Switch Theme:

What's The Matter With USRs?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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




Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Those are all strategems, not abilities that the unit has inherently, and wouldn't be represented on a data sheet as either a bespoke rule or USR. And strategems typically break the core rules so not really what we're talking about.

Except for the tau one. Don't know what you're talking about there, unless it's "wall of mirrors", which is also a stratagem, isn't true deep strike but just repositioning a unit already on the board, and still is subject to the "no closer than 9 from enemy units" rule. If it's something else I don't know about, please educate me.


I dont see where that distinction between stratagems, abilities, etc.. comes from.

The "ability" of a Space Marine Lieutenant to re-roll 1 to wound is the "stratagem" of an Eldar Farseer. The "ability" of a Khorne Berzerker to fight twice is the "stratagem" of a Sister Repentia unit. The "ability" of a Wulfen to fight-in-death is the "stratagem" of a Grey Knight Paladin. The "ability" for a Terminator to Deep Strike is the "stratagem" of a Wraithblade unit, etc..

They are all rules and abilities that "break the game" (e.g. you dont have to start the game on the board in your deployment zone as is the "default"), whether you gain this ability innately or pay some type of cost, be it CP, WL-traits, relics, force-org slots, etc.., doesnt really affect the nature of where that rules-breaking-ability comes from.

The Tau rule is the basic Homing Beacon rule for Stealth Suits.



Strats could confer USRs.

For instance, Webway Strike could be:

Select one ELDAR Unit for 1 CP or two units for 3 CP. Each selected unit gains Deep Strike (9")-they may be set in reserves instead of deployed normally on the table. Then, at the end of your second or third movement phase, you may deploy them anywhere on the table more than 9" from any enemy models.
And something like Khorne Berserkers fighting twice? That could be bespoke. Very, very few units in the game have that rule, so I don't see any need for it to be made universal.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 19:09:01


Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:
Strats could confer USRs.

For instance, Webway Strike could be:

Select one ELDAR Unit for 1 CP or two units for 3 CP. Each selected unit gains Deep Strike (9")-they may be set in reserves instead of deployed normally on the table. Then, at the end of your second or third movement phase, you may deploy them anywhere on the table more than 9" from any enemy models.
And something like Khorne Berserkers fighting twice? That could be bespoke. Very, very few units in the game have that rule, so I don't see any need for it to be made universal.


Sure.

But that wasnt the point. The false claim was there are only 2 exceptions to the more common 9" version of "arrive mid-battle-field-rules". And while 9" is a pretty common, there are many other variants, certainly more than just two.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JNAProductions wrote:


Select one ELDAR Unit for 1 CP or two units for 3 CP. Each selected unit gains Deep Strike (9")-they may be set in reserves instead of deployed normally on the table. Then, at the end of your second or third movement phase, you may deploy them anywhere on the table more than 9" from any enemy models.
And something like Khorne Berserkers fighting twice? That could be bespoke. Very, very few units in the game have that rule, so I don't see any need for it to be made universal.


But it is a very common rule.

It just comes with an uncommonly low cost for Berzerkers as they dont have to pay CP, pass a 4+ roll, invest a WL-trait, etc..



This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/04/30 19:12:49


 
   
Made in us
Consigned to the Grim Darkness





USA

USRs as a concept are fine, but GW can make anything not work.

The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Strats could confer USRs.

For instance, Webway Strike could be:

Select one ELDAR Unit for 1 CP or two units for 3 CP. Each selected unit gains Deep Strike (9")-they may be set in reserves instead of deployed normally on the table. Then, at the end of your second or third movement phase, you may deploy them anywhere on the table more than 9" from any enemy models.
And something like Khorne Berserkers fighting twice? That could be bespoke. Very, very few units in the game have that rule, so I don't see any need for it to be made universal.


Sure.

But that wasnt the point. The false claim was there are only 2 exceptions to the more common 9" version of "arrive mid-battle-field-rules". And while 9" is a pretty common, there are many other variants, certainly more than just two.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JNAProductions wrote:


Select one ELDAR Unit for 1 CP or two units for 3 CP. Each selected unit gains Deep Strike (9")-they may be set in reserves instead of deployed normally on the table. Then, at the end of your second or third movement phase, you may deploy them anywhere on the table more than 9" from any enemy models.
And something like Khorne Berserkers fighting twice? That could be bespoke. Very, very few units in the game have that rule, so I don't see any need for it to be made universal.


But it is a very common rule.

It just comes with an uncommonly low cost for Berzerkers as they dont have to pay CP, pass a 4+ roll, invest a WL-trait, etc..



Really? Very common? Let me crack open some Dexes...

