it's still fun to play.

I can't wait to see the nercon, GK and IG books get updated this way, the anger will be greater than the sun.

So the chart is OP?
Easy.
Flamers, screamers, crushers and fate took the nerf bat to the face to make up for this.

Also, daemons allways were random, which is why i started them in the 1st place.
Actually had a huge daemon army before it became seperate from chaos.

Adds to the fun IMHO.

 Jackal wrote:
So the chart is OP?

No, the chart is annoying. The objection has nothing to do with whether it's balanced on average or not, it is that it's poor game design to add a huge random element like that.

Do you guys think this chart is bad for the game as whole?

 MDizzle wrote:
Do you guys think this chart is bad for the game as whole?

I do not, the game is about having fun and this furthers that goal.

 MDizzle wrote:
Do you guys think this chart is bad for the game as whole?

Yes. It is bad every time a demon army is present in a game, and it's bad because it's part of GW's trend of adding lots of "cinematic" random tables. Random warlord traits/psychic powers/mysterious objectives/mysterious terrain are some of the worst things about 6th edition and GW can't seem to figure out that they're a very bad idea. I don't care all that much about demons since I hate the army and would be happy if GW removed them from the game entirely, but it is a bad sign for more important armies in the future.

Not at all. It looks like fun, the odds of an extremely important /deadly result occurring are low, and usually the odds are also good (or better, say 3 vs. 11 if your opponent has no psykers) of the daemon player suffering too. It's not just a random roll to screw your opponent.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
Mysterious objectives, your objective explodes and kills your scoring unit.

Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

You know that most people hate mysterious objectives/terrain and don't play with them, right? The reasons are exactly the same.

Nobody hates mysterious objectives. They are completely fine, and actually help balance the game a bit and improve it, because 2/6 of them help scoring units shoot flyers. I don't think I've played in any events that didn't use them except for the first couple months of 6th, when everyone was scared and kept it really conservative.

Mysterious Terrain is more iffy, and I've only played in one event so far that used it, but I didn't find it too crazy in that event.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
Mysterious objectives, your objective explodes and kills your scoring unit.

Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

You know that most people hate mysterious objectives/terrain and don't play with them, right? The reasons are exactly the same.

Then how about I just go out and say, daemon's need something good up their sleeve. They are the only army, after all, that has another army, that has the sole purpose of destroying them. I don't think it's a coincidence that daemon's got a 1/11 chance of getting an anti psyker ability, when grey knight's have a 1/1 chance of having anti-daemon abilities on every model, for every turn.

I'd say making it random is more fair and more fun than guaranteeing you will have something to kill another army, but there you go.

God i'm not looking forward to facing grey knight's now...force weapons on everyone mean anything with more than one wound is screwed royally. Which is, pretty much anything that isn't troops.

Let's imagine the space marines, got a weapon, that when fired, killed an enemy psyker outright, on a roll of 2d6, with a double 6 making it happen. And then they took a leadership test on 3d6 to see if they could avoid it.

No-one would ever take that weapon, even if it were 5 point's. Because the odd's of actually killing someone with it, are tiny. Mountain out of a molehill

What about Stormlord, or any gun really?....

As a whole, the chart is a bonus for daemons, its a very similar effect to playing Skaven in fantasy where you will occasionally blow up a thing or two, but usually something good will happen to the other guy.

Is it annoying? It is as annoying as anything else in other peoples army that take time. Facing off against 200+ gaunts, guardsmen or boyz is just as 'annoying' in that they take time, I have no say in what they are doing to me, and random luck (LD tests, excellent shooting, ect.) could fark me over.

This new book does a much better job representing a warp rift opening up. Its not the army I'll be playing, but its a hell of a lot more fun than playing solitaire against huge gun lines.

 Evileyes wrote:
Then how about I just go out and say, daemon's need something good up their sleeve.

Then balance them properly. As I said already, the objection is not that the table is overpowered, it's that GW's idea of "cinematic" randomness isn't fun.

I'd say making it random is more fair and more fun than guaranteeing you will have something to kill another army, but there you go.

No it isn't. Because:

1) It also applies to armies that aren't GK. If GK and their anti-demon abilities are a problem then you either nerf GK or give demons an anti-GK ability to balance it.

2) It isn't consistent enough to be a balancing factor. The majority of the time when you don't roll the right effect it isn't fun because your army is too weak, and when you do get lucky and roll it you're not having much fun either because you just dominated your opponent because the dice said so, not because you earned a victory.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
Then how about I just go out and say, daemon's need something good up their sleeve.

Then balance them properly. As I said already, the objection is not that the table is overpowered, it's that GW's idea of "cinematic" randomness isn't fun.

I'd say making it random is more fair and more fun than guaranteeing you will have something to kill another army, but there you go.

No it isn't. Because:

1) It also applies to armies that aren't GK. If GK and their anti-demon abilities are a problem then you either nerf GK or give demons an anti-GK ability to balance it.

2) It isn't consistent enough to be a balancing factor. The majority of the time when you don't roll the right effect it isn't fun because your army is too weak, and when you do get lucky and roll it you're not having much fun either because you just dominated your opponent because the dice said so, not because you earned a victory.

Then it's just your opinion. I beleive the random is fun, you don't. But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

Demons getting access to soul-destroying, yet random, warp-storms...I don't play demons, nor have I fought a demon army, and that sounds f'ing cool.

Sure it'll suck when my Librarian fails his leadership and explodes into a demon, but hell, them's the breaks. Honestly I think the demons needed something cool and possibly game breaking given how they've been treated over the last edition.

People going to rage? Of course. Will it matter? Probably not. Don't like the rule? Find a way to deal with it, react and counter your enemy, don't just call cheese and stomp off.

 Evileyes wrote:
I beleive the random is fun, you don't.

What exactly is fun about it?

But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

You're forgetting the part where this also applies if you're playing against demons. If you want to avoid GW's stupid design choices you have to refuse to play against demons, and I think it should be pretty obvious why this is a bad thing.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
I beleive the random is fun, you don't.

What exactly is fun about it?

But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

You're forgetting the part where this also applies if you're playing against demons. If you want to avoid GW's stupid design choices you have to refuse to play against demons, and I think it should be pretty obvious why this is a bad thing.

Let me tell you a little secret. You don't have to play with or against Daemons. I really like the new codex, but I have some issues with it. I will still play with and against it. I do not generally play against Grey Knights because that is the embodiment of cheese.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
I beleive the random is fun, you don't.

What exactly is fun about it?

But I have to say, if you don't like random, it was probably a bit of a silly choice to take daemons in the first place. It's like wanting to play elite orks, or horde marines, or close combat guardsmen.

You're forgetting the part where this also applies if you're playing against demons. If you want to avoid GW's stupid design choices you have to refuse to play against demons, and I think it should be pretty obvious why this is a bad thing.

I find it fun, because every time I play my army, it won't be the same. Even with bad warpstorms, I can still win, and it will feel more fun because I will feel I won even with the odd's stacked against me slightly. I also find it cinematic. I'm not a WAAC player, I play for the fun of it.

My army won't be static and predictable, with the same formula to win in each game.

And, not playing against an army, is stupid. I play daemons, but I won't deny a game to a grey knight player, even if they are vastly more likely to beat me now. I don't like deathwing armies, but I will still play against them. I don't like that dark eldar will shred through my tough stuff, but I will still play them.

Because, it's about fun, not about winning at all costs. If I met someone who wouldn't play me, because they couldn't predict exactly what was going to happen when they played me, i'd be glad, and i'd find a player who was a bit less uptight to play.

"I don't want to play you, because if you roll well, my army will be weakened" Yeah...if any army rolls right, they will win, daemon's will just win or lose in less predictable ways.

And here I thought players hated flamers and screamers so much that they would have done anything to see them nerfed. You don't see Daemon players wearng T-shirts printed with "I lost Breath of Chaos and all I got was this lousy Warpstom Chart".

Just look forward to the chance you get to have that Tzeentch Herald go poof! Its not like your Librarian has the same Leadership issues the Daemons now have.

It would seem that this thread is split up into people in the "Fun Camp" and people in the "Fair Camp". I'm that guy sat in the middle.

To be honest, I can see this table being fine, providing that most TOs do the sensible thing and ban it. It's great for fun games, since you've got a great amount of randomness and unexpectedness going on which makes for an interesting, fun game with plenty of laughs. And, of course, if it is a fun game, and you don't like the table, most of the time you'll be able to agree with your opponent to not use it. Now, I also agree with the "Fair Camp" in that it's not, well, fair, or at least not in tournament games. The reason being is that it has the possibility to severely flip the game in one person's favour. It could blow apart the opponent's Eldrad, opening up holes and unsupported units, but at the same time an important daemon character of yours could explode. It's really not fair for either play to have this happen (especially if it goes bias either way) because it tears apart strategies that they've worked hard to implicate. The worst thing is that this is just something that happens. It's not a special rule form a unit or character, which'd be ok, because you'd have paid points for it etc etc, it's something that, if you're playing by the book, will definitely effect somebody, and usually badly.

So, tl;dr : Good in fun games, bad in tournament games, TOs should ban it.

I'm more bothered by the lack of eternal warrior, fearless and the leader ship drops. I'm not gonna shelve an army due to a "maybe" on a chart.

This is just more evidence for my theory that GW themselves are trying to kill the tournament aspect of their games. both 8th edition fantasy and 6th 40k added a lot of random effects that no one can count on. More random things added to a game makes it less predictable and thus less viable for serious competition. They couldn't stop tournaments from happening after they dropped all support for them so they are making the game less strict and armies more random. The game should just be silly fun with cool models and that's just what they are doing.

I can't beleive anyone could call this overpowered, or game breaking. Just because something is random, doesn't mean it break's tournament's. Being adaptable, -is- the mark of a good army, and if you can't adapt, and lose because of it, consider it a weakness of your army.

If you build a list, that can only win one specific way, and if any randomness throws a spanner in the works, you lose, that isn't a good army. It's a one trick pony.

It's like saying "Were playing kill points, because my army is built for it, and i'm not letting a random dice roll decide it's an objective game"

You need to be adaptable.

 The Shadow wrote:
It would seem that this thread is split up into people in the "Fun Camp" and people in the "Fair Camp". I'm that guy sat in the middle.

To be honest, I can see this table being fine, providing that most TOs do the sensible thing and ban it. It's great for fun games, since you've got a great amount of randomness and unexpectedness going on which makes for an interesting, fun game with plenty of laughs. And, of course, if it is a fun game, and you don't like the table, most of the time you'll be able to agree with your opponent to not use it. Now, I also agree with the "Fair Camp" in that it's not, well, fair, or at least not in tournament games. The reason being is that it has the possibility to severely flip the game in one person's favour. It could blow apart the opponent's Eldrad, opening up holes and unsupported units, but at the same time an important daemon character of yours could explode. It's really not fair for either play to have this happen (especially if it goes bias either way) because it tears apart strategies that they've worked hard to implicate. The worst thing is that this is just something that happens. It's not a special rule form a unit or character, which'd be ok, because you'd have paid points for it etc etc, it's something that, if you're playing by the book, will definitely effect somebody, and usually badly.

So, tl;dr : Good in fun games, bad in tournament games, TOs should ban it.

So...Because nobody paid points for it, aside from it being apart of the army itself it should go away?

What if the entire army was technically +1 points because of that chart?

 Brotherjanus wrote:
This is just more evidence for my theory that GW themselves are trying to kill the tournament aspect of their games.

I prefer to think of this as them trying to kill off their WAAC players.

Same scenario, SW goes first and uses jaws on your warlord. That'd be different though, right?

I am waiting for sob stories like "Those overpowered Tzeentch daemons killed my Eldar after he blew up my runes of cheese with a roll on the warp storm table".

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 The Shadow wrote:
It would seem that this thread is split up into people in the "Fun Camp" and people in the "Fair Camp". I'm that guy sat in the middle.

To be honest, I can see this table being fine, providing that most TOs do the sensible thing and ban it. It's great for fun games, since you've got a great amount of randomness and unexpectedness going on which makes for an interesting, fun game with plenty of laughs. And, of course, if it is a fun game, and you don't like the table, most of the time you'll be able to agree with your opponent to not use it. Now, I also agree with the "Fair Camp" in that it's not, well, fair, or at least not in tournament games. The reason being is that it has the possibility to severely flip the game in one person's favour. It could blow apart the opponent's Eldrad, opening up holes and unsupported units, but at the same time an important daemon character of yours could explode. It's really not fair for either play to have this happen (especially if it goes bias either way) because it tears apart strategies that they've worked hard to implicate. The worst thing is that this is just something that happens. It's not a special rule form a unit or character, which'd be ok, because you'd have paid points for it etc etc, it's something that, if you're playing by the book, will definitely effect somebody, and usually badly.

So, tl;dr : Good in fun games, bad in tournament games, TOs should ban it.

So...Because nobody paid points for it, aside from it being apart of the army itself it should go away?

What if the entire army was technically +1 points because of that chart?

No, that's not what I mean. (And, due to the negative effects on the chart, I very much doubt that anything has had its price altered anyway). Say this rule came with a SC that cost, say, 200 points. In this instance, it wouldn't be so bad. If you didn't playing with it as a Daemons player, you don't have to take him (talking about tournaments here, so you may not necessarily be able to "forget about it"). In addition, you'll have paid points for this rule, which justifies any horrendous mishaps for your opponent (at least a bit, anyway) and, most importantly, were you to kill this character, the storm would go away.

MarsNZ wrote:
Same scenario, SW goes first and uses jaws on your warlord. That'd be different though, right?

Exactly this. Except you are guaranteed to get jaws of the warwolf, it doesnt carry a risk of killing yourself, and it's much, much more likely to kill said psyker than this chart is.

I think this is all pre-playing rage. People complaining have not played the new army, or have maybe played it once and had a bad time. But I can assure you. It doesn't wreak games. At all.

If, for instance, daemons got to destroy one HQ of their choice before a game, i'd be agreeing that's OP. But it's a 1/11 chance per turn, of even getting the result, and even then, you still take a test to see if they survive.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Shadow wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 The Shadow wrote:
It would seem that this thread is split up into people in the "Fun Camp" and people in the "Fair Camp". I'm that guy sat in the middle.

To be honest, I can see this table being fine, providing that most TOs do the sensible thing and ban it. It's great for fun games, since you've got a great amount of randomness and unexpectedness going on which makes for an interesting, fun game with plenty of laughs. And, of course, if it is a fun game, and you don't like the table, most of the time you'll be able to agree with your opponent to not use it. Now, I also agree with the "Fair Camp" in that it's not, well, fair, or at least not in tournament games. The reason being is that it has the possibility to severely flip the game in one person's favour. It could blow apart the opponent's Eldrad, opening up holes and unsupported units, but at the same time an important daemon character of yours could explode. It's really not fair for either play to have this happen (especially if it goes bias either way) because it tears apart strategies that they've worked hard to implicate. The worst thing is that this is just something that happens. It's not a special rule form a unit or character, which'd be ok, because you'd have paid points for it etc etc, it's something that, if you're playing by the book, will definitely effect somebody, and usually badly.

So, tl;dr : Good in fun games, bad in tournament games, TOs should ban it.

So...Because nobody paid points for it, aside from it being apart of the army itself it should go away?

What if the entire army was technically +1 points because of that chart?

No, that's not what I mean. (And, due to the negative effects on the chart, I very much doubt that anything has had its price altered anyway). Say this rule came with a SC that cost, say, 200 points. In this instance, it wouldn't be so bad. If you didn't playing with it as a Daemons player, you don't have to take him (talking about tournaments here, so you may not necessarily be able to "forget about it"). In addition, you'll have paid points for this rule, which justifies any horrendous mishaps for your opponent (at least a bit, anyway) and, most importantly, were you to kill this character, the storm would go away.

We don't pay point's, because it has as many negatives for us, as positives. As I said before, there is no character giving ATSKNF, but it doesn't mean i'd call it overpowered, and demand you play without it.

It's bad results, are worse than it's good result's. double 1, everything in the army, rolls instability. That could make everything in our army, lose half or more of it's wound's. Tell me again, why I should pay for that priveledge?

 juraigamer wrote:

 Brotherjanus wrote:
This is just more evidence for my theory that GW themselves are trying to kill the tournament aspect of their games.

I prefer to think of this as them trying to kill off their WAAC players.

Have to agree. The sooner the "everything must be 'uber competitive all the time" crowd leave, the better...

I just finished my first game with the new codex today vs a good friend of mine and his Deathwing. (horrible, horrible match-up for non-Slaaneshii Daemons btw!)
He's a competitive player who likes to play to win, but unlike those who tend to belittle and rage at things like the newer tables, he sees it for what it is - a new curveball/advanatage/quirk of said army.

The Warpstorm table actually kicked me in balls today too. 1st turn I got -1 saves, 2nd & 3rd turns, Slaanesh then Nurgle did the happy-dance all over the table. (and here I am with a primarily Khorne & Tzeentch army - oops!) 4th turn at which point my buddy firmly hade the upper hand, I finally got +1 save and it nearly helped pull me back into the fight! (my HoK on the other hand... yeah, he's a real champ - rolled snake-eyes to-hit twice in a row and then copped it to a measely Librarian! )

It was solid fun though, and every single turn my friend was sweating a bit wondering what the Warpstorm would pull this coming turn and if/how it would affect how things were going.

