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.

Firstly don't you think it would make sense to take an armor save BEFORE your opponent rolls to wound? I men the weapon actually has to get through the armor before it can hurt you. And secondly I have always had this thing about blast weapons here are some rules I have made up:
Any model (not monstrous creatures or tanks) caught under a blast weapon and not taken as a casualty must roll 3D6 - the models strength and toughness combined (eg a space marine would -8) If the final result is less than a 6 the model is fine. If it is more than a 6 roll a D3 and a scatter dice. The model must move the distance in the direction shown. At the start of the controlling players next moving phase they must immediately regroup into unit coherency. The unit counts as having moved but it may still run/shoot and assault. This is to represent models being blown back by the force of the explosion.
I know this second rule will never be used as it takes far too long but it has always bugged me that if you are hit by a battle canon and survive you somehow stay firmly rooted to the spot despite the explosion.

I think the armour save thing is just for ease. I don't think it makes a difference statistically. You roll all your dice to hit and wound - then you pass the dice to your opponent, who makes his rolls. Rather than pass the dice back and forth each time...

Hi vodo40k.
I know exactly what you mean.
I am working on another rules set .
Here is how I handle armour and weapon interactions.

All weapons are given a damage value(similar to 40ks str value).The higher the value the more damage the weapon can do.Values from 5 to 20.

All units are given an armour value.The higher the value the better protected the unit is.Values from 1 to 15.(Similar to 40ks vehicle AV)

When a unit takes a weapon hit , simply deduct the armour value (Av),from the weapon damage value.(Dv)
The defending player has to roll OVER this value to make the save.

Eg a unit with Av 4 is hit by a weapon with Dv 9.
9-4=5. The unit need a 6+ to save.

Armour value is equal or greater than the weapon Damage value, the unit is 'invunerable' the hit.

If units fail the save they take damage.(Loose wounds/structure points.)

What do you think ?

TTFN
lanrak.

vodo40k wrote:Firstly don't you think it would make sense to take an armor save BEFORE your opponent rolls to wound?

No. Statistically, whichever order you do it in, the results are exactly the same. Psychologically, doing the saves last works for the best because then the defender gets the last roll to try and save his guys. Try playing something that rarely gets saves (like IG) for a few games, then switch to power armor. it feels good to finally get a chance to keep them from dying.

What do you think ?

I actually quite like this idea, it would stop terminators losing tho a swarm of lasgun shots. But this would also mean a lasgun would do NOTHING to a terminator, which is a bit unfair. Also how would inv saves work do they get extra armor points or can they still take a save against a thin that would normally kill them straight out (eg a guy with av 10 against a dv 20 weapon) also how would this affect instant death?

Hi vodo40k.
Like I said this is the method I am using in a simple simulation rule set I am working on.
Inv saves are not in this sytem.
5 Armour saves, 3 Inv saves and 5 AV values , (and a few special rules,)seemed a bit clunky to me.I prefered to have one set of values.

However I do include a supression mechanic.The targets UNITS Av is added to its remaining Hp.

Eg a 'terminator type' unit with 5 men , 1 HP (wound ) each.Has an Av of 7.
5 +7 = 12.The units supression value is 12.
If the unit takes more than 12 points of supresion damage in total ,from any attack they have to test for supression.
(Every unit has a moral value.Any moral type test, (supression panic, etc,) simply roll over the moral value on a D6.)

A weapons supression damage (Sd) is listed seperatly from the normal damage, and is accumulative.(A units firing may only supress ONE target.)
Eg 7 lasgun shots, (Sd 1 ) are added together with a Heavy-bolter (Sd5 ) to get total of Sd 12.

As some weapons like Lascannon put a huge amount of energy in a very small area.They have (Sd-)
Where as a blind/flash/stun grenade little chance of causeing physical damage, but can supress (Sd 4)

Rather than muck about with loads of special rules for 'heroic actions-resolve'.I intend to give a set number of re-rolls per army .(Dependant on amount and experiance of leaders.)

These can be used by the player as and when. (So a lowly grunt can save the day,and get medals,not just the officers... )

I like the background of 40k, but the rules are so far from what I want, I though I would have a go at writing some myself! (Still a work in progress.)

Happy Gaming,
Lanrak.

The armor save thing does make sense but the reason it is done last is to keep the flow of the game going. As for the again i agree but it is again to keep the flow going.

Hi vindicator#9.
So having three seperate sytems (As-AP, Inv -special rules,Str-AV,) and a bunch of special rules 'flows' better than;-
'A-B=dice roll required to save,fail the save you take damage?
Please tell me how?

The current game mechanics used in 40k MADE sense in the game they were developed for,WHFB.

However as 40k is NOT a game using massed ranks of closely formed troops mainly using close combat weapons, the use of the WHFB game mechanics in 40k is a bit daft IMO.

And as WHFB has used the best resolution methods for these game mechanics, when the devs want to 'make 40k different', they have to use very abstract and counterintuitive rules.

Thats why I prefer to use alternative rule sets, (StargruntII, No Limits, Chain Reaction III, etc, or try to write my own.)

Happy Gaming,
lanrak.

Interesting idea, I kinda like it.

I had a discussion about the reason saves were taken after wounds and apart from the 'flow' of the game (which is a perfectly logical reason) it is much more dramatic to roll to hit, to wound and then give the commanding player one last chance to roll a save and literally 'save' his men from death.

If you rolled the save before the wound you could fail your save and then sit there while your opponent rolls the wound and essentially decides whether your guy lives or dies. I like it the 'save last' way better, personally.

DoW

Sorry lanrak i was refering to vodos idea of armor save before the wound roll and the blast blowing people away. Now i do like your idea though. That makes the game flow easier.

Hi again.
If we look at the game the current 40k game mechanics were developed for WHFB.
The game turn represents the generals responding to the actions of the large ememy formations.
Player A does everything, then player B does everything.

The weapon-armour mechanic simulates a warrior swinging a heavy piece of wood/metal at his opponent,its about to knock his head clean off.
Roll to hit, roll to wound. But just at the last minute the defender raises his shield and defelcts the blow/ or dodges it.(Roll to save.)

In 40k the weapons are far more deadly , can you dodge a hail of high velocity bullets?

If we use a simple interactive game turn, then freindly units can retaliate.The need to take 'saves' last, to give the opponent 'something to do in your turn' is no longer required.

I am currently trying out an order counter game turn.
Each game turn allows 2 actions, taken over two alternating phases.

Eg.
Start of turn.
Attempt to rally units on poor moral.Give orders to units on good moral.Request off table support.(Reserves, artillery -air strikes.)

Player A turns over order counters and takes first action.

Player B turns over order counters and takes first action.

Player A turns over order counter and takes second action.

Player B turns over order counter and takes second action.

End of turn.
Resolve close combats, resolve moral effects, plot arrivals.

Orders .
Fire support. Ready+fire.(to use non move and fire weapons, ordnance etc.)
Advance. Move + Fire.
Evade . Fire +Move.
Charge . Move +Assault.
Double. Move+Move

Eg player A gives an Advance order (face down , ) to one of his units.
On his first turn he reveals the order by turning it over, and performs a move action.
On his last turn he takes a fire action and turns the order counter blank side up again.

This way the opponent has NO IDEA whay your units will be doing, and you dont know what your oponents units will be doing.(VERY tactical thoughs ...)
Its easy to track which units have taken actions, and EVERY unit takes the same amount of actions.

TTFN
Lanrak.