Sisters have 27 units. None Fight Twice natively.
Space Marines (the main Dex) have 76 units (I think-I may have lost count a bit). None Fight Twice natively.
CSM have 45 units (in the first 8th edition Dex). 41 if you don't count the Daemons troops. Two can FIght Twice natively.

That's just over 1%, and that's probably an OVERESTIMATION of the proportion. Because, to my knowledge, Berserkers and Kharne are literally the ONLY UNITS that can Fight Twice always. I think Drazhar also can Fight Twice if he charges, so... Three units can do it natively.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran





Our group has adopted our own variation of 40K since 5th Ed., but we always see what new things an edition has that we might incorporate. When we heard of the 'bespoke' rules and the removal of USR's, we couldn't believe it at first, having been informed that this was supposedly a serious attempt at streamlining the game. Granted, we only currently have 25 USR's in our rules, but removing them entirely and listing all the rules under each unit alone with no or slight variation to a basic rule is a very backwards way of simplification.

In fact, it's just plain idiotic.
   
Made in us
Mutated Chosen Chaos Marine




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Strats could confer USRs.

For instance, Webway Strike could be:

Select one ELDAR Unit for 1 CP or two units for 3 CP. Each selected unit gains Deep Strike (9")-they may be set in reserves instead of deployed normally on the table. Then, at the end of your second or third movement phase, you may deploy them anywhere on the table more than 9" from any enemy models.
And something like Khorne Berserkers fighting twice? That could be bespoke. Very, very few units in the game have that rule, so I don't see any need for it to be made universal.


Sure.

But that wasnt the point. The false claim was there are only 2 exceptions to the more common 9" version of "arrive mid-battle-field-rules". And while 9" is a pretty common, there are many other variants, certainly more than just two.

Yes, but all those abilities you mentioned come from strategems, and therefore are not on data sheets. If every ability that a unit could gain from outside sources was on its data sheet then the page count in the average codex would be tripled. And as JNAProductions pointed out any common ability that a stratagem, warlord trait, etc gives to a unit could be explained by referencing the USR.

More odd, specific abilities, like the tau one you mentioned, would need to be bespoke rules for that particular unit.
   
Made in us
Pestilent Plague Marine with Blight Grenade




Accountability because they don't have a standard to measure against so they can throw out almost identical but not quite rules, which excuses poor work. Very few of these almost the same rules are importantly different. They're different for their own sake.

A USR simply creates a standardised measure for a mechanic in the game.

They can still be printed on unit cards, they can also appear in rulebooks. they can also appear as an update in chapter approved every year if needed.

But they mean that when you tell me you're deep striking, I can look at my own units rules to see what it does and know it does the same thing. They mean that you won't have to keep rereading each new rule that comes out because it might be worded different and create an effect no one expected.

What USRs won't do is:

Constrain the number of special rules in the game. All they do is ensure that you aren't duplicating the same thing over and over again and provide standardisation
Require you to look in more places than currently - you can replace every rule in every current location in the game with a standardised version of said rule and no extra burden is at hand
Require you to stack special rules inside each other - this was a choice for USR implementation, not a requirement.

All a USR is, is the standardisation of a particular way of doing the same thing, regardless of what unit it is. Just as Rolling to hit is a USR, so should deep strike, characters, aircraft etc be a USR.

USR's aren't about their name, they're about rule standardisation. So long as the mechanic is identical for that purpose, it doesn't matter what they're called - hell they could make INVISIBLE USRs, whose sole purpose is back end development consistency and only the designers need ever blight their eyes with such horrors...


That's all fair, but I don't think I've ever seen a game with the number of distinct factions, sub-factions, and untis-per-each that 40k has, that stayed with USRs once they got anywhere near that size. I feel like most of the time, you end up with maybe a very limited number of USRs, and then a boatload of bespoke rules anyway because, at the scale 40k has, USRs really do end up limiting how you can differentiate each army unless you also start adding back in all the bespoke rules to begin with ... which leaves us in a similar place to where we are now, but with maybe a small handful of rules that are now identical across all armies. I think, if GW really wanted to switch back to USRs, they'd have to almost rewrite the game to properly include it without loosing the unique distinctions between armies.

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in ca
Dakka Veteran





 Brutus_Apex wrote:
Bespoke rules adds nothing to the game of any value.

All it does is slow things down, make things less organized and make things convoluted.

There are literally no up sides to Bespoke rules over USR's.

7th ed was a stronger rules set than 8th because of USR's. But again GW chose to make useless ones, call them weird names, and created some USR's that were a combination of 2 or more already existing USR's.

USR's are not the enemy here, GW writing is. They never implemented it properly.

People's brains do work differently, but I find it easier to learn the rules on a datasheet than an encyclopedia of unit types and USRs


Again, USR's can also be printed on the datasheet. This is not an argument in favour of Bespoke rules. The bonus of USR's is that they can be in both an encyclopedia (where they should be, because it's the only proper way to organize a game) and on the datasheet.