Daemons don't get "normal" things like transports, gunlines, wargear, or even decent armour saves!
Instead, we get the ability to tailor our upgrades to a point AND the Warpstorm to provide army-wide abilities. (though only Tzeentch knows what you'll get!)

Whether it's fun or not, it's just bad design.

The chart doesn't require user input, it just _happens_. It's not a reward for good play it's just something completely random that may be good or bad.

Personally, I don't derive fun from that.

If I do something and an unexpected event happens I'll have fun (because it was unexpected and/or unusual). Like a lowly chaos cultist champion turning into a Daemon Prince.. Me making that last minute 12" charge and winning the game..

In this case you just roll every turn and stuff happens for no reason. And it MAY just win you the game or lose it all in one go. For no effort.

 Shandara wrote:
Whether it's fun or not, it's just bad design.

The chart doesn't require user input, it just _happens_. It's not a reward for good play it's just something completely random that may be good or bad.

Personally, I don't derive fun from that.

If I do something and an unexpected event happens I'll have fun (because it was unexpected and/or unusual). Like a lowly chaos cultist champion turning into a Daemon Prince.. Me making that last minute 12" charge and winning the game..

In this case you just roll every turn and stuff happens for no reason. And it MAY just win you the game or lose it all in one go. For no effort.

It's affect's are not so game-changing, that victory and defeat hinge on what you roll on that chart. At worst, it's a minor inconvenience to you or your opponent.

No more than the randomness of a blast scattering onto your own unit unexpectedly, is game changing, or ruins the fun of the game with it's randomness

It's not like the warpstorm chart became a rule in 6th ed. It became a rule in one army, and the point is, if you like the randomness, and unpredictability, you play a daemons army, and use both to your advantage, if you like rigidity, you don't play a chaotic force, you play a dependable force, and use that to your advantage.

The weakness is, you might roll bad. The benefit is, you opponent cannot rely on gimmicks, or one trick ponies, or "The internet told me how to beat your army", to best you, because your army is different every time.

It's really that simple.

 Evileyes wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

And we need something against eldar, as now eldrad is seriously scary for anyone not playing khorne, or pure hordes.

Try exploiting Eldrad's weaknesses. (I'll give you a hint: the rest of his army. Also, he's not scary to people who choose not to rely on psychers)

 Evileyes wrote:

MarsNZ wrote:
Same scenario, SW goes first and uses jaws on your warlord. That'd be different though, right?

Exactly this. Except you are guaranteed to get jaws of the warwolf, it doesnt carry a risk of killing yourself, and it's much, much more likely to kill said psyker than this chart is.

Jaws will reach roughly 5% of the enemy's deployment zone, more if you drop pod the priest or bump his movement with a Rhino. Still, you'll know where he is. You can take precautions against this by deploying your psycher in a vehicle, in reserve, further back the deployment zone or on second floor or higher of a ruin. Or in a building.

When using Jaws, t's still a shooting attack so you must still roll to hit. That's 1/3 to fail. 1/6 if he's got chooser. You're also getting a deny the witch save of at least a 5+, well it's 6+ if he's not "shooting at" your psycher but we're discussing psychers. After this you get an initiative test and we're going to assume you're not Eldrad 'cause casting Jaws in that case can be a bit daft, but rather assume you're a Space Marine who's not been touched by Slaanesh so you get a 2/3 of saving.This means you've got 14.8% chance of losing your psycher. More if he's got chooser, less if you're higher psycher level, even less if you've got anti-psycher gear such as hoods, and none if you've taken proper precautions as mentioned before - well or taken the precaution of killing the priest. Also, since the line ends when touching a friendly model the priest must be somewhat exposed.
So,
Jaws: 4/27, which you can do a lot about
Storm: 1/36, which you can't do anything about at all
...and it's this "that you can do something about" is the important bit. I think people would be playing craps if they wanted to play purely on chance, wargaming is about stacking the odds.

 The Shadow wrote:
It would seem that this thread is split up into people in the "Fun Camp" and people in the "Fair Camp". I'm that guy sat in the middle.

To be honest, I can see this table being fine, providing that most TOs do the sensible thing and ban it. It's great for fun games, since you've got a great amount of randomness and unexpectedness going on which makes for an interesting, fun game with plenty of laughs. And, of course, if it is a fun game, and you don't like the table, most of the time you'll be able to agree with your opponent to not use it. Now, I also agree with the "Fair Camp" in that it's not, well, fair, or at least not in tournament games. The reason being is that it has the possibility to severely flip the game in one person's favour. It could blow apart the opponent's Eldrad, opening up holes and unsupported units, but at the same time an important daemon character of yours could explode. It's really not fair for either play to have this happen (especially if it goes bias either way) because it tears apart strategies that they've worked hard to implicate. The worst thing is that this is just something that happens. It's not a special rule form a unit or character, which'd be ok, because you'd have paid points for it etc etc, it's something that, if you're playing by the book, will definitely effect somebody, and usually badly.

So, tl;dr : Good in fun games, bad in tournament games, TOs should ban it.

That's crazy, no to is going to ban it lol, it's part of the internal balance of codex daemons. You would sooner see them banning codex grey knights or necron flyers.

 Mahtamori wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

And we need something against eldar, as now eldrad is seriously scary for anyone not playing khorne, or pure hordes.

Try exploiting Eldrad's weaknesses. (I'll give you a hint: the rest of his army. Also, he's not scary to people who choose not to rely on psychers)

 Evileyes wrote:

MarsNZ wrote:
Same scenario, SW goes first and uses jaws on your warlord. That'd be different though, right?

Exactly this. Except you are guaranteed to get jaws of the warwolf, it doesnt carry a risk of killing yourself, and it's much, much more likely to kill said psyker than this chart is.

Jaws will reach roughly 5% of the enemy's deployment zone, more if you drop pod the priest or bump his movement with a Rhino. Still, you'll know where he is. You can take precautions against this by deploying your psycher in a vehicle, in reserve, further back the deployment zone or on second floor or higher of a ruin. Or in a building.

When using Jaws, t's still a shooting attack so you must still roll to hit. That's 1/3 to fail. 1/6 if he's got chooser. You're also getting a deny the witch save of at least a 5+, well it's 6+ if he's not "shooting at" your psycher but we're discussing psychers. After this you get an initiative test and we're going to assume you're not Eldrad 'cause casting Jaws in that case can be a bit daft, but rather assume you're a Space Marine who's not been touched by Slaanesh so you get a 2/3 of saving.This means you've got 14.8% chance of losing your psycher. More if he's got chooser, less if you're higher psycher level, even less if you've got anti-psycher gear such as hoods, and none if you've taken proper precautions as mentioned before - well or taken the precaution of killing the priest. Also, since the line ends when touching a friendly model the priest must be somewhat exposed.
So,
Jaws: 4/27, which you can do a lot about
Storm: 1/36, which you can't do anything about at all
...and it's this "that you can do something about" is the important bit. I think people would be playing craps if they wanted to play purely on chance, wargaming is about stacking the odds.

Then stack the odd's. Decide to yourself, if it's worth relying on Eldrad, if there is a 1/36 chance he might have to make a save which kills him.

Me, personally, i'd be like "Meh, he is more likely to die to his own perils than this chart, so what?" But that's just me.

It's not even like we get to pick the target. It's a random enemy psyker. So, if you have eldrad, and some farseers or warlocks or whatever eldar have these days that are psykers, it could just pop one of them instead. If it even pops it at all.

 Evileyes wrote:

 Shandara wrote:
Whether it's fun or not, it's just bad design.

The chart doesn't require user input, it just _happens_. It's not a reward for good play it's just something completely random that may be good or bad.

Personally, I don't derive fun from that.

If I do something and an unexpected event happens I'll have fun (because it was unexpected and/or unusual). Like a lowly chaos cultist champion turning into a Daemon Prince.. Me making that last minute 12" charge and winning the game..

In this case you just roll every turn and stuff happens for no reason. And it MAY just win you the game or lose it all in one go. For no effort.

It's affect's are not so game-changing, that victory and defeat hinge on what you roll on that chart. At worst, it's a minor inconvenience to you or your opponent.

No more than the randomness of a blast scattering onto your own unit unexpectedly, is game changing, or ruins the fun of the game with it's randomness

But it isnt unexpected the scattering blast is another case of a player weighing up the risk vs. reward and deciding that the risk of scattering onto your troops is worth reward of killing your enemy. This warpstorm table has none of that decision making and weighing up the risks.

A lot of the posters here need to understand that just because we are using dice doesnt mean everything that happend in the game is entirely uncontrollable.

I think the tournament scene should shift from a "win at all costs" type of mentality to a "fun with new people" mentality. Doing this would change how many people see the changes they are making by adding in things like these random effects charts. No longer would they seem like unfair/game breaking additions or arbitrary nuisances added for no discernible purpose, instead they are fun wrinkles that may blow up the wrong thing at the wrong time. The sooner people stop taking GW's games seriously the better imo.
'

 Madcat87 wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:

 Shandara wrote:
Whether it's fun or not, it's just bad design.

The chart doesn't require user input, it just _happens_. It's not a reward for good play it's just something completely random that may be good or bad.

Personally, I don't derive fun from that.

If I do something and an unexpected event happens I'll have fun (because it was unexpected and/or unusual). Like a lowly chaos cultist champion turning into a Daemon Prince.. Me making that last minute 12" charge and winning the game..

In this case you just roll every turn and stuff happens for no reason. And it MAY just win you the game or lose it all in one go. For no effort.

It's affect's are not so game-changing, that victory and defeat hinge on what you roll on that chart. At worst, it's a minor inconvenience to you or your opponent.

No more than the randomness of a blast scattering onto your own unit unexpectedly, is game changing, or ruins the fun of the game with it's randomness

But it isnt unexpected the scattering blast is another case of a player weighing up the risk vs. reward and deciding that the risk of scattering onto your troops is worth reward of killing your enemy. This warpstorm table has none of that decision making and weighing up the risks.

A lot of the posters here need to understand that just because we are using dice doesnt mean everything that happend in the game is entirely uncontrollable.

If you are scared of the warp table, take a transport. The "Random" effect's, won't hurt it as much as they hurt things out in the open.

There, I suggested a way for you to mitigate the damage of the thing. So it's not just a case of "It just happens and there is nothing I can do about it any more"

Here's another one, if you are scared of the tiny chance of your main psyker popping? Take more than one psyker, since it's random, you can ensure its unlikely your main psyker will die to it.

But to be honest, warpstorm result's, are really not very strong in comparison to the -actual shooting- that most armies get.

It doesnt matter if its a warpstorm or a vindicator, random, or planned, you should be prepared for thing's getting killed, and for your enemy to not react the way you think they will. Daemon's take that out of the equation, and rather than saying "There is a good chance he will take out this one thing" its more "There is a very slight chance of anything being hurt if I let it happen"

I really cannot beleive quite how much rage there is, over such a simple, weak, gimmicky thing in our book. One book out of 16, get's something unpredictable, and oh dear, tournament's are dead, world is over.

 Evileyes wrote:

MarsNZ wrote:
Same scenario, SW goes first and uses jaws on your warlord. That'd be different though, right?

Exactly this.

I'm sorry but "exactly this" is not supporting your way in the slightest.

List time I checked JOTWW since it's introduction was widely branded as not a good game mechanic and not very balanced. "Something similar (that I think is crappy) exist so my thing is not crappy" doesn't really strike as logical. If you don't like jaws (I'm guessing you don't, but I can't be sure), I find it strange that you approve of similar mechanic (single test, bypassing all Wounds, toughness, saves, escape mechanics, LoS, the other LoS etc..) and defend this one. I think most of the other people will say: I am pissed off when jaws eats my warlord, how does that make zapping my psyker with a single LD any better?

Also, similar to the Runes of Warding or Imhotek, it affects the whole table / every unit. Now the problem is scalability. How does it scale with different point ranges? Affecting 1 in 6 units will be different in 1k battle and different in 6k apoc game. Inversely with summoning additional unit / blowing up enemy psyker.

DISCLAMER:
I'm not saying the table is bad, because I haven't seen the whole codex. What I can try to do is show you why people are averse to the chart. It does have similarities with other "not especially loved" mechanics ("pokeball" - love that one Mohoc, jotww, RoW, Imhotek) in the game so it automatically brings negative association.

 Evileyes wrote:

 Madcat87 wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:

 Shandara wrote:
Whether it's fun or not, it's just bad design.

The chart doesn't require user input, it just _happens_. It's not a reward for good play it's just something completely random that may be good or bad.

Personally, I don't derive fun from that.

If I do something and an unexpected event happens I'll have fun (because it was unexpected and/or unusual). Like a lowly chaos cultist champion turning into a Daemon Prince.. Me making that last minute 12" charge and winning the game..

In this case you just roll every turn and stuff happens for no reason. And it MAY just win you the game or lose it all in one go. For no effort.

It's affect's are not so game-changing, that victory and defeat hinge on what you roll on that chart. At worst, it's a minor inconvenience to you or your opponent.

No more than the randomness of a blast scattering onto your own unit unexpectedly, is game changing, or ruins the fun of the game with it's randomness

But it isnt unexpected the scattering blast is another case of a player weighing up the risk vs. reward and deciding that the risk of scattering onto your troops is worth reward of killing your enemy. This warpstorm table has none of that decision making and weighing up the risks.

A lot of the posters here need to understand that just because we are using dice doesnt mean everything that happend in the game is entirely uncontrollable.

If you are scared of the warp table, take a transport. The "Random" effect's, won't hurt it as much as they hurt things out in the open.

There, I suggested a way for you to mitigate the damage of the thing. So it's not just a case of "It just happens and there is nothing I can do about it any more"

Here's another one, if you are scared of the tiny chance of your main psyker popping? Take more than one psyker, since it's random, you can ensure its unlikely your main psyker will die to it.

But to be honest, warpstorm result's, are really not very strong in comparison to the -actual shooting- that most armies get.

It doesnt matter if its a warpstorm or a vindicator, random, or planned, you should be prepared for thing's getting killed, and for your enemy to not react the way you think they will. Daemon's take that out of the equation, and rather than saying "There is a good chance he will take out this one thing" its more "There is a very slight chance of anything being hurt if I let it happen"

I really cannot beleive quite how much rage there is, over such a simple, weak, gimmicky thing in our book. One book out of 16, get's something unpredictable, and oh dear, tournament's are dead, world is over.

I am not complaining about the effectd of the table itself I am complaining about GWs design decision of taking control away from the player. This is also seen with the new heralds as you can no longer build the how you want instead you pay for the "privlege" of rolling on another table to see how useful or ehat role your herald fulfil this game.

 Macok wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:

MarsNZ wrote:
Same scenario, SW goes first and uses jaws on your warlord. That'd be different though, right?

Exactly this.

I'm sorry but "exactly this" is not supporting your way in the slightest.

List time I checked JOTWW since it's introduction was widely branded as not a good game mechanic and not very balanced. "Something similar (that I think is crappy) exist so my thing is not crappy" doesn't really strike as logical. If you don't like jaws (I'm guessing you don't, but I can't be sure), I find it strange that you approve of similar mechanic (single test, bypassing all Wounds, toughness, saves, escape mechanics, LoS, the other LoS etc..) and defend this one. I think most of the other people will say: I am pissed off when jaws eats my warlord, how does that make zapping my psyker with a single LD any better?

Also, similar to the Runes of Warding or Imhotek, it affects the whole table / every unit. Now the problem is scalability. How does it scale with different point ranges? Affecting 1 in 6 units will be different in 1k battle and different in 6k apoc game. Inversely with summoning additional unit / blowing up enemy psyker.

DISCLAMER:
I'm not saying the table is bad, because I haven't seen the whole codex. What I can try to do is show you why people are averse to the chart. It does have similarities with other "not especially loved" mechanics ("pokeball" - love that one Mohoc, jotww, RoW, Imhotek) in the game so it automatically brings negative association.

My only complaint, is that people are really making a mountain out of a molehill. I meant "Exactly this" to say, there are thing's much, much worse, than the thing's on this table. Especially with you only having a small chance of rolling something really useful.

I mean, would you rather have this fairly tame chart, or flamer/screamerspam back?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Evileyes wrote:
If, for instance, daemons got to destroy one HQ of their choice before a game, i'd be agreeing that's OP. But it's a 1/11 chance per turn, of even getting the result, and even then, you still take a test to see if they survive.

And the point is that it would be better in some ways if they just automatically got to destroy it. Auto-killing an HQ would be an ability you pay for, a decision you make, and something you know and plan to counter if you're playing against demons. Instead it's a 1/11 chance to randomly happen. You can't plan for it, you don't make meaningful choices with it, you don't do anything to deserve it, it's just "did I get lucky today". It takes more of the game out of the hands of the players and give it to the dice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Evileyes wrote:
I mean, would you rather have this fairly tame chart, or flamer/screamerspam back?

And, again, you're missing the point. It's not about balance, it's about randomness. There isn't a choice between overpowered mistakes and "cinematic" stupidity, GW could have picked the third option of making demons a balanced army without more obnoxious random tables.

Chaos is chaotic, that's part of the flavor of the army.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
If, for instance, daemons got to destroy one HQ of their choice before a game, i'd be agreeing that's OP. But it's a 1/11 chance per turn, of even getting the result, and even then, you still take a test to see if they survive.