Sure, 7th had 89 USR's. Wanna take a wild guess at how many bespoke rules 8th has? It's probably in the hundreds if not thousands. Guess what? I can memorize 90 something USR's and use that to speed the game along because I know what each unit does based on the USR's it contains in its profile. I can't do that when everything is different. It makes things way too convoluted, it slows the game down so much and provides literally no benefit to the user.

Again, there should be no exceptions. Everything should follow the core mechanics of the game. Stop making special snowflake rules. USR's to replace literally everything. Nothing exists outside of the main rules.


So, no. USR's never will replace everything. People taking a more measured approach have made a better argument than this. Many have said a USR should only be a USR if it applies to a minimum number of factions, because if it doesn't it's not universal. The more factions it applies to, the more making it a USR is justified. Deepstrike is a decent example of a good candidate for a USR. Acts of Faith are an example of a bad candidate for a USR.

For the record, I agree with a previous poster who said that even the name of a rule influences the character of the army- Daemonic Incursion just feels different than a teleport homer and ditto on the webway portal. In actual practice though, the conversation during a game usually doesn't use the name of the rule; instead, the people I play with tend to just state the rule. Which means USR's don't really bring a lot either. Maybe in the day of USRs there were a handful that were common enough that we'd use the name- deepstrike and FNP come to mind. But most of the time, in any edition I've played, when I ask if a unit has any special rules I should know about, my opponents almost always listed the effects of the various rules rather than their names. It's certainly what I do when people ask me. Even when USR's existed, it was never taken for granted that my opponents knew them all.

And finally, the greatest weakness with USRs is a design one. If every unit is a collection of USRs, you can't modify rules for a single unit without modifying them for everyone who has the rule. So you try to nerf a single OP unit due to a combination, and you end up nerfing 5 other units that weren't OP. It works the other way too; a unit that under performs can't get a rule tweak without making every other unit that shares the rule OP. The ability to do whatever needs to be done to a unit without impacting other units is the thing that bespoke units brings to the game from a design perspective.

Universal rules lead to armies that feel similar. If you want a game where armies feel similar, you'll like USRs. If you don't like armies that feel similar, you won't.

Both systems have advantages, and both systems have disadvantages. Personally, I don't have a problem with the game as is; I think that more damage would be done to the game by hitting a reset button than could be gained by any number of improvements- especially something as big as implementation of USR's, because, of necessity, it would invalidate everything we have right now, and we'd all have to sit through another year of almost pure Marines releases, while the rest of us all sit around waiting for GW to catch up.

Now if we're talking straight game theory without worrying about the practical effect on the game we have, well honestly, as long as the full text of any USR is duplicated on the data card of any unit that has it, fine. As I said, I remember rule effects, not rule names, so it really doesn't make a difference to me. But if they don't duplicate the text, then that's a hard no, even before the prctical implications are taken into effect.


   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:
Really? Very common? Let me crack open some Dexes...

Sisters have 27 units. None Fight Twice natively.
Space Marines (the main Dex) have 76 units (I think-I may have lost count a bit). None Fight Twice natively.
CSM have 45 units (in the first 8th edition Dex). 41 if you don't count the Daemons troops. Two can FIght Twice natively.

That's just over 1%, and that's probably an OVERESTIMATION of the proportion. Because, to my knowledge, Berserkers and Kharne are literally the ONLY UNITS that can Fight Twice always. I think Drazhar also can Fight Twice if he charges, so... Three units can do it natively.


Again, the rule to fight twice is very common and in most Codexes.

Whether it is linked to a CP cost, a WL trait, a spell, a Litany or some other roll-above-X condition or "free" is in the case of Berzerkers doesnt change the rule.

It only changes the costs to access the rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yes, but all those abilities you mentioned come from strategems, and therefore are not on data sheets. If every ability that a unit could gain from outside sources was on its data sheet then the page count in the average codex would be tripled. And as JNAProductions pointed out any common ability that a stratagem, warlord trait, etc gives to a unit could be explained by referencing the USR.

More odd, specific abilities, like the tau one you mentioned, would need to be bespoke rules for that particular unit.


Again. The rules is the same.

Access to the rule differs.

Re-roll 1s to wound is the same rules, whether its "native" to a Marine Lieutenant, a Stratagam for a Craftworld Farseer or a Relic-based Effect for Space Wolves.

The access cost is different, but the rule is identical. If you separate them by where they are printed, you re defeating the point of USR in the first place. The idea is to summarize and standardise similar/identical rules, but than you split them up again because you want to differentiate between "ability" or "stratagem" or "psychic power", even if the rule itself is identical? At that point, you re probably better off with the current system instead of "USR-but-not-really-and-only-if-its-printed-in-section-A-of-the-rules-but-not-section-B"

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 20:48:39


 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Really? Very common? Let me crack open some Dexes...