And the point is that it would be better in some ways if they just automatically got to destroy it. Auto-killing an HQ would be an ability you pay for, a decision you make, and something you know and plan to counter if you're playing against demons. Instead it's a 1/11 chance to randomly happen. You can't plan for it, you don't make meaningful choices with it, you don't do anything to deserve it, it's just "did I get lucky today". It takes more of the game out of the hands of the players and give it to the dice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Evileyes wrote:
I mean, would you rather have this fairly tame chart, or flamer/screamerspam back?

And, again, you're missing the point. It's not about balance, it's about randomness. There isn't a choice between overpowered mistakes and "cinematic" stupidity, GW could have picked the third option of making demons a balanced army without more obnoxious random tables.

There are 15 other armies, if you don't like random, though. Daemons, are for those who do like it. No-one is forcing you to run daemons.

 Evileyes wrote:
There are 15 other armies, if you don't like random, though. Daemons, are for those who do like it. No-one is forcing you to run daemons.

And, again, it still applies if you play against demons. Unless you want to be TFG who refuses to play against certain armies you still have to deal with the random table.

Mohoc wrote:
I am waiting for sob stories like "Those overpowered Tzeentch daemons killed my Eldar after he blew up my runes of cheese with a roll on the warp storm table".

I'm waiting for even more sob stories of 3++ re-rollable bloodthirsters and T10 GUO...

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
There are 15 other armies, if you don't like random, though. Daemons, are for those who do like it. No-one is forcing you to run daemons.

And, again, it still applies if you play against demons. Unless you want to be TFG who refuses to play against certain armies you still have to deal with the random table.

And...your point? You can't stand having a few of your games having a minor random element? The game still comes down to who played better, no matter how the player rolls on the chart.

Theres a lot of people in this thread that keep saying its only 1/36 chance or 1/11 chance to maybe kill a psyker. The actual odds are 1/18 to roll an 11. And even then it's almost 50/50 the psyker will pass the ld test as most psykers are ld 10.

 Evileyes wrote:
And...your point? You can't stand having a few of your games having a minor random element?

"The random table says your expensive HQ randomly dies" isn't a minor random element.

The game still comes down to who played better, no matter how the player rolls on the chart.

The fact that the better player probably still wins doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

 Brotherjanus wrote:
I think the tournament scene should shift from a "win at all costs" type of mentality to a "fun with new people" mentality. Doing this would change how many people see the changes they are making by adding in things like these random effects charts. No longer would they seem like unfair/game breaking additions or arbitrary nuisances added for no discernible purpose, instead they are fun wrinkles that may blow up the wrong thing at the wrong time. The sooner people stop taking GW's games seriously the better imo.'

Agreed, except IME the tournament scene is already like this. There are overly-competitive people out there, but 90%+ of the good players out there are already relaxed and looking to have fun with new people (while still aiming to win games), and they regard things like the Warm Storm table, or Tzeentch Flamers & Screamers (which were far worse and deadlier), or 5th ed Space Wolves with Jaws, as interesting challenges and things to adapt to.

The guys who rant and complain are a small minority, most of whom are trying to stir up controvery to drive clicks and advertising revenue for their blogs.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
And...your point? You can't stand having a few of your games having a minor random element?

"The random table says your expensive HQ randomly dies" isn't a minor random element.

The game still comes down to who played better, no matter how the player rolls on the chart.

The fact that the better player probably still wins doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

It's one result. It affects a random psyker, most armes don't even have a psyker, but those that do, tend to have more than just one super important one. Even then, its only a 50% or so chance it works.

Mountain, out of a molehill. Seriously.

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

Mohoc wrote:
I am waiting for sob stories like "Those overpowered Tzeentch daemons killed my Eldar after he blew up my runes of cheese with a roll on the warp storm table".

I'm waiting for even more sob stories of 3++ re-rollable bloodthirsters and T10 GUO...

I was trying to be nice. I have been thinking of other cheese in the meantime. For example the fact that fiends reduce your initiative by 5, without preventing you from dropping someone below 0, instantly removing all units with less than 6 initiative from the board if they are charged by the fiends.

t's one result. It affects a random psyker, most armes don't even have a psyker

all imperials run libbies and/or rune priests , all eldar run eldrad , all tau run eldar , a lot of DE run seers as ally , all nids hav psykers , , chaos runs tyfus in zombi builds and offten sorc as a second HQ , GK run psykers . So yeah BT and sob dont run psykers , neither do orcs because their suck and necron ,so unless aside of those 4 there are only 3 other dex made by GW , most armies do run psykers.



my only problem with the table is that it makes the game even longer , with even more rolling . It would have been fun , if the table had random/fun stuff. units of demons teleporting around [and being able to charge] or enemy units being teleported around , something that would require skill to use or at least gave tactical options . Right now it is as "fun" as storm lords blitzing.

Its like Dreadfleet, and dreadfleet was lame.

Its like the 3rd panel in this: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/05/25

 Evileyes wrote:
It's one result. It affects a random psyker, most armes don't even have a psyker, but those that do, tend to have more than just one super important one. Even then, its only a 50% or so chance it works.

Again. You're missing the point entirely.

1) It's not about whether it's overpowered or not, it's about how random it is. There is a huge difference in results on the table, and it has nothing to do with any kind of player choices. Sometimes it has no impact, sometimes it randomly screws over one or both players. Just like various other random tables in 6th edition it takes things out of the hands of the players and gives them to random chance.

2) The relative rarity makes it worse, not better. Instead of a consistent event that you can reasonably predict and make plans for you have a rare "oops, you lose" outcome. Consider the difference between missing a shot with an average BS 2 ork vs. missing a shot with a twin-linked BS 5 model. One is something you expect to happen all the time and you don't really care about, the other makes you smash your dice in frustration.

I personally love the chart, as it adds so much to the flavor of the army. Sure, its not predictable, but hell's bells its freakin' CHAOS! Plus, I look at it as simply part of the army, just like ATSKNF with Space Marines or overpowered, undercosted units with Necrons.

Just like when playing Eldar or Space Wolves, people will stop taking psykers against Daemons, and since that's the only thing non-Daemon players are really bitching about, it will blow over pretty quick, especially after folks realize how fragile the army is.

I think the "11" roll is very, very stupid. In a 6 turn game, there's a 1/3 chance that gets rolled. I have 6 psykers in my army, 5 of them are 200+ points. I don't want to lose a Tervigon or two and a Flyrant because of a silly table, and I'd hate to auto win turn 1 because my opponent lost his army on snake eyes.

I like the chart. I think it adds great character to the army and makes the Shooting Phase interesting.

Without it Daemons would lose a lot of 'flavor'. And a lot of things to do in the Shooting Phase.

I've probably played upwards of ten games already with the new codex and it has helped me and hindered me. It has the potential to win or lose you the game but that hasn't happened to me yet.

And it won't bother me when it does, embrace Chaos in its entirety or pick a different army.

Makumba wrote:

It's one result. It affects a random psyker, most armes don't even have a psyker

all imperials run libbies and/or rune priests , all eldar run eldrad , all tau run eldar , a lot of DE run seers as ally , all nids hav psykers , , chaos runs tyfus in zombi builds and offten sorc as a second HQ , GK run psykers . So yeah BT and sob dont run psykers , neither do orcs because their suck and necron ,so unless aside of those 4 there are only 3 other dex made by GW , most armies do run psykers.

So?
The army that lives in the Warp and is made from stuff of magic itself is finally good at making all practitioners of sorcery potentially cry.
Hint: Daemons are good against psykers and will school them.
So if you want to mitigate that effectiveness, then don't build a battleplan that revolves around psychic shinanigans.

Still no seeing the problem with the Warpstorm table maaaaaybe eating a random psyker... Isn't your psykers misbehaving themselves when facing the denizens of the Warp itself something you should expect to happen? (especially when Tzeentch is watching?!)

Makumba wrote:
my only problem with the table is that it makes the game even longer , with even more rolling . It would have been fun , if the table had random/fun stuff. units of demons teleporting around [and being able to charge] or enemy units being teleported around , something that would require skill to use or at least gave tactical options . Right now it is as "fun" as storm lords blitzing.

Okay, so for maybe two weeks or so it takes us Daemon players a quick look back to the chart to remind ourselves of each effect.
Give it a chance and at most it'll take an extra 10-15 seconds most of the time to work through - hardly dragging things out.

Hell, I've played all of 1 game so far and I already know what each roll is.
Only thing to still look up right now is the S/ap of each God's happy-dance-rampage across the board. (and I plan to make a little reminder chart anyways to keep on the table for quick-reference in game.)

And I can promise that if Daemons suddenly got the ability to randomly be able to teleport about and/or charge out of teleportation, we'd have a MUCH bigger gakstorm on our hands.

After reading this Thread sometimes I think GW could print a codex that says roll on this table and on a roll of an 11 you have to pay GW 50 bucks and people would love it and say that it's fluffy because GW loves money and competitive players can pound sand.

I'm a competitive player.

This chart is less of an issue for competitive play than the current flyer disparity, or runes of warding, or the WD screamer and flamer rules.

 MDizzle wrote:
After reading this Thread sometimes I think GW could print a codex that says roll on this table and on a roll of an 11 you have to pay GW 50 bucks and people would love it and say that it's fluffy because GW loves money and competitive players can pound sand.

Pretty much.

T3 5++ save foot slogging assault army with no grenades that can screw itself in multiple ways and forces you to keep a stack of notes and roll a couple dozen dice every game to see if your army is any good? Nah, nothing wrong there. Seems legit.

"This new Necron codex doesn't seem very good. Mid tier at best; maybe Tyranid level."
- Some guys a couple of years ago.

 Mannahnin wrote:
"This new Necron codex doesn't seem very good. Mid tier at best; maybe Tyranid level."
- Some guys a couple of years ago.

To be fair, necrons was much more mellow in 5th, before the introduction of the flyer rule.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
"This new Necron codex doesn't seem very good. Mid tier at best; maybe Tyranid level."
- Some guys a couple of years ago.

To be fair, necrons was much more mellow in 5th, before the introduction of the flyer rule.

Yet by end of 5th they were considered a top tier army by a large percentage of tournament players. He's just pointing out what happens when we rush to judgement.

 cvtuttle wrote:
Yet by end of 5th they were considered a top tier army by a large percentage of tournament players. He's just pointing out what happens when we rush to judgement.

Wasn't this pretty obvious as soon as they were released? IIRC the general consensus was that they were a solid army, even if they weren't completely broken yet. I don't remember there being any meaningful period of "Necrons suck".

 Ravenous D wrote:

 MDizzle wrote:
After reading this Thread sometimes I think GW could print a codex that says roll on this table and on a roll of an 11 you have to pay GW 50 bucks and people would love it and say that it's fluffy because GW loves money and competitive players can pound sand.

Pretty much.

T3 5++ save foot slogging assault army with no grenades that can screw itself in multiple ways and forces you to keep a stack of notes and roll a couple dozen dice every game to see if your army is any good? Nah, nothing wrong there. Seems legit.

Yeah cause its not like those units are so cheap you can field over 100 of them for under 1000 points, or that they either have 2+ cover saves, throw a crapton of S6 shots, or will rape your opponent (literally in the case of daemonettes) once they make it into assault. On top of which you have just a good a chance of screwing your opponent over as screwing yourself with warp storm. Wow, you know what I just realized? Having an equal chance to screw ether yourself or your opponent? i think they call that BALANCE

I think we call it RANDOM!

 Shandara wrote:
I think we call it RANDOM!

Random Balance

 Peregrine wrote:

 cvtuttle wrote:
Yet by end of 5th they were considered a top tier army by a large percentage of tournament players. He's just pointing out what happens when we rush to judgement.

Wasn't this pretty obvious as soon as they were released? IIRC the general consensus was that they were a solid army, even if they weren't completely broken yet. I don't remember there being any meaningful period of "Necrons suck".

No, there were tons of "Necron's Suck" and are "Tyranid Level" threads when they first came out. This continued for a while, until the first tournament wins started coming in. A very prominent group of Tourney players thought Wraiths, were BAD for a while. Once Templecon and the SVDM results came in with Necrons in first, people started changing their tune quite quickly.

 MDizzle wrote:
Imagine its a Saturday and you have met one of your buddies at the store and you set up your table and get set to play your buddy is paying Chaos Deamons and you are playing SW and you have a Rune Priest as your Warlord and HQ.

The deamon player gets first turn he moves all his models and then he moves to the shooting phase. He rolls an 11 on the chart and points to your warlord he makes you take a leadership test on 3d6 with no saves of any kind allowed and if you fail your Rune priest is dead and a Herald of the deamon players choice is set up 6 inches away from the RP.

I would like to ask how is this fun? Think how fun it would be if it were the swarmlord it's any enemy phyker BTW.

The odds of the swarmlord dying are pretty darn small.
Most 'nid players will have at least 4 psykers. That's a 25% of the swarmlord being targeted.
Look at the chart below. There is an 5.55% chance of the 11 being rolled.
Then there is a 50% of rolling greater than LD 10 on 3d6.
25% * 5.55% * 50% = .69% of it happening per turn.


Even if you only have one psyker, the chances of it dying are .277% per turn. Those are not very high odds.

Well, it is also theoretically possible for the Daemon player to set up his army and then lose turn 1 if they roll very very very very badly due to rolling snake eyes on the Warp Storm and then roll box cars on all his units. Anyone know what the chances of that happening are if you had say 7 units in your army?

Very unlikely, for all those events to happen:
EDIT:

(1/36)^8 even

1 in 2.821.109.907.456 or so?

I suck at math!

 juraigamer wrote:


I prefer to think of this as them trying to kill off their WAAC players.

So Long Fangs, Vendettas and Necron flyers are all going to be 0-1 choices in the next FAQ, right?

Randomness for me but not for thee is an unbalancing factor. It's not even that it keeps you from playing your army the way you'd like to, but it's usually done so badly that it often has the opposite effect of what they tried to do in the first place.

Example: My Chaos Lord on a bike is very fun and killy. He should -want- to be a glory hound and wreck enemy characters. He even has a rule saying so! Unfortunately, because of a random talbe, I am afraid when he WINS challenges. He can turn into a spawn through no bad call of my own, or turn into a Daemon Prince (supposedly a good thing), losing all the stuff I bought him to make him do what I want to do. In fact, making me even remove the model I bought and converted. This is seriously bad design.

Example 2: Much is being made of the fact that the more egregious Warp Storm effects happen only on a 1/36 chance. Those are the odds of boxcars and snake eyes on 2d6, and they pop up in pretty much every game. Warp Storm means between 5-7 rolls a game, assuming one side does not get swept, and the effects are inescapable. It's not like Mindshackle scarabs where I can avoid CC if I don't want to risk my heavy hitter turning coats, or even flyer spam where I can buy a quad gun and cross my fingers. Result turns up, you test and likely lose your Swarmlord, Avatar or Draigo, no matter where they are. There's no mitigating factor, nothing to plan for or counter it. It may as well be a gerbil there rolling dice for your army instead of you.

It's almost like it's some kind of fear based psyker defence...

No way around it? Aside from taking multiple psykers, not taking psykers, using high Ld psykers, taking Ld reroll powers or it not even coming up in the 1/3 ish chance i think someone quoted, in any game.

Putting all your eggs in one psyker basket now runs the risk of you coming up against a daemon player and the stars aligning and your crutch getting blown out from beneath you. It's something you can plan for and now need to. May as well complain because the tourney you went to drew you against 3 Necron bakery lists back to back, that was random too.

I'm a Nid and Eldar player so this can actually hurt me badly but it's just another ability to take into account when sculpting your army. There are ways to mitigate the effectiveness of the ability but if you don't want to plan for them then expect to occasionally get your ass kicked by them, no diffrent to trying to ignore other army elements. You can bet the Daemon player will have those instability rules in his mind when making his army in case he snake eyes it.

Personally I think the Storm sounds great,

I played against the new dex over the weekend. And I have to say, the warpstorm table isn't something worth getting butt hurt about. Stormlord with a crono is more infuriating than the warpstorm table. Every turn my opponent rolled an effect of roll a 6 and the unit takes blah blah hits. It was more or less equated to if bloodletters shot bolters at me for a round. I did lose a psyker to being transformed into a herald. Even at that I was not even phased. I think my exact words were "Oh, cool."

This isn't even close to the rage of a thousand super novas I've seen people display over Imo shooting lightning out of his butt at something. Bottom line, suck it up. Mt. out of Mole...

 Goat wrote:
I played against the new dex over the weekend. And I have to say, the warpstorm table isn't something worth getting butt hurt about. Stormlord with a crono is more infuriating than the warpstorm table. Every turn my opponent rolled an effect of roll a 6 and the unit takes blah blah hits. It was more or less equated to if bloodletters shot bolters at me for a round. I did lose a psyker to being transformed into a herald. Even at that I was not even phased. I think my exact words were "Oh, cool."

This isn't even close to the rage of a thousand super novas I've seen people display over Imo shooting lightning out of his butt at something. Bottom line, suck it up. Mt. out of Mole...

Nothing you've mentioned addresses situations where the outcomes of games can be changed arbitrarily with no connection to what has happened in previous turns.

It seems as though this whole thread is split between people who approach 40k as a more passive, cinematic experience where the goal is to shuffle one's army mans around the board and simply "see what happens" and others who actually enjoy employing tactics and strategy and dislike minimizing their impact on who wins the game. Neither approach is superior to the other (they each simply represent a different way of deriving enjoyment from the game), but people from each camp will naturally react differently (and predictably) to the introduction of the warp storm chart.

 Danny Internets wrote:
Nothing you've mentioned addresses situations where the outcomes of games can be changed arbitrarily with no connection to what has happened in previous turns.

This past weekend I was playing a daemon prince in my CSM army. I cast 'boon of change' on myself on turn 4 and turned my 305 point daemon prince into a spawn.
With one dice roll I completely changed the outcome of the game, with no connection to what happened in previous turns.

This has been in the CSM book since it was released. How is it different now? Because it can now also bone the opponent in addition to the CSM player?

You are not required to cast the boon though.

Warp Storm is automatic.

Well I dont think the table will be banned in tournies as someone else in the thread suggested.

I know that if a TO said "Oh your playing that codex, yeah you can only use these things", then I wouldnt be attending.

Why aren't we talking about how broken and OP heroic morale is on daemonic instability? omg double 1's I just got back everything you thought you killed. GG bro.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xeriapt wrote:
Well I dont think the table will be banned in tournies as someone else in the thread suggested.

I know that if a TO said "Oh your playing that codex, yeah you can only use these things", then I wouldnt be attending.

I agree here. If some TO wanted to sit on some high horse and dismember a codex for whatever reason. Than they should look into all dex's and take out the crap everyone on the internet complains about. There would be a lot of blank pages in a lot of armies codex.

I love how people talk about armies being bland, expensive, bad models, or any of the other crap people complain about for basically no reason and when GW finally adds something with some more flavor people also complain.

The chart is random and mostly irrelevant. So runes of warding on eldar are unbalanced then? leadership tests on 3d6 that cause auto wounds? Seems like a pretty similar thing to me.

 Goat wrote:
Why aren't we talking about how broken and OP heroic morale is on daemonic instability? omg double 1's I just got back everything you thought you killed. GG bro.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xeriapt wrote:
Well I dont think the table will be banned in tournies as someone else in the thread suggested.

I know that if a TO said "Oh your playing that codex, yeah you can only use these things", then I wouldnt be attending.

I agree here. If some TO wanted to sit on some high horse and dismember a codex for whatever reason. Than they should look into all dex's and take out the crap everyone on the internet complains about. There would be a lot of blank pages in a lot of armies codex.

I think the double ones for instability isn't really that big a deal because you don't see double ones very often and if you do you'd have to have lost combat epically along with a large amount of daemons for it to make a large impact.
In the event double ones do come up Id say its more likely you will only be getting a few guys back.

 Danny Internets wrote:

 Goat wrote:
I played against the new dex over the weekend. And I have to say, the warpstorm table isn't something worth getting butt hurt about. Stormlord with a crono is more infuriating than the warpstorm table. Every turn my opponent rolled an effect of roll a 6 and the unit takes blah blah hits. It was more or less equated to if bloodletters shot bolters at me for a round. I did lose a psyker to being transformed into a herald. Even at that I was not even phased. I think my exact words were "Oh, cool."

This isn't even close to the rage of a thousand super novas I've seen people display over Imo shooting lightning out of his butt at something. Bottom line, suck it up. Mt. out of Mole...

Nothing you've mentioned addresses situations where the outcomes of games can be changed arbitrarily with no connection to what has happened in previous turns.

It seems as though this whole thread is split between people who approach 40k as a more passive, cinematic experience where the goal is to shuffle one's army mans around the board and simply "see what happens" and others who actually enjoy employing tactics and strategy and dislike minimizing their impact on who wins the game. Neither approach is superior to the other (they each simply represent a different way of deriving enjoyment from the game), but people from each camp will naturally react differently (and predictably) to the introduction of the warp storm chart.

Let's imagine this as a real war then, set in the 40k universe. Not even tzeentch can get absolutely everything to go exactly as planned. You should expect some random thing's to go wrong, even if it's as simple as draigo having a cold on the day of the battle, or bad weather, or, in the case of facing daemon's, the sky raining fire, and psyker's being at increased risk.

Hell, in real war's, random stuff can affect the outcome, an epidemic of some minor disease, can swing the tide of a battle, and it's not something you can affect, or prevent, it's just the way it is. You can plan, and plan, and something can still go wrong. It's just the way of war.

 Xeriapt wrote:

 Goat wrote:
Why aren't we talking about how broken and OP heroic morale is on daemonic instability? omg double 1's I just got back everything you thought you killed. GG bro.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xeriapt wrote:
Well I dont think the table will be banned in tournies as someone else in the thread suggested.

I know that if a TO said "Oh your playing that codex, yeah you can only use these things", then I wouldnt be attending.

I agree here. If some TO wanted to sit on some high horse and dismember a codex for whatever reason. Than they should look into all dex's and take out the crap everyone on the internet complains about. There would be a lot of blank pages in a lot of armies codex.

I think the double ones for instability isn't really that big a deal because you don't see double ones very often and if you do you'd have to have lost combat epically along with a large amount of daemons for it to make a large impact.
In the event double ones do come up Id say its more likely you will only be getting a few guys back.

That was the intended context of the post. It doesn't happen that often so for all of the outrage of the warpstorm chart, people need to sit back and have a coke and a smile. Yes I understand that something not under your control, whatever that means in a dice game, ruins your master strategic plan for domination... you have to take it for what it is. Part of the army. Necrons have reanimation protocals, space wolves have wolf things, guard has bodies and tanks... armies have things to make them stand out. Otherwise we'd all be playing the same armies, have access to the same units, with all of the same statlines. And even than you wouldn't have a balance.

Dice man... freaking dice, how do they work?

 Goat wrote:
Why aren't we talking about how broken and OP heroic morale is on daemonic instability? omg double 1's I just got back everything you thought you killed. GG bro.

Because that's not a big deal? If they fail their leadership test, they get sucked back into the warp. If the assault went particularly bad and they ended up losing by more than five, then double ones are literally the only thing keeping them from completely and immediately disappearing from the board. With any of the troop daemons, you have a 50% chance of taking extra wounds if you lose by even ONE.

And all you guys whining about "OMG ON 11 A PSYKER GETS POSSESSED" or "ZOMFG YOU GET A NEW UNIT ON 12", have you read the other eight results? One of them includes the possibility of the ENTIRE ARMY BEING DESTROYED INSTANTLY. How OP is that now?

You want something to whine about? What about taking eight Heralds of Tzeentch with Psyker Mastery 3 in squads of 15 Pink Horrors. That's Assault 36D6 S6 shots from one unit. Cry about that, not about the unlikely chance that one of your psykers gets overpowered by the magic energy that he's stealing from the people he's fighting or the extra unit that can try to deepstrike onto the board.

 xSPYXEx wrote:

 Goat wrote:
Why aren't we talking about how broken and OP heroic morale is on daemonic instability? omg double 1's I just got back everything you thought you killed. GG bro.

Because that's not a big deal? If they fail their leadership test, they get sucked back into the warp. If the assault went particularly bad and they ended up losing by more than five, then double ones are literally the only thing keeping them from completely and immediately disappearing from the board. With any of the troop daemons, you have a 50% chance of taking extra wounds if you lose by even ONE.

And all you guys whining about "OMG ON 11 A PSYKER GETS POSSESSED" or "ZOMFG YOU GET A NEW UNIT ON 12", have you read the other eight results? One of them includes the possibility of the ENTIRE ARMY BEING DESTROYED INSTANTLY. How OP is that now?

You want something to whine about? What about taking eight Heralds of Tzeentch with Psyker Mastery 3 in squads of 15 Pink Horrors. That's Assault 36D6 S6 shots from one unit. Cry about that, not about the unlikely chance that one of your psykers gets overpowered by the magic energy that he's stealing from the people he's fighting or the extra unit that can try to deepstrike onto the board.

We are not saying that the warp storm chart is OP we are saying its bad for the game for a few reasons.

1. Killing someones HQ on some random roll will piss people off I like having fun not making people mad
2. Deamon player killing his own army could wildly swing the game making the guy across the table feel like he did nothing to win the game.
3. Free Scoring unit that deep strikes in the shooting phase is going to win the deamon player games if he/she roll box cars in the late game making the deamon player feel he did nothing to win the game and just lucked out.
4. Blast templates scattering all over the field of play randomly killing things is going down the same road.

This is not good for the game because people that don't want play Chaos deamons still have to deal with this chart and the chart IMHO makes for a bad game of 40k I would feel as if I just wasted 3 hours if any of the things happened like they are really likely too happen rolling on the chart as much as you have to.

Warp storm is the dumbest idea GW has had in years.

tgf wrote:
Warp storm is the dumbest idea GW has had in years.

So was the IG codex, Space Puppy Long Fangs, Necron Flyers, JotWW.... hear this every time a new codex comes out.

I think the table is a great, fun addition to the army. Of course people who only care about winning tounaments are butt-hurt about it. Those of us who like to play to have fun don't think the sky is falling...yet.

Samurai_Eduh wrote:
I think the table is a great, fun addition to the army. Of course people who only care about winning tounaments are butt-hurt about it. Those of us who like to play to have fun don't think the sky is falling...yet.

This attitude of hate towards tourney players is not the issue I think its worse for the casual player Neil from the 11th company posted this and I think it says it all.

I actually do find this level of randomness much less entertaining in casual play than competitive play. In a competitive scene, you are always hedging your bets against odds and used to getting screwed.

In a casual scene, I'm generally trying to do fun things but wait, I can't beacuse I just rolled something stupid on a chart. Hell, using this, I can't even theoretically sand bag a weaker opponent because he might kill himself before my eyes.

This goes beyond competitive and casual play though and extends into way more in this book than the Warp Storm chart.

There are SEVERAL instances of special rules in this book which ultimately just create "un-fun" scenarios. Randomness can create fun, but randomness that creates frustration as a result is NOT going to be fun, regardless of how you are playing the game.

There are several special rules in this book where it's nutshell is: "most rolls don't matter, one roll is going to really frustrate/make your opponent mad, one roll is going to really frustrate make you made."

For example, the Demonic Instability rolls. you roll double 1's or double 6's and what's going to happen is NOT "so fun random result!"... what's going to happen is one player or the other getting very frustrated while his opponent feels bad that he is getting frustrated.

It's simply poor game design. You should never design uncontrollable events into a game which will net frustration... they should always net FUN. Like GW says, fun for both YOU and YOUR OPPONENT.
- See more at: http://the11thcompany.freeforums.org/post48459.html#p48459

 MDizzle wrote:

We are not saying that the warp storm chart is OP we are saying its bad for the game for a few reasons.

1. Killing someones HQ on some random roll will piss people off I like having fun not making people mad
2. Deamon player killing his own army could wildly swing the game making the guy across the table feel like he did nothing to win the game.
3. Free Scoring unit that deep strikes in the shooting phase is going to win the deamon player games if he/she roll box cars in the late game making the deamon player feel he did nothing to win the game and just lucked out.
4. Blast templates scattering all over the field of play randomly killing things is going down the same road.

This is not good for the game because people that don't want play Chaos deamons still have to deal with this chart and the chart IMHO makes for a bad game of 40k I would feel as if I just wasted 3 hours if any of the things happened like they are really likely too happen rolling on the chart as much as you have to.

1. Because we don't already have a bunch of abilities that can already one-shot characters on a lucky roll...

2. If the Daemon player insta-gibs their entire army on Turn 1, then I'd say their dice that day were bad enough that even without the chart they would've been royally screwed!
You know what, I think Marines are bad for the game because I can't seem to ever pass more than 25% or so of my saves! We need to ban Marines so I don't feel that I've cheated myself or my opponent through bad luck!

3. And that only happens IF the Daemon player is going second AND rolls the relevent result AND sticks their deep strike.
And who says I'd feel cheated if I won that way? If all my Troops have been wiped out already and suddenly the Gods bless me with some reinforcements, I'm not about to say, "oh dear, this is 100% unfair to you Mr.Opponent, I think I'll just forget about it and you can keep your victory."

4. Yes, because Daemons are such a game-breaking gunline already. And it's not like IG can throw down 'oodles of templates that scatter about and kill random crap either...



When you fight Daemons you're now fighting the Warp itself as well. Get over it and deal with it.
(BTW, isn't that the exact same line we got fed by the masses of GK players who've just spent the past two years auto-stomping us into the ground?!)

 MDizzle wrote:

When you fight Daemons you're now fighting the Warp itself as well. Get over it and deal with it.
(BTW, isn't that the exact same line we got fed by the masses of GK players who've just spent the past two years auto-stomping us into the ground?!)

lol, Exalted!

Samurai_Eduh wrote:

 MDizzle wrote:

When you fight Daemons you're now fighting the Warp itself as well. Get over it and deal with it.
(BTW, isn't that the exact same line we got fed by the masses of GK players who've just spent the past two years auto-stomping us into the ground?!)

lol, Exalted!

I didn't write that it was a quote from a different poster

 Danny Internets wrote:
It seems as though this whole thread is split between people who approach 40k as a more passive, cinematic experience where the goal is to shuffle one's army mans around the board and simply "see what happens" and others who actually enjoy employing tactics and strategy and dislike minimizing their impact on who wins the game. Neither approach is superior to the other (they each simply represent a different way of deriving enjoyment from the game), but people from each camp will naturally react differently (and predictably) to the introduction of the warp storm chart.

The notion that Daemon players and their opponents who aren't offended by the warpstorm chart aren't competitive is pure drivel. Likewise the assumption that tactics and strategy are not affected by the random events that occur on battlefields is massively uninformed. The warpstorm table, mysterious terrain, deepstrike mishaps, perils of the warp and the like are all events that strategies must overcome. Assuming that a player is somehow less competitive because they're less likely to whine about a challenge inherent to playing a specific army or against it is just complete fail.

Sure, on an 11 your Ld 10 Librarian has a chance of becoming the Daemonic Herald everyone always warned him about if he kept playing those books. You can mitigate the threat by just taking one, or at least prepare for the slight eventuality of it. My SoB army won't see it as a problem at all. On a 3 the warpstorm chart requires the Daemon player to roll the same 3d6 leadership check against his character of ANY type. Khorne isn't immune to it, nothing is. While you're safe rolling that 10, Daemons stand a large chance of losing a character with anything over an average roll. Daemons get a random sized (5-15) unit of basic troops with a 12 result. Oh the horror! How many do you think they're going to lose with even average instability dice when the warpstorm chart comes up snake eyes?

Do Daemon players need to hone up on their skills and find a way to keep the warp storm chart from slowing down the game any more than say reanimation protocols, sure. I'm already devising warp storm tokens for the various effects of the different powers as well as warpflame tokens that will make it easier for my opponents and myself to remember what the hell is going on where.

Just don't assume that since I'm looking forward to the challege of it, I'm somehow less capable of understanding the use of interior lines or recognizing when I'm in an inferior position.

Experiment 626 wrote:
1. Because we don't already have a bunch of abilities that can already one-shot characters on a lucky roll...

Yes, jaws and others exist. Everybody knows that. The sky is blue and I like chocolate. So? Can we go back to: "Warp storm Chart is this bad for 40k?", not to: "Warp storm Chart do other similar mechanics exists?".
You say it's not bad, so you approve other mechanics that one-shot characters (like the quoted JOTWW)?

Kinda reminds me of the old RoC "Rituals of Engagement" rules. In those days, playing Daemon v Daemon armies allowed each player to establish a set number of Rules, as handed down by the Ruinous Powers, that would govern the battle.

For example, if you had agreed on one Ritual per player, it could go something like this:

Player One: "It is decreed that, on this field, no soldier may dress in red. Nor shall crimson or russet be seen."

(Both players remove any model with any red or crimson paint on its armor or uniform from the table.)

Player Two: "It is decreed that, on this field, the mettle of forces shall be tested by strength of arm alone. Those who kill from afar, or by sorcerous means, excepting that those means are performed in melee, will earn the great disfavor of the Chaos Gods."

(Both players remove any model that has no close-combat attack, or WS 0, and any sorcerer or psyker with no CCW or CC abilities. For the rest of the battle, all units must engage opposing units in CC, or be instantly removed from the table).

... and now Turn 1 begins.

 Macok wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
1. Because we don't already have a bunch of abilities that can already one-shot characters on a lucky roll...

Yes, jaws and others exist. Everybody knows that. The sky is blue and I like chocolate. So? Can we go back to: "Warp storm Chart is this bad for 40k?", not to: "Warp storm Chart do other similar mechanics exists?".
You say it's not bad, so you approve other mechanics that one-shot characters (like the quoted JOTWW)?

The point he is making is powers/abilities that you cant control or defend against make for crappy game (dreadfleet).

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Macok wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
1. Because we don't already have a bunch of abilities that can already one-shot characters on a lucky roll...

Yes, jaws and others exist. Everybody knows that. The sky is blue and I like chocolate. So? Can we go back to: "Warp storm Chart is this bad for 40k?", not to: "Warp storm Chart do other similar mechanics exists?".
You say it's not bad, so you approve other mechanics that one-shot characters (like the quoted JOTWW)?

The point he is making is powers/abilities that you cant control or defend against make for crappy game (dreadfleet).

And yet, did the hobby, as a whole, agree to not use Warp-Quake lists? No? Well, there we go then. Feth it, ruck on.

Samurai_Eduh wrote:
I think the table is a great, fun addition to the army. Of course people who only care about winning tounaments are butt-hurt about it. Those of us who like to play to have fun don't think the sky is falling...yet.