Sisters have 27 units. None Fight Twice natively.
Space Marines (the main Dex) have 76 units (I think-I may have lost count a bit). None Fight Twice natively.
CSM have 45 units (in the first 8th edition Dex). 41 if you don't count the Daemons troops. Two can FIght Twice natively.

That's just over 1%, and that's probably an OVERESTIMATION of the proportion. Because, to my knowledge, Berserkers and Kharne are literally the ONLY UNITS that can Fight Twice always. I think Drazhar also can Fight Twice if he charges, so... Three units can do it natively.


Again, the rule to fight twice is very common and in most Codexes.

Whether it is linked to a CP cost, a WL trait, a spell, a Litany or some other roll-above-X condition or "free" is in the case of Berzerkers doesnt change the rule.

It only changes the costs to access the rule.
Okay. So if we have three units total and one rule per codex on average, that's something like 20 cases it get used.

That doesn't need to be a USR. And if you think it does, okay-we can disagree on this.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yes, but all those abilities you mentioned come from strategems, and therefore are not on data sheets. If every ability that a unit could gain from outside sources was on its data sheet then the page count in the average codex would be tripled. And as JNAProductions pointed out any common ability that a stratagem, warlord trait, etc gives to a unit could be explained by referencing the USR.

More odd, specific abilities, like the tau one you mentioned, would need to be bespoke rules for that particular unit.


Again. The rules is the same.

Access to the rule differs.

Re-roll 1s to wound is the same rules, whether its "native" to a Marine Lieutenant, a Stratagam for a Craftworld Farseer or a Relic-based Effect for Space Wolves.

The access cost is different, but the rule is identical. If you separate them by where they are printed, you re defeating the point of USR in the first place. The idea is to summarize and standardise similar/identical rules, but than you split them up again because you want to differentiate between "ability" or "stratagem" or "psychic power", even if the rule itself is identical? At that point, you re probably better off with the current system instead of "USR-but-not-really-and-only-if-its-printed-in-section-A-of-the-rules-but-not-section-B"
So...

Lieutenants have, on their datasheet:

<CHAPTER> Aura (6")-Reroll 1s To-Wound-Tactical Precision
Friendly <CHAPTER> units within 6" may reroll wound rolls of 1.

A lieutenant is a leader of marines, a veteran of a thousand battles, With their accurate and precise orders, they help their comrades shoot and fight to inflict maximum devastation.
Eldar, meanwhile, have a stratagem that says:

Stratagem Name-X CP
Select an Eldar FARSEER unit at the start of your movement phase. For the remainder of the turn, that model gains the <CRAFTWORLD> Aura (6")-Reroll 1s To-Wound ability, which means "Friendly <CRAFTWORLD> units within 6" may reroll wound rolls of 1."
I don't know the name or exact rules of that strat, but if it lasts only a single phase or only in shooting or whatever, you can tweak it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 20:54:26


Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:

Okay. So if we have three units total and one rule per codex on average, that's something like 20 cases it get used.

That doesn't need to be a USR. And if you think it does, okay-we can disagree on this.



Sure. But than Deepstrike doesnt need to be a USR either. It has 40 cases instead of 20? So what.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JNAProductions wrote:
I don't know the name or exact rules of that strat, but if it lasts only a single phase or only in shooting or whatever, you can tweak it.


Which is the same with Deepstrike-style rules. Many are different in some way. Thus it makes sense to do them as bespoke rules unique to each datasheet (stratagem, whatever).

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/04/30 20:56:18


 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:

Okay. So if we have three units total and one rule per codex on average, that's something like 20 cases it get used.

That doesn't need to be a USR. And if you think it does, okay-we can disagree on this.



Sure. But than Deepstrike doesnt need to be a USR either. It has 40 cases instead of 20? So what.

That's disingenuous. Virtually every codex has multiple units that Deep Strike, as a rule in many places.

Most Codecs have zero-to-one, occasionally two, instances of Fighting Twice.

Edit: And you misunderstood what I said.

I meant that the ability could be granted for only one phase, AS PART OF THE STRAT. Not the USR. Or the range could be tweaked, by making it "<CRAFTWORLD> Aura (9")-Reroll 1s To-Wound" if it's supposed to be 9". Or if it affects all Eldar, you could change <CRAFTWORLD> for AELDARI.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 20:57:54


Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:

Okay. So if we have three units total and one rule per codex on average, that's something like 20 cases it get used.

That doesn't need to be a USR. And if you think it does, okay-we can disagree on this.



Sure. But than Deepstrike doesnt need to be a USR either. It has 40 cases instead of 20? So what.

That's disingenuous. Virtually every codex has multiple units that Deep Strike, as a rule in many places.

Most Codecs have zero-to-one, occasionally two, instances of Fighting Twice.


Do they? Daemons have 1. Knights have zero (if you considere outflank a separate rule). Grey Knights have 2. Craftworld have 2. Admech have 2. Harlequins have 1. GSC as pre-eminent "deepstrike army" have 3. Etc..

Seems very comparable.
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:

Okay. So if we have three units total and one rule per codex on average, that's something like 20 cases it get used.

That doesn't need to be a USR. And if you think it does, okay-we can disagree on this.



Sure. But than Deepstrike doesnt need to be a USR either. It has 40 cases instead of 20? So what.

That's disingenuous. Virtually every codex has multiple units that Deep Strike, as a rule in many places.

Most Codecs have zero-to-one, occasionally two, instances of Fighting Twice.


Do they? Daemons have 1. Knights have zero (if you considere outflank a separate rule). Grey Knights have 2. Craftworld have 2. Admech have 2. Harlequins have 1. GSC as pre-eminent "deepstrike army" have 3. Etc..

Seems very comparable.
Really? Grey Knights have only TWO UNITS that can Deep Strike?

Eldar, the same?

Unless you mean that Grey Knights only have two unique variations on Deep Strike, in which case, enlighten me. What's the differences between them?

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:

Edit: And you misunderstood what I said.

I meant that the ability could be granted for only one phase, AS PART OF THE STRAT. Not the USR. Or the range could be tweaked, by making it "<CRAFTWORLD> Aura (9")-Reroll 1s To-Wound" if it's supposed to be 9". Or if it affects all Eldar, you could change <CRAFTWORLD> for AELDARI.


Sure. But both referencing an USR in a separate publication, the USR-reference text and the tweak is overall more clumsy than simply making it a bespoke rule that just does what it is supposed to do without triple-cross references and modifications.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:

Okay. So if we have three units total and one rule per codex on average, that's something like 20 cases it get used.

That doesn't need to be a USR. And if you think it does, okay-we can disagree on this.



Sure. But than Deepstrike doesnt need to be a USR either. It has 40 cases instead of 20? So what.

That's disingenuous. Virtually every codex has multiple units that Deep Strike, as a rule in many places.

Most Codecs have zero-to-one, occasionally two, instances of Fighting Twice.


Do they? Daemons have 1. Knights have zero (if you considere outflank a separate rule). Grey Knights have 2. Craftworld have 2. Admech have 2. Harlequins have 1. GSC as pre-eminent "deepstrike army" have 3. Etc..

Seems very comparable.
Really? Grey Knights have only TWO UNITS that can Deep Strike?

Eldar, the same?

Unless you mean that Grey Knights only have two unique variations on Deep Strike, in which case, enlighten me. What's the differences between them?


They are two separate rules with separate names.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 21:01:42


 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:

Edit: And you misunderstood what I said.

I meant that the ability could be granted for only one phase, AS PART OF THE STRAT. Not the USR. Or the range could be tweaked, by making it "<CRAFTWORLD> Aura (9")-Reroll 1s To-Wound" if it's supposed to be 9". Or if it affects all Eldar, you could change <CRAFTWORLD> for AELDARI.


Sure. But both referencing an USR in a separate publication, the USR-reference text and the tweak is overall more clumsy than simply making it a bespoke rule that just does what it is supposed to do without triple-cross references and modifications.
What cross-referencing? Everything you need is right there.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
They are two separate rules with separate names.
What're the MECHANICAL differences?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/04/30 21:02:37


Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
They are two separate rules with separate names.
What're the MECHANICAL differences?


What is the MECHANICAL difference between Khorne Berzerkers fighting twice and Repentia fighting twice?

The rules are identical.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Annandale, VA

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Many are different in some way. Thus it makes sense to do them as bespoke rules unique to each datasheet (stratagem, whatever).


What you're missing is that there are elements that are overwhelmingly common to all of them. Besides Drop Pods, none are allowed to appear in the first Battle Round. Aside from a few that modify the minimum distance, virtually all have a minimum 9" deployment distance.

All have the same wording around being placed in reserved during deployment, appearing at the end of a Movement phase, and setting up the entire unit so that every model is outside of the minimum distance.

They're all just variations on the same rule. So there is no reason that Deep Strike itself can't be a universal rule, with the few units that have exceptions or special behavior having those as their bespoke special rules. That way you immediately know whether a unit has a variant on Deep Strike or not, the wording is consistent across codices, FAQs don't have to do this awkward 'any ability that lets you appear on the board as reserves' phrasing to patch the rule, and at a very basic level the game gets easier to understand and teach.