Just no Making the game become a dice poker to avoid winning list is just bad game design. Yes, you can screw up WAAC lists but you also take the fun from people who like to play strategic. Good game design would be a much less random but much more balanced game, where there is no OP list.

I don't like the WAAC lists for the same reason as random stuff, both are dumb.

We are not the same, you can have fun that your OP units crash the chance-less other units, you can have fun the way random stuff happens and someone get screwed up for no real reason, or you can have fun planing forward, build a strategy, try to put your rights unit right time right place, take advantage of terrain....

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:

 MDizzle wrote:
After reading this Thread sometimes I think GW could print a codex that says roll on this table and on a roll of an 11 you have to pay GW 50 bucks and people would love it and say that it's fluffy because GW loves money and competitive players can pound sand.

Pretty much.

T3 5++ save foot slogging assault army with no grenades that can screw itself in multiple ways and forces you to keep a stack of notes and roll a couple dozen dice every game to see if your army is any good? Nah, nothing wrong there. Seems legit.

Yeah cause its not like those units are so cheap you can field over 100 of them for under 1000 points, or that they either have 2+ cover saves, throw a crapton of S6 shots, or will rape your opponent (literally in the case of daemonettes) once they make it into assault. On top of which you have just a good a chance of screwing your opponent over as screwing yourself with warp storm. Wow, you know what I just realized? Having an equal chance to screw ether yourself or your opponent? i think they call that BALANCE

Orks have an ass load of shooting and over a hundred models with 5+ cover saves, and its not hard to beat a green tide, the difference is Orks dont nuke themselves so its not balance, thats called unreliable, and that isnt fun, its stupid. The point is dont make rules that will piss off 99% of the people that it happens to.

 Ravenous D wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:

 MDizzle wrote:
After reading this Thread sometimes I think GW could print a codex that says roll on this table and on a roll of an 11 you have to pay GW 50 bucks and people would love it and say that it's fluffy because GW loves money and competitive players can pound sand.

Pretty much.

T3 5++ save foot slogging assault army with no grenades that can screw itself in multiple ways and forces you to keep a stack of notes and roll a couple dozen dice every game to see if your army is any good? Nah, nothing wrong there. Seems legit.

Yeah cause its not like those units are so cheap you can field over 100 of them for under 1000 points, or that they either have 2+ cover saves, throw a crapton of S6 shots, or will rape your opponent (literally in the case of daemonettes) once they make it into assault. On top of which you have just a good a chance of screwing your opponent over as screwing yourself with warp storm. Wow, you know what I just realized? Having an equal chance to screw ether yourself or your opponent? i think they call that BALANCE

Orks have an ass load of shooting and over a hundred models with 5+ cover saves, and its not hard to beat a green tide, the difference is Orks dont nuke themselves so its not balance, thats called unreliable, and that isnt fun, its stupid. The point is dont make rules that will piss off 99% of the people that it happens to.

Implying yourself and this online community is 99% of 40k players.

Dont be thick, name 1 person that likes having JoWW used successfully on them.

 Ravenous D wrote:
Dont be thick, name 1 person that likes having JoWW used successfully on them.

Name one person that doesn't play Necrons that likes Pokeballs , MSS and Imotek Lightning.

You're helping my point, those are all annoying as hell game mechanics, they should strive to avoid them. Annoying tactics/gimmicks are usually a sure fire way to wreck a sportsmenship score.

If you don't play tournies, there's no Sportsmanship Score to worry about, really.

And if a bit of wargear or a Special Rule from a codex affects the Sportsmanship Score? That's a terrible way to score a game. Sportsmanship should, primarily, be the score for Not Being A Dick at the table. Maybe a "you sure you want to approach that unit? That's my MSS-toting Lord in that mob" or something, letting the other player have an idea for what they're in for when they still have a chance to withdraw (before you assault them the next turn).

 Ravenous D wrote:
You're helping my point, those are all annoying as hell game mechanics, they should strive to avoid them. Annoying tactics/gimmicks are usually a sure fire way to wreck a sportsmenship score.

Why would you wreck a sportsmanship score over a codex rule? You don't rate the list with sportsmanship, you rate the player.

I quite like the warp storm table.

Sure, 1 result can destroy your entire army (if you roll bad...), another makes it harder for you to live (-1 to ++ saves) but it gives daemon players firepower that can hurt them as well, and there will only be a massive amount of blasts if 1 or both sides are using MSUs.

Possession only effects psykers... and only if they fail a 3D6 Ld test...

Yes it's random... but, really the entire game is random... build a bridge and get over it... change your tactics.

Mohoc wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
You're helping my point, those are all annoying as hell game mechanics, they should strive to avoid them. Annoying tactics/gimmicks are usually a sure fire way to wreck a sportsmenship score.

Why would you wreck a sportsmanship score over a codex rule? You don't rate the list with sportsmanship, you rate the player.

In a perfect system that would be the case, Ive seen people nuke scores over army plenty of times.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:
If you don't play tournies, there's no Sportsmanship Score to worry about, really.

And if a bit of wargear or a Special Rule from a codex affects the Sportsmanship Score? That's a terrible way to score a game. Sportsmanship should, primarily, be the score for Not Being A Dick at the table. Maybe a "you sure you want to approach that unit? That's my MSS-toting Lord in that mob" or something, letting the other player have an idea for what they're in for when they still have a chance to withdraw (before you assault them the next turn).

Even in casual games some people dont want to play against things that annoy them, there is a guy that runs the Tyrants legion and no one wants to play him, nice enough general, but his army is a douchelord. Its the same reason why people get butt hurt over Forgeworld, I dont know why they do but the point is that they do.

What in the Tyrants legion list is annoying? It's a watered-down Space Marine with IG ally army list that doesn't get the best units from either codex. How odd.

Honestly I prefer playing with the warp storm table than all those gifts.


GIFTS FOR THE GIFT GOD.

literally sat down for 2 hours waiting for my opponent to roll all the gifts and powers. (on the bright side the dark gods felt it right to punish him at the last moment killing his warlord (his only model on the field) on turn 4 with a roll of a 3) lol)

If you don't like possesion stop taking psykers. Nothing else on the random table is too overpowered that I can see. Considering how powerful psykers are right now the more hard counters to them the better I feel.

 Desubot wrote:
Honestly I prefer playing with the warp storm table than all those gifts.


GIFTS FOR THE GIFT GOD.

literally sat down for 2 hours waiting for my opponent to roll all the gifts and powers. (on the bright side the dark gods felt it right to punish him at the last moment killing his warlord (his only model on the field) on turn 4 with a roll of a 3) lol)

At least most (all?) of the Gifts these days are useful.. Back in the day, you could have a dude lose all his limbs and have to be carried into battle in someone else's backpack, or tied to a spawn-mount or something. Or have your head burst into flames. Or get too fat to wear regular armor, and have to beg Chaos Armor off your HQ. Or get "Uncontrollable Flatulence", which made you *real* popular in the barracks.

 Psienesis wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Macok wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
1. Because we don't already have a bunch of abilities that can already one-shot characters on a lucky roll...

Yes, jaws and others exist. Everybody knows that. The sky is blue and I like chocolate. So? Can we go back to: "Warp storm Chart is this bad for 40k?", not to: "Warp storm Chart do other similar mechanics exists?".
You say it's not bad, so you approve other mechanics that one-shot characters (like the quoted JOTWW)?

The point he is making is powers/abilities that you cant control or defend against make for crappy game (dreadfleet).

And yet, did the hobby, as a whole, agree to not use Warp-Quake lists? No? Well, there we go then. Feth it, ruck on.

+1
The number of times that happened to me...
Every single GK player at my local store would keep a Quake-list handy just for Daemons/DoA's/Drop Pod Marines. And you know what all of us who were forced to suffer got told? "It's part of the game now - deal with it."

So suck-it-up-buttercup. Us Daemons bring our random-funhouse-realm along for the ride when we party on the Myan's calander!

List tailoring is a completely different issue, besides thats what fiends were for.

 Psienesis wrote:


And yet, did the hobby, as a whole, agree to not use Warp-Quake lists? No? Well, there we go then. Feth it, ruck on.

Again tailoring.

It's not a completely different issue, not at all, and not really. What I'm getting from this is that it's OK to bring an Army that contains special rules or wargear that nukes the other army (whether that's Warp-Quake, Mindshackle Scarabs, Purifiers, a fethload of fliers, a buttload of barrage artillery, JotWW, whatever)... but a single table that's rolled, what, once? that has a chance of affecting a single character from an army that has to even contain that character-type for that result to mean anything, and if it contains multiples of that character-type its effect is randomly distributed, but has equal chance of affecting the Daemon army negatively, or at least differently, is bad?

That... just sounds like whining to me, really.

 labmouse42 wrote:
This past weekend I was playing a daemon prince in my CSM army. I cast 'boon of change' on myself on turn 4 and turned my 305 point daemon prince into a spawn.
With one dice roll I completely changed the outcome of the game, with no connection to what happened in previous turns.

This has been in the CSM book since it was released. How is it different now? Because it can now also bone the opponent in addition to the CSM player?

It was different because it was a CHOICE. You knew the results, you chose to gamble on the random table. If you don't like that random element you could have just not made that gamble. The warp storm table is not random, if you agree to play against a demon player you have to deal with it.

 Psienesis wrote:
It's not a completely different issue, not at all, and not really. What I'm getting from this is that it's OK to bring an Army that contains special rules or wargear that nukes the other army (whether that's Warp-Quake, Mindshackle Scarabs, Purifiers, a fethload of fliers, a buttload of barrage artillery, JotWW, whatever)... but a single table that's rolled, what, once? that has a chance of affecting a single character from an army that has to even contain that character-type for that result to mean anything, and if it contains multiples of that character-type its effect is randomly distributed, but has equal chance of affecting the Daemon army negatively, or at least differently, is bad?

That... just sounds like whining to me, really.

It sounds like whining, because it is whining.

 Peregrine wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:
This past weekend I was playing a daemon prince in my CSM army. I cast 'boon of change' on myself on turn 4 and turned my 305 point daemon prince into a spawn.
With one dice roll I completely changed the outcome of the game, with no connection to what happened in previous turns.

This has been in the CSM book since it was released. How is it different now? Because it can now also bone the opponent in addition to the CSM player?

It was different because it was a CHOICE. You knew the results, you chose to gamble on the random table. If you don't like that random element you could have just not made that gamble. The warp storm table is not random, if you agree to play against a demon player you have to deal with it.

So? You now have a new choice if you're expecting/know you're going up against Daemons;
a) Bring extra Psykers to help mitigate the remote chance your main psyker suddenly poofs into a new Herald
b) Don't bring any Psykers and then that result is 100% useless to the Daemon player.
c) Just live with it.

Just to show you guys how rare rolls of 1,2,11 and 12 are:

2D6 Outcome probability:
2 - 2.78%
3 - 5.56%
4 - 8.33%
5 - 11.11%
6 - 13.89%
7 - 16.67%
8 - 13.89%
9 - 11.11%
10 - 8.33%
11 - 5.56%
12 - 2.78%

3D6 Outcome probability:

Probability of a sum of 3: 1/216 = 0.5%
Probability of a sum of 4: 3/216 = 1.4%
Probability of a sum of 5: 6/216 = 2.8%
Probability of a sum of 6: 10/216 = 4.6%
Probability of a sum of 7: 15/216 = 7.0%
Probability of a sum of 8: 21/216 = 9.7%
Probability of a sum of 9: 25/216 = 11.6%
Probability of a sum of 10: 27/216 = 12.5%
Probability of a sum of 11: 27/216 = 12.5%
Probability of a sum of 12: 25/216 = 11.6%
Probability of a sum of 13: 21/216 = 9.7%
Probability of a sum of 14: 15/216 = 7.0%
Probability of a sum of 15: 10/216 = 4.6%
Probability of a sum of 16: 6/216 = 2.8%
Probability of a sum of 17: 3/216 = 1.4%
Probability of a sum of 18: 1/216 = 0.5%

 Psienesis wrote:
It's not a completely different issue, not at all, and not really. What I'm getting from this is that it's OK to bring an Army that contains special rules or wargear that nukes the other army (whether that's Warp-Quake, Mindshackle Scarabs, Purifiers, a fethload of fliers, a buttload of barrage artillery, JotWW, whatever)... but a single table that's rolled, what, once? that has a chance of affecting a single character from an army that has to even contain that character-type for that result to mean anything, and if it contains multiples of that character-type its effect is randomly distributed, but has equal chance of affecting the Daemon army negatively, or at least differently, is bad?

That... just sounds like whining to me, really.

...

Okay. You're not understanding

List tailoring is bad, tactics that piss off your opponent are bad, rules that you have no control over are bad. a table that MUST be rolled on 5 to 7 times per game that can nuke you is bad. Savvy?

I can not control when your drop pods with JotWW come in, therefore we need to ban droppods, right?

This thread is long in the tooth as it is. And we are fighting about something that is truly so inconsequential as this.

I find it fascinating that you people who cry that this Warp Storm table is bad for 40k.

It has been stated that you agree to play Daemons? You agree to play with their rules. INTACT!
The same goes to GK, Necrons, DA, BA, Tyranids, Tau, SM, CSM, Eldar, DE, Orks, Sisters, IG, THE WORKS PEOPLE!!

Forget what the results are. Forget what the comparative lists are, abilities, etc. etc.
This has become a giant shouting match of ONE TINY F-ASPECT of a NEW AND UNTRIED CODEX!

The Warpstorm Table is good because it has done EXACTLY what it was intended to do, and that is this: force people out of their comfort zones, force people to THINK, force people to REACT, force people to PLAY THE GAME. If you wanted to just run your comfortable lists of mathhammered to the result of victory because of the rules, then you, sir or madam, can go and shove your head where the sun don't shine, because you are being asinine. You have the right to either play by the rules, with the rules, or you can sell your army and not play, or you can just be TFG for being a scumbag, and then don't be surprised when people refuse to play you because of it.

Games change, get over it. Things change, get over it. The warp storm table is good because it has changed the nature of the game from being "predictable" to being "fun."

Then again, if we want to just agree my Daemons have +1 to all ++ and an additional 2000 points to make up for the lack of my special rules and my shooting, and because I say so because you say you don't want to play with the table, sure, I'll do that.

Seriously, you people who are complaining, get a life. You make me sick because you want to be TFG with the WAAC because you want to be comfortable with your win streak and never lose. *stepping down off my *

Here is some more statistics:

In a 7 round game, there is a 38% chance of rolling a warp storm result of 11. Assuming a Leadership 10 for the Psyker being hit, you have a 59.8% chance of not having your Psyker killed. Or on average you might loose a single Psyker against Daemons every 5 games or so. That is if you even play with an army that uses Psykers.

You guys have it all wrong this table creates random things that can be upsetting for both players in many different ways that's why it's bad for 40k.

Randomly creating things that upset both players? So, random things are worse than things that are deliberately broken, OP, and accepted to be such?

I disagree with you. If a random event is the only way to deal with something (which it ALWAYS IS) then the more random, the better.

It's Chaos. Random is the name of the Chaos Game. That's how Chaos was introduced to the game (check out the table of Gifts of Chaos from Slaves to Darkness and The Lost and the Damned) and is how it should have stayed.

Qui-Gon Jinn wrote:
The warp storm table is good because it has changed the nature of the game from being "predictable" to being "fun."

"Unpredictable" and "fun" are not the same thing. IMO the game is more fun when the outcome is determined by decisions made by the players, not by a random table saying "oops, I lose".

Then again, if we want to just agree my Daemons have +1 to all ++ and an additional 2000 points to make up for the lack of my special rules and my shooting, and because I say so because you say you don't want to play with the table, sure, I'll do that.

Or we could just not play a game at all. You're not going to get some ridiculous bonus to make up for losing the table, those people just aren't going to play against you unless you agree to remove it.

Seriously, you people who are complaining, get a life. You make me sick because you want to be TFG with the WAAC because you want to be comfortable with your win streak and never lose. *stepping down off my *

Imagine how little fun it is playing against TFG with a "WAAC" army. Now imagine how much less fun it is when TFG, on top of all their advantages, gets better luck on the game-changing random table.

But think of how delicious the irony will be when TFG's deathstar unit suddenly explodes in a ball of rending flesh and damonic talons...

 Psienesis wrote:
But think of how delicious the irony will be when TFG's deathstar unit suddenly explodes in a ball of rending flesh and damonic talons...

And that will also suck, because instead of beating TFG through superior play you "win" because you rolled the right result on the random table. I hardly see how this is better than just not playing TFG at all.

 Psienesis wrote:
But think of how delicious the irony will be when TFG's deathstar unit suddenly explodes in a ball of rending flesh and damonic talons...

Or you could just take The Masque. She does the same thing, just more guaranteed.

Point being, unless the game is changed to the point where every miniature has identical stats to every other unit of its type (ie, all Troops units are identical, all Heavy Support units are identical, all Elites are identical, etc), there will always be areas where TFGs can be TFGs. Whining that this randomly-generated list of effects is another tool for TFG to be TFG is missing the point that its random nature is as likely to ruin TFG's day... though if he's a smart TFG, he'll have units arranged to mitigate worst-case scenarios, which, really, any smart player should be doing.

Qui-Gon Jinn wrote:
This thread is long in the tooth as it is. And we are fighting about something that is truly so inconsequential as this.

I find it fascinating that you people who cry that this Warp Storm table is bad for 40k.

It has been stated that you agree to play Daemons? You agree to play with their rules. INTACT!
The same goes to GK, Necrons, DA, BA, Tyranids, Tau, SM, CSM, Eldar, DE, Orks, Sisters, IG, THE WORKS PEOPLE!!

Forget what the results are. Forget what the comparative lists are, abilities, etc. etc.
This has become a giant shouting match of ONE TINY F-ASPECT of a NEW AND UNTRIED CODEX!

The Warpstorm Table is good because it has done EXACTLY what it was intended to do, and that is this: force people out of their comfort zones, force people to THINK, force people to REACT, force people to PLAY THE GAME. If you wanted to just run your comfortable lists of mathhammered to the result of victory because of the rules, then you, sir or madam, can go and shove your head where the sun don't shine, because you are being asinine. You have the right to either play by the rules, with the rules, or you can sell your army and not play, or you can just be TFG for being a scumbag, and then don't be surprised when people refuse to play you because of it.

Games change, get over it. Things change, get over it. The warp storm table is good because it has changed the nature of the game from being "predictable" to being "fun."

Then again, if we want to just agree my Daemons have +1 to all ++ and an additional 2000 points to make up for the lack of my special rules and my shooting, and because I say so because you say you don't want to play with the table, sure, I'll do that.

Seriously, you people who are complaining, get a life. You make me sick because you want to be TFG with the WAAC because you want to be comfortable with your win streak and never lose. *stepping down off my *

*slow clap*

Well said sir!
If someone were to try and tell me they'd only play if I dropped my "randomly game-wrecking & unfun Warpstorm table", I'd tell 'em to p-off and instead I'd go find a real opponent to play against.

 Psienesis wrote:
Point being, unless the game is changed to the point where every miniature has identical stats to every other unit of its type (ie, all Troops units are identical, all Heavy Support units are identical, all Elites are identical, etc), there will always be areas where TFGs can be TFGs. Whining that this randomly-generated list of effects is another tool for TFG to be TFG is missing the point that its random nature is as likely to ruin TFG's day... though if he's a smart TFG, he'll have units arranged to mitigate worst-case scenarios, which, really, any smart player should be doing.

QTF. Seriously, you've got the concept. Here are quotes that are apt for this table:

"Prepare for the unknown by studying how others in the past have coped with the unforeseeable and the unpredictable."

"Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory."

If you don't want the table, never play Daemons, never play against Daemons, but then don't be surprised when you piss someone off about it. The table is good for 40k, because it forces both players to react to something that isn't there from the outset.

 Psienesis wrote:
Point being, unless the game is changed to the point where every miniature has identical stats to every other unit of its type (ie, all Troops units are identical, all Heavy Support units are identical, all Elites are identical, etc), there will always be areas where TFGs can be TFGs.

Nonsense. Unless you're defining "TFG" as "trying to optimize a list for winning games" (which is a ridiculous definition and makes you TFG) then having variety in the game has nothing to do with TFG. TFG is about cheating/rules lawyering/refusing to shower more than once a month/rude behavior/etc, not just bringing a better list than you have. These things will exist no matter what the game's rules are, you can have TFGs in a perfectly symmetrical game like chess just as easily as you can in 40k.

Also, you can have a balanced game without having identical units.

Whining that this randomly-generated list of effects is another tool for TFG to be TFG is missing the point that its random nature is as likely to ruin TFG's day... though if he's a smart TFG, he'll have units arranged to mitigate worst-case scenarios, which, really, any smart player should be doing.

You're missing the point entirely. The random chart is bad for both players. People have been gleefully celebrating how horrible it is for TFG/WAAC players, but completely missing the point that a game against a "WAAC" demon player is going to be even less fun if the WAAC player gets lucky with the random table. There isn't some magical rule that annoying players will only roll badly on the table.

Qui-Gon Jinn wrote:
The table is good for 40k, because it forces both players to react to something that isn't there from the outset.

You know what's good about forcing players to react to something that isn't there from the outset? Decisions made by the players.

So, then I must ask: which is worse for 40k as a whole, this table or the broken lists of the previous Codex+WD update?

If you want to remove this table, then please, let us also remove Preferred Enemy (Daemons) from all GK units while we're at it. ATSKNF from Space Marines? Inner Circle from Dark Angels? Mob rule for Orks?

In fact, one final thing: if you don't like what the table is and what it does, please, enlighten us with a far more "balanced" alternative.

Before things get too heated, I would like to say that I do not find this table very fun.

I play a combination of IG and BA. I do it so that I can play a semi-competitive list, I do it because I enjoy the books and I do it because it fits the background of the army I play. I like to run a few Psykers because I like what they bring to the table. Every Psyker I have is either a Dreadnought or converted in some way.

So now I can look forward to walking up to a game, setting out my converted BA librarian and then getting to remove him because my opponent rolled an 11. I don't think that is very fun for either party.

And for the record, I didn't enjoy SW JoTWW, I didn't enjoy 5th edition Grey Knights and I do not enjoy Necron Flyer Spam or the Triple Heldrake list. And somehow not liking these things because I do not find them very fun makes me a WAAC player.

Very Interesting.

 Happygrunt wrote:
So now I can look forward to walking up to a game, setting out my converted BA librarian and then getting to remove him because my opponent rolled an 11. I don't think that is very fun for either party.

Yup. You can look forward to that about 2.77% of the time, according to math early in the thread. Your odds of losing him to a S8+ hit where you fail your LoS are considerably higher.

Game design theory is a very interesting topic, but its being conflated here with a bunch of irrelevant stuff and labels with high emotional content.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
Point being, unless the game is changed to the point where every miniature has identical stats to every other unit of its type (ie, all Troops units are identical, all Heavy Support units are identical, all Elites are identical, etc), there will always be areas where TFGs can be TFGs.

Nonsense. Unless you're defining "TFG" as "trying to optimize a list for winning games" (which is a ridiculous definition and makes you TFG) then having variety in the game has nothing to do with TFG. TFG is about cheating/rules lawyering/refusing to shower more than once a month/rude behavior/etc, not just bringing a better list than you have. These things will exist no matter what the game's rules are, you can have TFGs in a perfectly symmetrical game like chess just as easily as you can in 40k.

If being an elitist means "simply not being the dumbest mother-fether in the room", then I'll be an elitist!

But, really, if you're afraid that your list is going to suddenly come entirely apart because you fell into a hole in the Warp and had your giblets gobbled by Daemons, then did you really bring a better list than the other guy? Or did you bring a list that had 1 guy who could be killed by random dice-roll, or a DCA or a IG HW squad with a fething 50-cent las-cannon? It's not the table that killed your army, it's the fact that you placed all the faith in your army in one guy. One. Flipping. Guy.

... and then Zuvassin, the Undoer, decided to feth with your plans and so ate your guy. Zuvassin, Chaos God of the Eternal Monkey-Wrench, was all up in your base, killing your guys.

 Janthkin wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:
So now I can look forward to walking up to a game, setting out my converted BA librarian and then getting to remove him because my opponent rolled an 11. I don't think that is very fun for either party.

Yup. You can look forward to that about 2.77% of the time, according to math early in the thread. Your odds of losing him to a S8+ hit where you fail your LoS are considerably higher.

Game design theory is a very interesting topic, but its being conflated here with a bunch of irrelevant stuff and labels with high emotional content.

Never mind then, math was never my strong suit. I had it in the realm of 27%, which would be upsetting.

I still don't like the table, but less so then before.

Qui-Gon Jinn wrote:
So, then I must ask: which is worse for 40k as a whole, this table or the broken lists of the previous Codex+WD update?

Sigh. "But X is bad too!" isn't a valid argument. Other things can be bad at the same time, and that doesn't mean it's any less of a stupid decision to include it.

In fact, one final thing: if you don't like what the table is and what it does, please, enlighten us with a far more "balanced" alternative.

Remove it entirely.

 Peregrine wrote:

Qui-Gon Jinn wrote:
So, then I must ask: which is worse for 40k as a whole, this table or the broken lists of the previous Codex+WD update?

Sigh. "But X is bad too!" isn't a valid argument. Other things can be bad at the same time, and that doesn't mean it's any less of a stupid decision to include it.

In fact, one final thing: if you don't like what the table is and what it does, please, enlighten us with a far more "balanced" alternative.

Remove it entirely.

Sorry, but they don't have any real reason to remove it, aside from another player's whining.

So we should also remove MSS, Warp-Quake, Eternal Warrior, Force Weapons, ID, Longfangs, TH/SS, uh... lemme think... I know I can come up with a few other things that people have QQ'd about on the forums in the past year or so.... that one Doom of Malatai power that eats brains or something through force-fields.... oh, someone kvetched about their melee-Tyranids getting shot to pieces by an IG gunline, so we should remove IG gunline armies, too. In fact, just remove the BS stat from IG entirely. They're now old-school Infantry... all cloth and leather armor with swords and a wood shield. Actually, there's been enough kvetching about both GK and SW over the last year that allows us to say, you know what? let's just rub those two Chapters out entirely. *Poof!* Gone.

Also, let's get rid of that Lucius guy. What a jerk, amiright? That Skulltaker is kind of an unmitigated ass-beater, too, isn't he? Not fair to all the other ICs whose skulls he takes. And Trazyn? Such a knee-biter. And Tachyon Arrow? It never stops. Let's just pull that out, lest it blast through someone's tank and hit their HQ right in the face. Someone could lose an eye!

I must defer to a recent article from Taco Bell (one that was surprisingly critical, given the usual “Rah! Rah! Everything is wonderful!” mantra of their ‘reviews’):

[The] Warp Storm table. The major thing to note here is that it happens at the start of each of your shooting phase, and some of the results are just unwanted and overdone. The ones that really stand out is the 11, which basically picks an enemy psyker and makes him test 3D6 for leadership. If he fails, he's killed outright and you get a free Herald of your choice. Now, I don't know about you guys, but I've never found anything that just does something to you, without any player control, for free, to be good game design. Things like Dante's mask and this just makes you start off the game angry, and frustrates the other player who has no protection against pure luck and zero skill. As you make your way through the table, you'll find that almost every roll has a consequence for a particular god, so if you have a heavily chromatic-god army, you'll be rolling a D6 every turn just in case you get hate on by a rival god. Sure, you need a 6 for something to happen, and it can very well effect your enemy more than you, but this is completely out of the player's control. Sometimes you you gain +1 to your invulnerable save army-wide, sometimes you -1 to your invulnerable. And sometimes, like the enemy psyker, you just blow up. You literally blow your up own Greater Demon before the game even starts.

Can't really disagree. I think things like the Warp Storm table are bad for 40K. All of this "cinematic gaming" and "forging a narrative" nonsense is starting to take the game away from the players, and leave it all to the random whims of some cubed objects. I'm sorry, I'd like to play the game, not watch my army get fethed over because of a bad roll on a single table each turn.

 Peregrine wrote:
It's cinematic.

*claps*

Thank you.

 Psienesis wrote:
So we should also remove MSS, Warp-Quake, Eternal Warrior, Force Weapons, ID, Longfangs, TH/SS, uh... lemme think... I know I can come up with a few other things that people have QQ'd about on the forums in the past year or so.... that one Doom of Malatai power that eats brains or something through force-fields.... oh, someone kvetched about their melee-Tyranids getting shot to pieces by an IG gunline, so we should remove IG gunline armies, too. In fact, just remove the BS stat from IG entirely. They're now old-school Infantry... all cloth and leather armor with swords and a wood shield. Actually, there's been enough kvetching about both GK and SW over the last year that allows us to say, you know what? let's just rub those two Chapters out entirely. *Poof!* Gone.

Also, let's get rid of that Lucius guy. What a jerk, amiright? That Skulltaker is kind of an unmitigated ass-beater, too, isn't he? Not fair to all the other ICs whose skulls he takes. And Trazyn? Such a knee-biter. And Tachyon Arrow? It never stops. Let's just pull that out, lest it blast through someone's tank and hit their HQ right in the face. Someone could lose an eye!

Exhalted

Chaos =/= Random.

 Evileyes wrote:
Mysterious terrain, razorwing's eat your scouts.

Yeah. And no one likes those rules either.

This game shouldn't be RandomHammer 40,000.

Qui-Gon Jinn- Post exalted because it was brilliant.

Lol at the irony of people complaining and cursing GW for the Warp Storm Table because of "random" stuff in a game that uses dice.

I don't take the "Plastic Space Army Game" seriously enough to be bothered by the Warp Storm table all that much. I''ll use my daemons and if something good happens i'll cheer. Something bad, I'll swear. Something neutral, I will be content.

"Chaos Daemons are to chaotic!!!!!"

 Psienesis wrote:
So we should also remove MSS, Warp-Quake, Eternal Warrior, Force Weapons, ID, Longfangs, TH/SS, uh... lemme think... I know I can come up with a few other things that people have QQ'd about on the forums in the past year or so.... that one Doom of Malatai power that eats brains or something through force-fields.... oh, someone kvetched about their melee-Tyranids getting shot to pieces by an IG gunline, so we should remove IG gunline armies, too. In fact, just remove the BS stat from IG entirely. They're now old-school Infantry... all cloth and leather armor with swords and a wood shield. Actually, there's been enough kvetching about both GK and SW over the last year that allows us to say, you know what? let's just rub those two Chapters out entirely. *Poof!* Gone.

You possess an unnatural ability to completely miss the point.

Again, Chaos =/= Random.

All the things you've mentioned are choices made by players, and players have ways of interacting with them during a game (avoiding them, countering them, using them, etc.). The Warp Storm table has no such counter. It exists apart from the players as something that neither of them have any control over. That's bad game design, whether you think there should be more random or not...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
So we should also remove MSS, Warp-Quake, Eternal Warrior, Force Weapons, ID, Longfangs, TH/SS, uh... lemme think... I know I can come up with a few other things that people have QQ'd about on the forums in the past year or so.... that one Doom of Malatai power that eats brains or something through force-fields.... oh, someone kvetched about their melee-Tyranids getting shot to pieces by an IG gunline, so we should remove IG gunline armies, too. In fact, just remove the BS stat from IG entirely. They're now old-school Infantry... all cloth and leather armor with swords and a wood shield. Actually, there's been enough kvetching about both GK and SW over the last year that allows us to say, you know what? let's just rub those two Chapters out entirely. *Poof!* Gone.

You possess an unnatural ability to completely miss the point.

Again, Chaos =/= Random.

All the things you've mentioned are choices made by players, and players have ways of interacting with them during a game (avoiding them, countering them, using them, etc.). The Warp Storm table has no such counter. It exists apart from the players as something that neither of them have any control over. That's bad game design, whether you think there should be more random or not...

I dunno, chaos seemed pretty random back when it first dropped in Realms of Chaos.

The nameless wrote:
Lol at the irony of people complaining and cursing GW for the Warp Storm Table because of "random" stuff in a game that uses dice.

Lol at the people who lack the reading comprehension skills to understand that that's not what's being complained about.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I must defer to a recent article from Taco Bell (one that was surprisingly critical, given the usual “Rah! Rah! Everything is wonderful!” mantra of their ‘reviews’):

[The] Warp Storm table. The major thing to note here is that it happens at the start of each of your shooting phase, and some of the results are just unwanted and overdone. The ones that really stand out is the 11, which basically picks an enemy psyker and makes him test 3D6 for leadership. If he fails, he's killed outright and you get a free Herald of your choice. Now, I don't know about you guys, but I've never found anything that just does something to you, without any player control, for free, to be good game design. Things like Dante's mask and this just makes you start off the game angry, and frustrates the other player who has no protection against pure luck and zero skill. As you make your way through the table, you'll find that almost every roll has a consequence for a particular god, so if you have a heavily chromatic-god army, you'll be rolling a D6 every turn just in case you get hate on by a rival god. Sure, you need a 6 for something to happen, and it can very well effect your enemy more than you, but this is completely out of the player's control. Sometimes you you gain +1 to your invulnerable save army-wide, sometimes you -1 to your invulnerable. And sometimes, like the enemy psyker, you just blow up. You literally blow your up own Greater Demon before the game even starts.

Can't really disagree. I think things like the Warp Storm table are bad for 40K. All of this "cinematic gaming" and "forging a narrative" nonsense is starting to take the game away from the players, and leave it all to the random whims of some cubed objects. I'm sorry, I'd like to play the game, not watch my army get fethed over because of a bad roll on a single table each turn.

So what?
If I take a mono Tzeentch army, then I know I could be shooting myself in the foot should Nurgle decide to take a giant crap all over the battlefield. Guess what's super shocking about this? I made an outright personal choice and am well aware of the risk involved! (hard to believe, but it's true - your own army comp can screw you over!)

How is this any different than a Daemon player running into a GK army rocking Strikes & Intercepters under the old codex? Or an IG armoured company/mech list running up against MSU melta-spam? Or a Deathwing army facing off against ap2 spam?
Here's a thought; when you theme and army, you're already potentially handi-capping yourself. The God-specific rolls are no different in this regard. It's something every single Daemon player understands.

Same deal for the chart potentially screwing over psykers. Guess what? Daemons have potent anti-psyker abilities. So either don't hinge your entire battleplan around a single psyker, or else bring more of them to help off-set the chance of your key psyker getting nobbled by some angry warp entity.

You fear the roll of 12 on the final turn? Fine, let the Daemon player go first. Guess what? Even if they get that 'free' unit on the last turn, you still have a turn to try and deal with it.