The very fact that we colloquially use terms like Deep Strike, Objective Secured, and Feel No Pain despite the fact that these are not the names of the rules for most factions directly shows the utility of having universal language.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 21:04:50


 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
They are two separate rules with separate names.
What're the MECHANICAL differences?


What is the MECHANICAL difference between Khorne Berzerkers fighting twice and Repentia fighting twice?

The rules are identical.
Okay. I get it-you think that Fighting Twice should be a USR.

I disagree, not because the rules should be WORDED DIFFERENTLY, but because I don't feel it crops up often enough.

To make my position more clear, if two rules do the same thing, they should have the same name and the same rules text. (As I demonstrated above, I'm totally fine with adding fluff names and fluff text-but the MECHANICS should be the same.)

But there should be an index of USRs in the main rulebook, containing all common USRs. This does NOT mean the rules would not be printed on the datasheet-it just means that you can learn all the common rules of the game from your main rulebook, not by pouring every single datasheet.

Does that make sense?

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 catbarf wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Many are different in some way. Thus it makes sense to do them as bespoke rules unique to each datasheet (stratagem, whatever).


What you're missing is that there are elements that are overwhelmingly common to all of them. Besides Drop Pods, none are allowed to appear in the first Battle Round. Aside from a few that modify the minimum distance, virtually all have a minimum 9" deployment distance.

All have the same wording around being placed in reserved during deployment, appearing at the end of a Movement phase, and setting up the entire unit so that every model is outside of the minimum distance.

They're all just variations on the same rule. So there is no reason that Deep Strike itself can't be a universal rule, with the few units that have exceptions or special behavior having those as their bespoke special rules. That way you immediately know whether a unit has a variant on Deep Strike or not, the wording is consistent across codices, FAQs don't have to do this awkward 'any ability that lets you appear on the board as reserves' phrasing to patch the rule, and at a very basic level the game gets easier to understand and teach.

The very fact that we colloquially use terms like Deep Strike, Objective Secured, and Feel No Pain despite the fact that these are not the names of the rules for most factions directly shows the utility of having universal language.


Sure. Just as colloquially people use the term "fight twice" for a variety of different rules as well.

Again, why would one be bespoke to every unit and strat but the other must, must, must have a USR that must cover both Drop Pods coming 1st turn both narrative and matched play, 9" away and Mawlocs coming 1" away but within 6" of other Mawlocs (and not turn 1 in the matched-play variant) but with a MW splash effect?

Seems illogical and inconsistent.
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Many are different in some way. Thus it makes sense to do them as bespoke rules unique to each datasheet (stratagem, whatever).


What you're missing is that there are elements that are overwhelmingly common to all of them. Besides Drop Pods, none are allowed to appear in the first Battle Round. Aside from a few that modify the minimum distance, virtually all have a minimum 9" deployment distance.

All have the same wording around being placed in reserved during deployment, appearing at the end of a Movement phase, and setting up the entire unit so that every model is outside of the minimum distance.

They're all just variations on the same rule. So there is no reason that Deep Strike itself can't be a universal rule, with the few units that have exceptions or special behavior having those as their bespoke special rules. That way you immediately know whether a unit has a variant on Deep Strike or not, the wording is consistent across codices, FAQs don't have to do this awkward 'any ability that lets you appear on the board as reserves' phrasing to patch the rule, and at a very basic level the game gets easier to understand and teach.

The very fact that we colloquially use terms like Deep Strike, Objective Secured, and Feel No Pain despite the fact that these are not the names of the rules for most factions directly shows the utility of having universal language.


Sure. Just as colloquially people use the term "fight twice" for a variety of different rules as well.

Again, why would one be bespoke to every unit and strat but the other must, must, must have a USR that must cover both Drop Pods coming 1st turn both narrative and matched play, 9" away and Mawlocs coming 1" away but within 6" of other Mawlocs (and not turn 1 in the matched-play variant) but with a MW splash effect?

Seems illogical and inconsistent.
Most units have Deep Strike (9"). Such as, off the top of my head...
Terminators
Crisis Suits
Strike Squads
Suppressors
Seraphim
Lictors
Stormboys

Monoliths have Deep Strike (12") because GW hates them. But, it's pretty clear what they do-they Deep Strike more than 12" away.

Drop Pods have Deep Strike (9"), as well as a rule called Quick Deepstrike, which allows them to drop turn 1.

Mawlocs have Deep Strike (Special). It then explains what the Mawloc's Deep Strike does, which includes the 1" from enemy models, 6" from other Mawlocs, and cannot charge restrictions, as well as the mortal wounds it does. It's still Deep Strike, and is therefore treated as Reinforcements and part of the "Cannot Deep Strike T1" restriction.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Many are different in some way. Thus it makes sense to do them as bespoke rules unique to each datasheet (stratagem, whatever).