Daemons might spend a turn with buffed invulns? Bring more anti-infantry guns to help put more wounds on them instead of relying on the same old melta or plasma spam all the fething time.

And IF a Daemon player explodes their entire army (or a good chunck of it) on turn 1 because they rolled snake eyes and then a bunch of boxcars. Well, I dare say their dice were completely fethed and you'd have spanked them no matter what they did. (we ALL have those games!)



What I'm ironically not hearing however are any Daemon players bemoaning the fact we can pooch our own army, or get one of our own psykers om-nom'ed, or be forced to take a bunch of Instability tests on turn 1...
Hell, my first game I rolled up -1 save, then had Nurgle crap on my Tzeentch units, followed by Slaanesh tap dancing all over my Bloodletters and the Warpstorm going ADD and doing nothing for a turn. Did I b**** about how 'unfair' this was? Nope, my opponent and I simply got a laugh out of the whole thing and figured it was Tzeentch's idea of a good joke!

All we're getting here is just a bunch of whiney mathhammerers crying about how the game is no longer completely predictable.
Go figure.

Experiment 626 wrote:
So what?

Experiment 626 wrote:
All we're getting here is just a bunch of whiney mathhammerers crying about how the game is no longer completely predictable.

These two comments alone tell me just how little you understand what this topic is about and how your only real rebuttal is a broad ad hominem to call anyone who disagrees with you a "whiney mathhammer", no better than those immediately calling anyone who doesn't like the table a WAAC'ing TFG.

Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Qui-Gon Jinn wrote:
This thread is long in the tooth as it is. And we are fighting about something that is truly so inconsequential as this.

I find it fascinating that you people who cry that this Warp Storm table is bad for 40k.

It has been stated that you agree to play Daemons? You agree to play with their rules. INTACT!
The same goes to GK, Necrons, DA, BA, Tyranids, Tau, SM, CSM, Eldar, DE, Orks, Sisters, IG, THE WORKS PEOPLE!!

Forget what the results are. Forget what the comparative lists are, abilities, etc. etc.
This has become a giant shouting match of ONE TINY F-ASPECT of a NEW AND UNTRIED CODEX!

The Warpstorm Table is good because it has done EXACTLY what it was intended to do, and that is this: force people out of their comfort zones, force people to THINK, force people to REACT, force people to PLAY THE GAME. If you wanted to just run your comfortable lists of mathhammered to the result of victory because of the rules, then you, sir or madam, can go and shove your head where the sun don't shine, because you are being asinine. You have the right to either play by the rules, with the rules, or you can sell your army and not play, or you can just be TFG for being a scumbag, and then don't be surprised when people refuse to play you because of it.

Games change, get over it. Things change, get over it. The warp storm table is good because it has changed the nature of the game from being "predictable" to being "fun."

Then again, if we want to just agree my Daemons have +1 to all ++ and an additional 2000 points to make up for the lack of my special rules and my shooting, and because I say so because you say you don't want to play with the table, sure, I'll do that.

Seriously, you people who are complaining, get a life. You make me sick because you want to be TFG with the WAAC because you want to be comfortable with your win streak and never lose. *stepping down off my *

*slow clap*

Well said sir!
If someone were to try and tell me they'd only play if I dropped my "randomly game-wrecking & unfun Warpstorm table", I'd tell 'em to p-off and instead I'd go find a real opponent to play against.

But you're fine with list tailoring. Guys got to lay off the crazy pills.

Experiment 626 wrote:

All we're getting here is just a bunch of whiney mathhammerers crying about how the game is no longer completely predictable.
Go figure.

Nope.

Let me explain something: I like the game. I like winning. I like losing. I like winning because it makes me feel like I've succeeded, and I like losing because it makes me think on what I did wrong and how I could improve my game.

Randomly rolling a die and having a model simply taken off of the board, whether mine or my opponents, is not fun. There is no way for me to improve my game unless I get loaded dice or disregard the table altogether, which are two things I would rather not do. I don't care if it is a small chance for it to happen; it WILL happen eventually. It is not just that it is unpredictable; I predicted that my Ravager with 3 Dark Lances would hit a Fortification sometime within the last 5 turns of the game, but I was proven wrong when my Deldar proved to have the BS of a monkey with down syndrome.

It is not a weapon that you fire, it is not a melee attack that slices a model up. It is a magic "did someone lose a model this turn" roll. It takes away control from the player. Getting a bad roll on the table and losing because of it does not offer the chance for me to improve my generalship.

What ARE those complaining the table really complaining about, and what are they proposing if anything? I'm honestly confused. Given the Chaos Boon Chart for CSM I don't see this as unprecedented, and I don't see that one anti-psyker fluke Warp Chart result as any different than a fluke lascannon shot taking out a land raider. How is that fun either? It isn't for the land raider.

I want to point out that the free missle launcher on a single Space Marine Tactical squad is more likely to take out a vidicator in a single shot. than for you to loose a single psyker to my warpstorm table.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Exalted.

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Exalted.

He has an excellent point. Exalted as well.

I like the idea of the chart not some of the higher and lower results on it though. Random buffs and debuffs to the chaos army its self would have been taking it far enough, kept it in fluff and added flavour. Even slight debuffs to the enemy army would have been acceptable but I think they have gone too far on the upper and tail ends of the charts. It's really way more game changing than it should have been.

Would I refuse to play against it? No way, its fun and I'd have a laugh about it but I do get that people who play more competitive matches might be irked by the more game changing chart results. I'd be willing to compromise for a game if someone wanted to change some of the more drastic results. I could see this been abandoned or modified by TO's.


Not as bad as turn 1 flying carpet + power scroll purple sun bombs were in fantasy :@.

HBMC wrote: Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Pretty much this.

Also, knock it off with the "Exalted" posts, folks. It's spam by essentially any measure, which is ALSO against Dakka rules. If you don't have anything substantive to add, you don't need to post, either.

 Janthkin wrote:

HBMC wrote: Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Pretty much this.

Also, knock it off with the "Exalted" posts, folks. It's spam by essentially any measure, which is ALSO against Dakka rules. If you don't have anything substantive to add, you don't need to post, either.

I think people use it as as short hand for what you said. Although it is in red, so I can't tell if that is Janthkin the mod or Janthkin the poster posting.

The red is Janthkin the mod borrowing HBMC's words & putting my imprimatur behind them.

The second is Janthkin the mod giving some friendly advice before I have to make it more official.

 Janthkin wrote:
The red is Janthkin the mod borrowing HBMC's words & putting my imprimatur behind them.

The second is Janthkin the mod giving some friendly advice before I have to make it more official.

Thanks for the clarification. I will keep that in mind for the future.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

The nameless wrote:
Lol at the irony of people complaining and cursing GW for the Warp Storm Table because of "random" stuff in a game that uses dice.

Lol at the people who lack the reading comprehension skills to understand that that's not what's being complained about.

Really? You don't see it in any of the previous posts. I see 7 pages of "I hate the W.Storm table" vs. " I like the W.Storm table" which is based off
rolling a 2d6 and has effects that can help/hinder/cripple your or your opponents army. This game is based on dice rolls, playing Daemons means you face the most fickle gods of all- the Dice Gods, and the unholy 4 bow even to them. I find humour in that, like grots being sent in to tie up terminators and they beat the crap out of said terminator, dice are funny.

The "warpstorm table" is a gimmick/mechanic of Codex Daemons and a multi god list can suffer, I will give that to the op but we carry on.
5Th edition wound shenanigans-some people complained, people carried on.
Gray Knight warp quake, Necron Mss, Long Fangs,etc people complain, people carried on.
Transition from 5th/6th after we looked at our armies people complain, people carried on.
GW's price increases, we all face palm and rage and make sure we're not on the Australian site, but people carried on.
GW changes the game at their leisure and your only alternative is to love it or leave it or possibly house rule it.


Besides in a month or two this will all begin with a new codex, that's something we can all agree on.

The "warpstorm table" is a gimmick/mechanic of Codex Daemons and a multi god list can suffer, I will give that to the op but we carry on.

Don't people know you can use instruments from those that are based on those gods to avoid it?

If you have a DoK unit with an instrument, you re-roll khorne's wrath for example. You can even use it to reroll an enemies result to try and better hit with it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
All the things you've mentioned are choices made by players, and players have ways of interacting with them during a game (avoiding them, countering them, using them, etc.). The Warp Storm table has no such counter. It exists apart from the players as something that neither of them have any control over. That's bad game design, whether you think there should be more random or not...

I disagree. Randomness /= bad game design. Randomness, in the form of the Warp Storm table, is here to represent a particular fluff concept, of fighting Daemons in proximity to a warp rift. Some crazy stuff may happen. Lighting bolts will shoot out and hit people. Psykers may die. Daemons themselves may grow tougher or weaker. These are all reasonable and fluffy effects which players will need to adapt to and play around. Most of them can be adapted to and compensated for to a greater or lesser extent. Certainly as much or more than stuff like Warp Quake, Jaws of the World Wolf, or Runes of Witnessing, all of which have reliably and consistently screwed various armies over the last few years, and all of which folks have compensated for and adapted to deal with.

HBMC wrote: Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I'm a competitive player.

This chart is less of an issue for competitive play than the current flyer disparity, or runes of warding, or the WD screamer and flamer rules.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

The "warpstorm table" is a gimmick/mechanic of Codex Daemons and a multi god list can suffer, I will give that to the op but we carry on.

Don't people know you can use instruments from those that are based on those gods to avoid it?

If you have a DoK unit with an instrument, you re-roll khorne's wrath for example. You can even use it to reroll an enemies result to try and better hit with it.

Sweetness! Didn't know that. Thanks

I like the warpstorm chart.

As far as gameplay, I can see why people don't like it, I suppose. It is true that it does random, crazy things and requires no input from the players.

On the other hand, I think it is a wonderful way to represent the reality-tearing, mind-blowing, psyker-eating systemwide disaster that is a warp storm, which always accompanies Daemonic armies.

For me, that fits the background quite well, and I do play 40k to win (I don't deliberately try to lose, or make bad tactical decisions, or anything) but I appreciate that the background should ultimately govern how the battle goes, and if the reality-tearing warp-storm feths something up, then that is the background that I love being made manifest on the tabletop. It does mean that every win or loss may not be based on my skill alone, but the same is true in real war.

The nameless wrote:
Really? You don't see it in any of the previous posts. I see 7 pages of "I hate the W.Storm table" vs. " I like the W.Storm table" which is based off
rolling a 2d6 and has effects that can help/hinder/cripple your or your opponents army.

There is, unfortunately, a lot of that too. But the core discussion is an interesting one, and it's not about if the effects are good or not, or what armies are affected. The heart of the issue is whether a table like this one, where significant game-altering events are triggered by a single die roll out of the control of either player, is "good" for a game like Warhammer 40k.

No choice by either player, aside from one of them playing the army. No meaningful ability to mitigate the effects available to the opponent, and only marginally for the Daemons player (Fateweaver, or else another random roll for the right Warlord trait). No ability for either player to stop the effect.

As mentioned before, it's a game design question. Trying to dismiss the entire discussion as whining for/against particular outcomes or effects is dismissing the possibility of a lot of interesting discussion that could be going on here, if we weren't bogged down in the details of if it's fluffy or in some subjective sense a good rule for daemons. The question is whether it is objectively a good rule for the game.

I disagree that there's no meaningful ability to mitigate the effects available to the opponent.

Not fielding psykers is an option to remove the danger of the 11 (just as it already was to remove the danger of Runes of Warding).

Fielding fewer, tougher units, and/or Reserving vulnerable/fragile units is a way to mitigate the danger of the random hits effects.

Surrounding objectives and cordoning them off is a way to prevent a 12-summoned scoring unit from taking or contesting one late game.

---------

Obviously it's too early to tell for sure but I don't think we can reasonably conclude yet that the rule is bad for the game. It changes the way games with and against daemons go, to make that a unique experience, in a different way than their previous unique (all DS, half on turn 1) way of playing. Both are/were interesting ways of portrating the fluff in tabletop effects. I enjoyed the other, and I'm looking forward to playing with this one too.

I think this issue is a microcosm of the WAAC vs FAAC debate. From a WAAC perspective it is terrible. The inherent randomness of 40k is bad to begin with and can potentially punish excellent tactical decisions while rewarding poor play. Granted, the distribution of rolls probably follows a bell curve so it's not as though the game is excessively random, but it's there. Adding another table that has a significant impact on the game only serves to take control out of the hand of the players.

Meanwhile from a FAAC (fun OR fluffy) it is great. Chaos is fickle. The table reflects that.


I think the heart of the problem is that people want 40k to be something its not and its not a well balanced and developed competitive game.

I think part of the problem is armchair analysts who aren't actually good at and don't really understand the game, but enjoy screaming hyperbole on the internet* and pretending that the sky is falling. Good competitive players rise to challenges, accept that 40k contains significant amounts of randomness, and consistently win anyway. When we’re wearing our big boy pants we also don’t cry too much at the occasional dice meltdown.

*: Also bloggers who may or may not understand the game, but who derive ad revenue from stirring up controvery and arguments, driving pageclicks, and who thus have a vested interest in employing hyperbole and freaking out periodically.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I disagree. Randomness /= bad game design. Randomness, in the form of the Warp Storm table, is here to represent a particular fluff concept, of fighting Daemons in proximity to a warp rift. Some crazy stuff may happen. Lighting bolts will shoot out and hit people. Psykers may die. Daemons themselves may grow tougher or weaker. These are all reasonable and fluffy effects which players will need to adapt to and play around. Most of them can be adapted to and compensated for to a greater or lesser extent. Certainly as much or more than stuff like Warp Quake, Jaws of the World Wolf, or Runes of Witnessing, all of which have reliably and consistently screwed various armies over the last few years, and all of which folks have compensated for and adapted to deal with.

I'll disagree with your disagreement, to a point, and it's mostly about results 2, 3, 11, and 12. In any game that approaches tactical play, I believe that the choices the players make should meaningfully influence the outcome. It doesn't have to be determinative - I like dice! - but the choices my opponent and I make should provide a bounding condition for what the dice can do. I think several of the entries on the chart violate that basic principle in an annoying fashion.

2 - due to nothing but playing Daemons, the Daemon player finds himself disadvantaged. This will come up about once every 5-6 games; possible outcomes are widely variable, but it's likely to cost you 1-2 wounds per unit (not evenly distributed, of course), with the potential outliers hitting smaller units/solo models harder. The only potential mitigation, aside from Fateweaver, is to build your army list around the idea that you will need to be prepared for this outcome - fewer, larger units maybe? Always keep a Herald in every unit, for that extra point of survivability? (About 1 in 36 games, assuming you always use the Daemons Warlord chart, you will likely avoid this scenario - that game where you happen to have the right trait and roll double 1's; that may be offset by the times you reroll a different result, and end up with double 1's.)

3 - due to nothing but playing Daemons, you've got a decent chance of getting a character whacked about 1 in 3 games. Fairly easy to mitigate - just buy the character upgrades for every unit, and you're less likely to lose something valuable. It's about on par with Perils for psykers.

11 - due to nothing but playing AGAINST daemons, your opponent has a 50-50 chance of losing a psyker, few of whom are cheap. No mitigation possible. You can't build an army to prevent it (short of bringing no psykers at all, or switching to Grey Knights), and the chances are slim enough that you shouldn't try. But 1 in every 3 games played against Daemons is likely to see this result.

12 - this is the odd one. Your opponent can play an essentially perfect game, and you can still find yourself in possession of a scoring unit at just the right minute to alter a game's outcome. Impossible to plan for; impossible to mitigate ahead of time (unless you're winning so handily that you can properly bubble-wrap every objective, in which case it's a meaningless outcome).


By contrast, Jaws is a bad mechanic because it has such a disproportionate effect on different armies, but if I'm playing against it, I can mitigate it, up to and including killing the models who can cast it. If my opponent gets it off anyway, it's because he made some choices that put him in a position to do so. Cleansing Flame is another example like that - WAY disproportionate against certain armies, but choices by myself & my opponent are involved for it to become significant.

Runes of Warding is a much closer example, but if I run into Runes on the table, at least I can choose not to cast psychic powers, or work to kill off the wearer. Since Runes is an "always on," you can have a plan and expect to deal with it. You can't really build your army around a 2.7%/turn possibility that only comes up against Daemon opponents (unless, of course, you've prearranged a game or have several lists to choose from).

I like random. I like the Warlord traits, I like the random psychic powers, I like the random gifts. But I want my random to have SOMETHING to do with what's going on, either in list building or on the tabletop, and not just random because it's cool.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think part of the problem is armchair analysts who aren't actually good at and don't really understand the game, but enjoy screaming hyperbole on the internet and pretending that the sky is falling. Good competitive players rise to challenges, accept that 40k contains significant amounts of randomness, and consistently win anyway. When we’re wearing our big boy pants we also don’t cry too much at the occasional dice meltdown.

Reposting from the "WAAC" thread:

Good dice-based games involve randomness, but done in such a way that the randomness follows a nice bell curve (for example, shooting bolters with a full tactical squad) which allows you to intelligently make decisions based on risk vs. reward. The outcome of a given individual event is in doubt, but complete surprises are rare and in the long run everything converges on the average with the player who makes better decisions winning the game.