What you're missing is that there are elements that are overwhelmingly common to all of them. Besides Drop Pods, none are allowed to appear in the first Battle Round. Aside from a few that modify the minimum distance, virtually all have a minimum 9" deployment distance.

All have the same wording around being placed in reserved during deployment, appearing at the end of a Movement phase, and setting up the entire unit so that every model is outside of the minimum distance.

They're all just variations on the same rule. So there is no reason that Deep Strike itself can't be a universal rule, with the few units that have exceptions or special behavior having those as their bespoke special rules. That way you immediately know whether a unit has a variant on Deep Strike or not, the wording is consistent across codices, FAQs don't have to do this awkward 'any ability that lets you appear on the board as reserves' phrasing to patch the rule, and at a very basic level the game gets easier to understand and teach.

The very fact that we colloquially use terms like Deep Strike, Objective Secured, and Feel No Pain despite the fact that these are not the names of the rules for most factions directly shows the utility of having universal language.


Sure. Just as colloquially people use the term "fight twice" for a variety of different rules as well.

Again, why would one be bespoke to every unit and strat but the other must, must, must have a USR that must cover both Drop Pods coming 1st turn both narrative and matched play, 9" away and Mawlocs coming 1" away but within 6" of other Mawlocs (and not turn 1 in the matched-play variant) but with a MW splash effect?

Seems illogical and inconsistent.
Most units have Deep Strike (9"). Such as, off the top of my head...
Terminators
Crisis Suits
Strike Squads
Suppressors
Seraphim
Lictors
Stormboys

Monoliths have Deep Strike (12") because GW hates them. But, it's pretty clear what they do-they Deep Strike more than 12" away.

Drop Pods have Deep Strike (9"), as well as a rule called Quick Deepstrike, which allows them to drop turn 1.

Mawlocs have Deep Strike (Special). It then explains what the Mawloc's Deep Strike does, which includes the 1" from enemy models, 6" from other Mawlocs, and cannot charge restrictions, as well as the mortal wounds it does. It's still Deep Strike, and is therefore treated as Reinforcements and part of the "Cannot Deep Strike T1" restriction.


Sure. And the same could be for fight twice.

Terminators get Fight Twice, End of Phase, must be within 1" (3CP)
Suppressors get Fight Twice, End of Phase, must be within 1" (3CP)
Berzerkers get Fight Twice immediately (free)
Eversors get Fight Twice, End of Phase, take some MW (2CP)
Daemonettes get Fight Twice, must cast spell, Psychic Phase
Slaanesh Possessed get Fight Twice, must cast spell, Psychic Phase.
Khorne Possessed get Fight Twice, End of Phase, (3CP)
Imperial Knights get Fight Twice, immediately (3CP)
Aberrants get Fight Twice, End of Phase, sub-faction-specific only, also give -1 LD debuff (3CP)

Etc..

Seems like the same concept.

Again, either both or neither.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 21:19:13


 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Spoiler:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Many are different in some way. Thus it makes sense to do them as bespoke rules unique to each datasheet (stratagem, whatever).


What you're missing is that there are elements that are overwhelmingly common to all of them. Besides Drop Pods, none are allowed to appear in the first Battle Round. Aside from a few that modify the minimum distance, virtually all have a minimum 9" deployment distance.

All have the same wording around being placed in reserved during deployment, appearing at the end of a Movement phase, and setting up the entire unit so that every model is outside of the minimum distance.

They're all just variations on the same rule. So there is no reason that Deep Strike itself can't be a universal rule, with the few units that have exceptions or special behavior having those as their bespoke special rules. That way you immediately know whether a unit has a variant on Deep Strike or not, the wording is consistent across codices, FAQs don't have to do this awkward 'any ability that lets you appear on the board as reserves' phrasing to patch the rule, and at a very basic level the game gets easier to understand and teach.

The very fact that we colloquially use terms like Deep Strike, Objective Secured, and Feel No Pain despite the fact that these are not the names of the rules for most factions directly shows the utility of having universal language.


Sure. Just as colloquially people use the term "fight twice" for a variety of different rules as well.

Again, why would one be bespoke to every unit and strat but the other must, must, must have a USR that must cover both Drop Pods coming 1st turn both narrative and matched play, 9" away and Mawlocs coming 1" away but within 6" of other Mawlocs (and not turn 1 in the matched-play variant) but with a MW splash effect?

Seems illogical and inconsistent.
Most units have Deep Strike (9"). Such as, off the top of my head...
Terminators
Crisis Suits
Strike Squads
Suppressors
Seraphim
Lictors
Stormboys

Monoliths have Deep Strike (12") because GW hates them. But, it's pretty clear what they do-they Deep Strike more than 12" away.