Bad dice-based games involve randomness with wild swings (which threaten to impact the game more than player decisions), lack of predictability (you can't make strategic plans beyond "roll the dice and hope they like you"), or things that should be player choices (picking warlord traits). The stronger these elements are the less player skill and decisions matter and the more the game becomes little more than an exercise in throwing dice and seeing what happens.

The warp storm table is the second kind of randomness and, like many of the "cinematic" random things in 6th, bad for the game.

I think there's some confusion here as what bad for the game actually means, too.

Because some people seem to think that, to quote Peregrine, "dice-based games [which] involve randomness with wild swings" are bad for the game.

I personally think that the Warp-Storm table is good for 40k, not because it is random but because it follows the background so well and deliciously.

It can be good and bad at the same time.

It is a well known fact that GW is a miniatures company first and gaming company second. Expecting good rules and a balanced, competitive environment is a mistake. You can choose to play it that way and that is your right as a paying customer, but complaining when GW introduces "cinematic" (more like Rule of Cool imo) elements into the story is a bit silly.

Janthkin, you've got some reasonable points.

Peregrine, I still have to disagree. Most dice thrown in 40k will fall into bell curves, giving reasonably predictable results. But the occasional simple roll with large potential effect (look out sir against an ID attack, morale, scatter or reserve rolls for expensive units) has its place too. Part of player skill is being able to roll with the punches and win even when the dice throw you a curveball. Part of playing with or against daemons is that the pitcher throws more curveballs, if I'm not straining that metaphor too far. Now, that's ALWAYS been part of the Daemon army concept; heck, just having the Preferred Wave roll was a much bigger example of that than the 2,3 or 11 on the Warp Storm chart. I honestly think folks are freaking out disproportionately over the fact that part of daemons' randomness now can screw the opponent too.

 Mannahnin wrote:
But the occasional simple roll with large potential effect (look out sir against an ID attack, morale, scatter or reserve rolls for expensive units) has its place too. Part of player skill is being able to roll with the punches and win even when the dice throw you a curveball.

The difference is that these effects are still reasonably predictable (for example, deep strike scatter distance is a bell curve) and still involve risk/reward decisions (for example, you choose how aggressively you want to target your deep strike knowing that there is a bell curve of distances). This isn't true for the warp storm table. There's little or nothing you can do about it (no unit to kill to shut it off), there are no choices to be made by either player, and the most significant outcomes are too rare to be able to plan for them (for example, refusing to take psykers is a huge disadvantage the rest of the time). Just occasionally something will randomly screw you over.

I honestly think folks are freaking out disproportionately over the fact that part of daemons' randomness now can screw the opponent too.

That is part of it.

In the past the randomness of demons was excessive, but at least there was some degree of risk vs. reward of whether you wanted to take a chance on playing a potentially powerful army that was at the mercy of preferred wave and deep strike rolls. Now that choice is removed, unless you just refuse to play against demons (and never play in tournaments) you have to put up with the random table.

You'll have to put up with the table, and the small possibility of being screwed by it, just as daemon players have had to put up with Warp Quake, GK players have had to put up with Runes of Warding, Necron and Tyranid players have had to put up with Jaws, and folks playing against Daemons for the past six months have had to put up with silly broken Screamers and Flamers.

I can concede that the implementation is not ideal, and certainly see that it's not to everyone's taste, but IMO it's substantially less impactful on our experience as players and on the ability to play a balanced game than a lot of other things presently or recently extant, which we suck up and deal with. Many of which prove not to be as bad as we thought after all. Most of these things soon blend into the scenery, as will (I expect) the Warp Storm table.

 Mannahnin wrote:
You'll have to put up with the table, and the small possibility of being screwed by it, just as daemon players have had to put up with Warp Quake, GK players have had to put up with Runes of Warding, Necron and Tyranid players have had to put up with Jaws, and folks playing against Daemons for the past six months have had to put up with silly broken Screamers and Flamers.

Again, stupid decisions don't justify more stupid decisions. The fact that Matt Ward is an idiot and somehow thought warp quake was a good idea doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the warp storm table is a good idea, it just means that GW made two mistakes.

Of course one difference here is that things like RoW aren't random in the same way. It's a powerful effect, but it's a consistent effect. You know what the risks of using your psykers are and can make intelligent decisions about whether the benefits are worth the costs. You can try to kill the farseer and shut it off, and make decisions about how much effort to invest into killing the farseer and/or whether you should use your psykers aggressively under RoW or save them until RoW is gone. You don't just randomly roll a D20 every turn and remove a psyker model if you roll a 1 with no interaction between the players or decisions to make.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I like the warpstorm chart.

As far as gameplay, I can see why people don't like it, I suppose. It is true that it does random, crazy things and requires no input from the players.

On the other hand, I think it is a wonderful way to represent the reality-tearing, mind-blowing, psyker-eating systemwide disaster that is a warp storm, which always accompanies Daemonic armies.

For me, that fits the background quite well, and I do play 40k to win (I don't deliberately try to lose, or make bad tactical decisions, or anything) but I appreciate that the background should ultimately govern how the battle goes, and if the reality-tearing warp-storm feths something up, then that is the background that I love being made manifest on the tabletop. It does mean that every win or loss may not be based on my skill alone, but the same is true in real war.

No... real wars are won through Tactical insight and hard work. Not random happenstance. No war, or battle, and in the history of planet earth has been won due to the anything other than one general being better than the other, or one has more troops than the other. No magic, no random deaths because Zeus felt like it, people won wars because people did work and people were able to use that work to save lives and take lives more efficiently.

 McNinja wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I like the warpstorm chart.

As far as gameplay, I can see why people don't like it, I suppose. It is true that it does random, crazy things and requires no input from the players.

On the other hand, I think it is a wonderful way to represent the reality-tearing, mind-blowing, psyker-eating systemwide disaster that is a warp storm, which always accompanies Daemonic armies.

For me, that fits the background quite well, and I do play 40k to win (I don't deliberately try to lose, or make bad tactical decisions, or anything) but I appreciate that the background should ultimately govern how the battle goes, and if the reality-tearing warp-storm feths something up, then that is the background that I love being made manifest on the tabletop. It does mean that every win or loss may not be based on my skill alone, but the same is true in real war.

No... real wars are won through Tactical insight and hard work. Not random happenstance. No war, or battle, and in the history of planet earth has been won due to the anything other than one general being better than the other, or one has more troops than the other. No magic, no random deaths because Zeus felt like it, people won wars because people did work and people were able to use that work to save lives and take lives more efficiently.

No real wars are won through Cinematic.

 McNinja wrote:
No... real wars are won through Tactical insight and hard work. Not random happenstance. No war, or battle, and in the history of planet earth has been won due to the anything other than one general being better than the other, or one has more troops than the other. No magic, no random deaths because Zeus felt like it, people won wars because people did work and people were able to use that work to save lives and take lives more efficiently.

Not true at all.

However, it's not really relevant since real wars aren't supposed to be fun. 40k, on the other hand, is supposed to be a balanced and fun game.

 McNinja wrote:
No... real wars are won through Tactical insight and hard work. Not random happenstance. No war, or battle, and in the history of planet earth has been won due to the anything other than one general being better than the other, or one has more troops than the other. No magic, no random deaths because Zeus felt like it, people won wars because people did work and people were able to use that work to save lives and take lives more efficiently.

This is hilariously untrue. For example, the Soviet Union won the Battle of Kursk in part because all many of the attacking German tanks were badly designed and broke down. That's not something a General can count on or predict, or even fix with tactical insight or hard work.

Or, for example, the German Dreadnought fleet's escape from Jutland, which was aided by fog and mist before nightfall.

Or the success of D-Day, where the counterattack Panzer reserve was not released to the control of Rommel until Hitler woke up - around noon. How does hard work and tactical insight address that?

Just a few modern examples.

 McNinja wrote:
No... real wars are won through Tactical insight and hard work. Not random happenstance. No war, or battle, and in the history of planet earth has been won due to the anything other than one general being better than the other, or one has more troops than the other. No magic, no random deaths because Zeus felt like it, people won wars because people did work and people were able to use that work to save lives and take lives more efficiently.

Please tell me you're joking...please

I would much rather roll on this table than have to deep-strike my entire army like I did in 5th. Ever had a 300 point unit destroyed during your own deployment phase? In a 1500 point game?

That is what sucks. So your lost your libby in a 1/36 freak occurance. Boo hoo. A necron airforce just came onto the field, that gives you a 1/1 chance of being utterly boned and there's feth all you can do to stop it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 blood reaper wrote:

No real wars are won through Cinematic.

Your attempt at sarcasm is undermined by your sloppy grammar

 McNinja wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I like the warpstorm chart.

As far as gameplay, I can see why people don't like it, I suppose. It is true that it does random, crazy things and requires no input from the players.

On the other hand, I think it is a wonderful way to represent the reality-tearing, mind-blowing, psyker-eating systemwide disaster that is a warp storm, which always accompanies Daemonic armies.

For me, that fits the background quite well, and I do play 40k to win (I don't deliberately try to lose, or make bad tactical decisions, or anything) but I appreciate that the background should ultimately govern how the battle goes, and if the reality-tearing warp-storm feths something up, then that is the background that I love being made manifest on the tabletop. It does mean that every win or loss may not be based on my skill alone, but the same is true in real war.

No... real wars are won through Tactical insight and hard work. Not random happenstance. No war, or battle, and in the history of planet earth has been won due to the anything other than one general being better than the other, or one has more troops than the other. No magic, no random deaths because Zeus felt like it, people won wars because people did work and people were able to use that work to save lives and take lives more efficiently.

General Winter disagrees with your assessment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Winter

Or any other Victory winning weather condition that has randomly caused armies to fall, fail, and die.

Warp Storm table is the dumbest piece of garbage rule added in 6th ed so far. I hope they FAQ it to make it optional, or something.

Peregrine explained it pretty well on page 1 of this thread.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
You'll have to put up with the table, and the small possibility of being screwed by it, just as daemon players have had to put up with Warp Quake, GK players have had to put up with Runes of Warding, Necron and Tyranid players have had to put up with Jaws, and folks playing against Daemons for the past six months have had to put up with silly broken Screamers and Flamers.

Again, stupid decisions don't justify more stupid decisions. The fact that Matt Ward is an idiot and somehow thought warp quake was a good idea doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the warp storm table is a good idea, it just means that GW made two mistakes.

Agreed that bad decisions don't justify more bad decisions. But just as surely, it's important to maintain perspective when something new, powerful, and difficult to counter comes along. It happens fairly regularly in 40k, and the neverending cycle of "what are we going to freak out about this time? The Helldrake? The Banner of Devastation?" becomes silly and tired.

The hyperbolic opinion of some guys on the internet that Mat Ward is an idiot (when he clearly designs powerful and flexible codices which people like to use, and have fewer never-take units in them than codices written by guys like Cruddace or Kelly) should not be confused with being any more of a fact than if those same posters were to chorus that Chocolate is objectively better than Vanilla.

 Peregrine wrote:
Of course one difference here is that things like RoW aren't random in the same way. It's a powerful effect, but it's a consistent effect. You know what the risks of using your psykers are and can make intelligent decisions about whether the benefits are worth the costs. You can try to kill the farseer and shut it off, and make decisions about how much effort to invest into killing the farseer and/or whether you should use your psykers aggressively under RoW or save them until RoW is gone. You don't just randomly roll a D20 every turn and remove a psyker model if you roll a 1 with no interaction between the players or decisions to make.

IMO a 1/36 chance per turn (assuming you bring a single LD10 psyker with no ability to re-roll LD) of losing a psyker's a lot less punishing than a 67% chance of losing a Terivigon if you move within 24" of the Space Wolf player's deployment zone, or 2/3 chance per Tervigon crossed by the line when the Space Wolf player drop pods in their Rune Priest in on turn 1. Or the chances of having a bad game if you brought an elite army against a list of 20+ each WD-statted screamers and flamers.

I'd have preferred a different way of making psykers more vulnerable against daemons (maybe any double is perils, and boxcars/snake eyes turn you into a spawn?), but this one is going to cost you a psyker a tiny percentage of the time, to be honest. Most armies make a pretty cheap investment in that psyker, and I remembered that Eldar can take a 30pt Warlock and give Eldrad a re-roll on that LD.

Agreed with Mann, basically

This is an attempt to bring some of the background of fighting against daemons more into the fore. You CAN, as has been *repeatedly* shown, mitigate the effects of it on your own army, and is at least a 2D6 roll and not the 1D6 preferred roll of yore.

Those pointing to the bell curve also miss that that only really works with discrete events in large numbers (binomial approximation to the normal) so a lot of other game changing rolls are just as unmanageable (to whit: actually manageable, as hsa been shown) as this entire table.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Agreed that bad decisions don't justify more bad decisions. But just as surely, it's important to maintain perspective when something new, powerful, and difficult to counter comes along. It happens fairly regularly in 40k, and the neverending cycle of "what are we going to freak out about this time? The Helldrake? The Banner of Devastation?" becomes silly and tired.

1) Nobody is saying that the warp storm chart is the most overpowered thing ever. The thread is "warp storm is bad for 40k", not "what's the worst thing in 40k". Saying "but it's not as bad as Helldrakes" is just missing the point entirely, and doesn't make it any less annoying.

2) The issue isn't that it is overpowered, it is that it is not fun. It's a poorly designed random element that should never have been included in the game, and just one more case of GW substituting "cinematic" for proper game design. These criticisms have nothing to do with the power level of demons and/or how the warp table contributes to it, they're just as valid even if demons are the worst army in the game.

IMO a 1/36 chance per turn (assuming you bring a single LD10 psyker with no ability to re-roll LD) of losing a psyker's a lot less punishing than a 67% chance of losing a Terivigon if you move within 24" of the Space Wolf player's deployment zone, or 2/3 chance per Tervigon crossed by the line when the Space Wolf player drop pods in their Rune Priest in on turn 1.

1) See previous comments about the poorly designed randomness being the problem, not whether or not it is overpowered.

2) The relative rarity of it makes it worse, not better. Losing a tank to a drop pod full of combi-melta sternguard is predictable, and there's very little you can do to stop it. You see it in your opponent's list, you know they spent points on it, and you aren't going to be at all surprised when it kills a tank. And that keeps it from being annoying, you can see it as a strategic choice by your opponent and not a case of getting screwed by the dice. The warp storm chart, on the other hand, is entirely different. Since it's only a 1/36 chance when it does happen it's extremely frustrating. Your opponent didn't make a good choice, and you didn't make a bad one. The dice just said " you, remove your character".

(maybe any double is perils, and boxcars/snake eyes turn you into a spawn?)

See, this is a good idea. Well, not the spawn part, just the increased perils chance. It's a fluffy representation of "the warp is doing weird things", but it's also predictable enough that it doesn't feel like an out of nowhere " you" when it happens. Instead of rolling on the random table of a bunch of completely different outcomes you just have a nice straightforward 1/6 chance to take a wound, and now you can make intelligent decisions based on that information.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Evileyes wrote:
It's one result. It affects a random psyker, most armes don't even have a psyker, but those that do, tend to have more than just one super important one. Even then, its only a 50% or so chance it works.

Again. You're missing the point entirely.

1) It's not about whether it's overpowered or not, it's about how random it is. There is a huge difference in results on the table, and it has nothing to do with any kind of player choices. Sometimes it has no impact, sometimes it randomly screws over one or both players. Just like various other random tables in 6th edition it takes things out of the hands of the players and gives them to random chance.

2) The relative rarity makes it worse, not better. Instead of a consistent event that you can reasonably predict and make plans for you have a rare "oops, you lose" outcome. Consider the difference between missing a shot with an average BS 2 ork vs. missing a shot with a twin-linked BS 5 model. One is something you expect to happen all the time and you don't really care about, the other makes you smash your dice in frustration.

And you miss the point as well. Some people like the table, some don't. Some find it fun, some find it obnoxious, some find it adds elements to the game, some find it takes things away. At the end of the day, GW decided on doing something that made the codex different from everybody else. You dislike the randomness of the book? Fine-that's your call. But others like it. Don't tell those of us who like the table that it shouldn't exist and it was a mistake-we play Daemons because we like them. Random can be bad, but in this case the 4 most likely results (outside of NOTHING HAPPENING on a 7) are going to be an added attack against opponents and occasional attacks against Daemons. You can plan for those, as they are going to make up about 60% of the things on the chart going off. The other 40% of the rolls (based on dice combinations) will be 20% bad for Daemons, 20% bad for opponents in opposite ways to Daemons. The only thing you should expect from the chart is "my opponent is rolling a D6 for each of his units and I'm rolling a D6 for each unit of ________ god". Those results are the most likely. The other results are less likely, and for every positive, there is a negative. You enjoy your army, we'll enjoy ours. If you don't want to play against the table, then don't play against Daemons. That's your choice, but don't ever tell other players they can't have fun with their own army or that they don't deserve something because it goes against how you want to have fun. It's as simple as that.

And this is coming from somebody who has been very upset with GW for a while-I find this book to have rekindled an interest for me. Others, obviously, feel the same.

tl;dr-You don't like the table, some of us do. Nobody is twisting your arm, but don't try to tell us we can't enjoy it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Giganthrax wrote:
Warp Storm table is the dumbest piece of garbage rule added in 6th ed so far. I hope they FAQ it to make it optional, or something.

Peregrine explained it pretty well on page 1 of this thread.

Hell no. You don't like it, don't play against Daemon players-there's your "optional FAQ". Maybe GW should hire me to help out.