Drop Pods have Deep Strike (9"), as well as a rule called Quick Deepstrike, which allows them to drop turn 1.

Mawlocs have Deep Strike (Special). It then explains what the Mawloc's Deep Strike does, which includes the 1" from enemy models, 6" from other Mawlocs, and cannot charge restrictions, as well as the mortal wounds it does. It's still Deep Strike, and is therefore treated as Reinforcements and part of the "Cannot Deep Strike T1" restriction.


Sure. And the same could be for fight twice.

Terminators get Fight Twice, End of Phase, must be within 1" (3CP)
Suppressors get Fight Twice, End of Phase, must be within 1" (3CP)
Berzerkers get Fight Twice immediately (free)
Eversors get Fight Twice, End of Phase, take some MW (2CP)
Imperial Knights get Fight Twice, immediately (3CP)
Aberrants get Fight Twice, End of Phase, sub-faction-specific only, also give -1 LD debuff (3CP)

Etc..

Seems like the same concept.

Again, either both or neither.
Spoilered for length.

And no, it's not the same.

One is an ability inherent to the unit. The other is an outside ability. The outside can very well reference USRs, grant USRs, modify USRs, whatever. But you shouldn't include every single possible ability on a unit, in case something grants it to them.

Why would you?

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:


And no, it's not the same.

One is an ability inherent to the unit. The other is an outside ability. The outside can very well reference USRs, grant USRs, modify USRs, whatever. But you shouldn't include every single possible ability on a unit, in case something grants it to them.

Why would you?


Why would that make a difference for "learning common rules from the rulebook"?

Where the rule comes from in a fluff-perspective as something "these guys just do" or "that magic stone over there conveys upon them" or "that basically-magic-glowing-piece-of-technology-on-the-space-ship-in-orbit-allows-them-to-do-it" is pretty much irrelevant from a mechanical perspective.

Just because a rule such as "fight twice" is printed on page 27 of the datahseet in a Codex or page 83 in the stratagem-section of the codex doesnt change anything in how you resolve it mechanically on the table.



This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 21:23:07


 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up, please articulate your position. You seem to be typing nonsense.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up, please articulate your position. You seem to be typing nonsense.


Again. What is this "outside" and "native" you talk about.

If I fight twice with a unit of Imperial Fist Intercessors or a unit of Khorne Berzerkers is the exact same mechanical resolution. You pile-in, you roll the dice, you resolve wounds, consolidate, etc.. exactly like you do for one or the other.

The separation of "outside" and "native" is just fluff and convenience of where there was white space in the Codex to print it.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Imagine being so disingenuous you think a Stratagem for an ability is the same as Deep Strike or FNP, when we still use those fething terms in the first place instead of the stupid names GW gave us. Hell some people, including me, still use Shred and stuff like that.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle





In My Lab

Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up, please articulate your position. You seem to be typing nonsense.


Again. What is this "outside" and "native" you talk about.

If I fight twice with a unit of Imperial Fist Intercessors or a unit of Khorne Berzerkers is the exact same mechanical resolution. You pile-in, you roll the dice, you resolve wounds, consolidate, etc.. exactly like you do for one or the other.

The separation of "outside" and "native" is just fluff and convenience of where there was white space in the Codex to print it.
One unit has it as a rule that is always active-the unit just HAS IT.

The other is an ability that is NOT part of their datasheet-it is activated by spending CP.

In the same way that "Reroll hit rolls of 1" is NOT a Terminator ability-it's an ability they can be granted by being near a Captain.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Imagine being so disingenuous you think a Stratagem for an ability is the same as Deep Strike or FNP, when we still use those fething terms in the first place instead of the stupid names GW gave us. Hell some people, including me, still use Shred and stuff like that.


I have never seen people use the, quote, "stupid names GW gave us" over just saying "I fight twice" or "I should twice" or whatever, whether its stratagem-based or ability-based or psychic-power-based or whatever.

   
Made in ch
Revered Rogue Psyker





Sunny Side Up wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Sunny Side Up, please articulate your position. You seem to be typing nonsense.


Again. What is this "outside" and "native" you talk about.

If I fight twice with a unit of Imperial Fist Intercessors or a unit of Khorne Berzerkers is the exact same mechanical resolution. You pile-in, you roll the dice, you resolve wounds, consolidate, etc.. exactly like you do for one or the other.

The separation of "outside" and "native" is just fluff and convenience of where there was white space in the Codex to print it.


No it is even in regards to Ressources different.
And mechanically it also is not allways the same, some only triggering on death f.e. etc.

You not making that difference even though it is inherent in unit cost and or outside cost aka cp is a massive difference just as deepstrike natively and deepstrike ability distributors are and vary Overall.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/30 21:29:29


   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: