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.

Hmm whith a small rise of the points should be ok ( for ex. 3-4 points)

 Talys wrote:
This highlights the D6 issue of 40k. There's a big difference between BS4 and BS3, (16.7% effectiveness), and Scouts should be enhanced humans.

Actually it's a 33% difference in effectiveness.

I hadn't actually read about scouts going to Ws/Bs 4. If that's the case, I don't like it. Ws/Bs3 should be representative of a well trained human, 4 should represent something freakish.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Talys wrote:
This highlights the D6 issue of 40k. There's a big difference between BS4 and BS3, (16.7% effectiveness), and Scouts should be enhanced humans.

Actually it's a 33% difference in effectiveness.

I hadn't actually read about scouts going to Ws/Bs 4. If that's the case, I don't like it. Ws/Bs3 should be representative of a well trained human, 4 should represent something freakish.

Personally I'm happy with it.

Not all Chapters field untested recruits as their Scout Squads. Raven Guard were mentioned to field kill-teams of veteran Battle-Brothers(as in equivalent to those guys from the First Company) in Scout Armor when necessary to throw out an example.

Power creep, pure and simple. Just another small step towards a game with even more deadly shooting, where your entire army dies by turn 5.

The only thing wrong with 6e scouts is how crappy sniper rifles are, and that would have been more appropriately fixed by a buff to the sniper USR during the transition to 7th edition (instead of the nerf it got).

 Kanluwen wrote:
Not all Chapters field untested recruits as their Scout Squads. Raven Guard were mentioned to field kill-teams of veteran Battle-Brothers(as in equivalent to those guys from the First Company) in Scout Armor when necessary to throw out an example.

Yeah and that's fine, Space Wolves are the same (since 3rd edition), but I think those should be special rules given to those specific chapters, not just a blanket power creep.

I'm actually happy about it. It was a personal peeve of mine that scouts, the only ubut with access to snipers in the whole codex, also had the worst bs.

As a Space Marine player, I feel pretty good about the increase :-)

Get rid of the D6. Profit.

Martel732 wrote:
Get rid of the D6. Profit.

Getting rid of the D6 has its own problems as has been discussed in other threads. I'd be happy with the D6 system if we actually used the potential of the D6.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Get rid of the D6. Profit.

Getting rid of the D6 has its own problems as has been discussed in other threads. I'd be happy with the D6 system if we actually used the potential of the D6.

Could you elaborate on that?

Martel732 wrote:
Get rid of the D6. Profit.

What we need to do is replace it with the classic Swedish game "Kasta Gris" ("Throw a Pig) dice.

I enjoy that they took the Scouts back to BS and WS4 like they were in 4th Edition and earlier. Scouts should be better at shooting than average Guardsmen. They are either trained their whole life to be a marine, or have already been proven warriors prior to recruitment.

Then once they are recruited they go through more training, until they are put in a Scout Squad (to receive yet more training and field experience) and serve an indeterminate amount of time as a Scout before being elevated to the position of full Battle Brother. Remember you dont just get promoted after X amount of time in the 10th Company, when you leave is based on merit and whether or not there is a place in the other companies for you.

The low cost wont effect too much in the Grand Scheme of things, but could they go up maybe one point? Sure, but I doubt it will affect much.

 vipoid wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Get rid of the D6. Profit.

Getting rid of the D6 has its own problems as has been discussed in other threads. I'd be happy with the D6 system if we actually used the potential of the D6.

Could you elaborate on that?

Well look at the Ws table. It only goes from 3+ to 5+. I tend to be of the opinion that 40k being a larger scale game these days doesn't need the fine granularity of an RPG. All your core troops can be represented on a 2+ to a 6+ quite well enough and then oddities can be shown with special rules to account for troops that are significantly more powerful than that.

I think going to higher sided dice comes with enough of it's own problems to not really be worth the benefits, I'd much rather roll large numbers of D6 than smaller numbers of higher sided dice, especially when you consider that the more dice you roll the less variability there is.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
I enjoy that they took the Scouts back to BS and WS4 like they were in 4th Edition and earlier. Scouts should be better at shooting than average Guardsmen. They are either trained their whole life to be a marine, or have already been proven warriors prior to recruitment.

Then once they are recruited they go through more training, until they are put in a Scout Squad (to receive yet more training and field experience) and serve an indeterminate amount of time as a Scout before being elevated to the position of full Battle Brother. Remember you dont just get promoted after X amount of time in the 10th Company, when you leave is based on merit and whether or not there is a place in the other companies for you.

The low cost wont effect too much in the Grand Scheme of things, but could they go up maybe one point? Sure, but I doubt it will affect much.

Again: Fluff reasons are bad reasons. Hell, in the Space Wolves I seem to recall that being a scout isn't the second class citizen job it is in other chapters, but something reserved for some of their more proven soldiers.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
I enjoy that they took the Scouts back to BS and WS4 like they were in 4th Edition and earlier. Scouts should be better at shooting than average Guardsmen. They are either trained their whole life to be a marine, or have already been proven warriors prior to recruitment.

By that logic, any Cadian model should be BS4 as well since they "learn to field-strip and fire their lasguns before they can walk".

I always thought Scouts should be WS4 BS4 S3 T3. But that's just, like, my opinion, man. (And WS4 BS4 S5 T5 for Terminators...)

 Purifier wrote:

Again: Fluff reasons are bad reasons. Hell, in the Space Wolves I seem to recall that being a scout isn't the second class citizen job it is in other chapters, but something reserved for some of their more proven soldiers.

It's more that in the Wolves, it's "reserved for those Space Wolves who don't play well with others and who have a tricky side to them".

Purifier wrote:Again: Fluff reasons are bad reasons. Hell, in the Space Wolves I seem to recall that being a scout isn't the second class citizen job it is in other chapters, but something reserved for some of their more proven soldiers.

What's your crunch reason that they shouldn't be WS/BS4?

Kanluwen wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
I enjoy that they took the Scouts back to BS and WS4 like they were in 4th Edition and earlier. Scouts should be better at shooting than average Guardsmen. They are either trained their whole life to be a marine, or have already been proven warriors prior to recruitment.

By that logic, any Cadian model should be BS4 as well since they "learn to field-strip and fire their lasguns before they can walk".

Give them options for Veteran Platoons problem solved.

But you know who else trains from a young age to be Soldiers and do have BS4? Storm troopers, who would be closer to what a Scout is.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Get rid of the D6. Profit.

Getting rid of the D6 has its own problems as has been discussed in other threads. I'd be happy with the D6 system if we actually used the potential of the D6.

Could you elaborate on that?

Well look at the Ws table. It only goes from 3+ to 5+. I tend to be of the opinion that 40k being a larger scale game these days doesn't need the fine granularity of an RPG. All your core troops can be represented on a 2+ to a 6+ quite well enough and then oddities can be shown with special rules to account for troops that are significantly more powerful than that.

I think going to higher sided dice comes with enough of it's own problems to not really be worth the benefits, I'd much rather roll large numbers of D6 than smaller numbers of higher sided dice, especially when you consider that the more dice you roll the less variability there is.

It needs more granularity because the amount of unique units in the game.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Could you elaborate on that?

Well look at the Ws table. It only goes from 3+ to 5+. I tend to be of the opinion that 40k being a larger scale game these days doesn't need the fine granularity of an RPG. All your core troops can be represented on a 2+ to a 6+ quite well enough and then oddities can be shown with special rules to account for troops that are significantly more powerful than that.

 vipoid wrote:
Sorry, I'm confused. You first say that 40k shouldn't be as granular as an RPG... then you say that it should be more granular by making the WS table go from 2+ to 6+.

I'm not sure what's confusing about that. It doesn't need the granularity of a game that uses D10's, 12's and 20's.... but it could use the granularity offered by a D6 (which currently isn't being used because we have things like the Ws table that only goes from 3+ to 5+ or snap shots that are 6's to hit regardless of Bs).

In any case, I'm not sure that solves anything - especially when you start applying it elsewhere. Surely the major problem of 40k in terms of using different values (rather than hovering around 4 for most stats) is that even +2 or -2 can quickly make a unit either too tough or so fragile as to be worthless.

I think that's more a problem with 40k tending to not use many modifiers but instead going for all or nothing sort of things (like snap shots dropping to 6's, or the AP system where you either ignore armour completely or don't ignore it at all).

Out of interest, what problems would d10s cause?

It's just less convenient rolling large numbers of dice. They don't roll as nicely, they are more likely to get cocked up against terrain or models, they are slower to read, they aren't as cheap and easy to get.

Obviously it just comes down to preference though. I'm not a fan of higher sided dice unless it's for rolling smaller numbers of dice and I prefer rolling larger number of dice anyway (to reduce variability). At the end of the day, I think the granularity offered by a D10 over a D6 is far from the worst problem with 40k.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
I enjoy that they took the Scouts back to BS and WS4 like they were in 4th Edition and earlier. Scouts should be better at shooting than average Guardsmen. They are either trained their whole life to be a marine, or have already been proven warriors prior to recruitment.

By that logic, any Cadian model should be BS4 as well since they "learn to field-strip and fire their lasguns before they can walk".

The whole "raised to be a warrior" myth is a stupid one that needs to die. Spartans surrendered and lost battles. So did samurai, knights, and every other caste of professional soldier in history.

Volunteer forces are the way to go, since you weed out, by default, everyone who doesn't consciously want to be a warrior.



After all, the Fire Caste do the same thing. Maybe Tau should get a bump up to BS4, since they spend their lives training for war and nothing else.

For the record, I think that anything that isn't super-human or assisted by advanced targeting systems should be BS3. Stormtroopers, Guardians, and Veterans need to be BS3. Scouts might deserve the 4, but it's happening because of power creep, not because it's fluffy.

 Peregrine wrote:
no. Enough of this stat inflation where everyone gets to be BS/WS 4. Why even bother having BS stats when Tau and IG are the only armies with BS 3? Just make shooting a flat 3+ to hit for everyone and give orks a special rule that they only hit on 6s.

Orks have Bs 2....

Scout should have Bs 4 because they are space marines and have pretty much all the training except some body implants...

 vipoid wrote:
Sorry, I'm confused. You first say that 40k shouldn't be as granular as an RPG... then you say that it should be more granular by making the WS table go from 2+ to 6+.

In any case, I'm not sure that solves anything - especially when you start applying it elsewhere. Surely the major problem of 40k in terms of using different values (rather than hovering around 4 for most stats) is that even +2 or -2 can quickly make a unit either too tough or so fragile as to be worthless.

Out of interest, what problems would d10s cause?

I don't think changing the WS table makes the game more granular. Everything else in the game already goes from 2+ to 6+, so I don't see why to-hit rolls in close combat should be any different. If anything, it would help new players by allowing for more consistency. I can't tell you how many times I've had newer players think they should be hitting on better than 3+, or worse than 4+ (they don't realize you need to be REALLY high WS for a 5+ to happen).

I also agree with AllSeeingSkink, a simple 2+ to 6+ isn't really enough on its own, but is easily expanded. Things that modify, rerolls, modified rerolls, bonuses on certain numbers, penalties on other numbers... there's a lot of room in the randomization of d6. Take a look at a simple to-wound roll. Pretty standard normally, but look how much different it becomes when a weapon is poisoned, when the attack has rending, or shred, or is a Harlequin kiss of death, or is a rad-rifle from a Skitarii, or is rerolled with Da Lucky Stikk. It's something so simple, but there's a lot of extra ways to modify it.

Finally, there's a pretty obvious huge problem switching dice systems causes. Everything's written for d6's right now. To change up would mean there'd need to be an update of EVERYTHING - which would be slow, expensive, and cause no small amount of grief for the players and GW. Imagine if legalisation passed that made it illegal to use cell phones, and all the cell companies had to immediately end service. Your phone suddenly only works when plugged into a wall outlet again. I mean, yeah, we'd get by, but some people only own cell phones and would have to change. There'd be buying of new cell phones. Cancelling and changing of phone plans. Samsung, Apple, etc... they all have to pull their devices and put out new ones fast. And you, the customer are stuck in the middle. Like, you could do it, but the logistics of it would be traumatic to the economy and to your own life.

I'm in two minds about this really. On the one hand, as someone who has loved scout marines since 5e, this is awesome. My objective holder snipers are more annoying now than ever! But, no increase in points bothers me a bit, I'll be honest. I liked having the sergeant be a better shot than the rest of the unit, out was kinda neat. I think maybe making them a point or to more would be more fair, but they're still scout marines, they're still going to be used to hold objectives for me, so, I don't know. I'm still gonna run them.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
I enjoy that they took the Scouts back to BS and WS4 like they were in 4th Edition and earlier. Scouts should be better at shooting than average Guardsmen. They are either trained their whole life to be a marine, or have already been proven warriors prior to recruitment.

By that logic, any Cadian model should be BS4 as well since they "learn to field-strip and fire their lasguns before they can walk".

The whole "raised to be a warrior" myth is a stupid one that needs to die. Spartans surrendered and lost battles. So did samurai, knights, and every other caste of professional soldier in history.

Volunteer forces are the way to go, since you weed out, by default, everyone who doesn't consciously want to be a warrior.

You might want to go and actually read up on Cadians then; because they are the very definition of "volunteer forces".

After all, the Fire Caste do the same thing. Maybe Tau should get a bump up to BS4, since they spend their lives training for war and nothing else.

Their "adult lives", not from childhood onwards from what we've seen.

 EmpNortonII wrote:


The whole "raised to be a warrior" myth is a stupid one that needs to die. Spartans surrendered and lost battles. So did samurai, knights, and every other caste of professional soldier in history.

Volunteer forces are the way to go, since you weed out, by default, everyone who doesn't consciously want to be a warrior.

No one said those groups didnt surrender, if fact that hadn't even been mentioned. Besides, in 40k raise a warrior is something that happens through constant indoctrination of various sorts. And you dont just need volunteer forces to be good soldiers, you can break those that dont until they do, its not as efficient but it can be done if you have the resolve to do it. I'd also point out that a fair number of today's volunteer forces aren't people that want to be Soldiers (at least in the US) they are just people that want the perks, schooling, benefits ect.

Scouts might deserve the 4, but it's happening because of power creep, not because it's fluffy.

Except that it is fluffy, a Scout remains a scout until he is given the Black Carapace which come at an undetermined time in the Scout Company, usually depending on skill and the need for replacements. Their skills would be highly refined. There's no reason Vets and Storm Troopers shouldnt be BS4, as they would through experience be able to hit targets more than 50% of the time. Tau get the tech to make up for it.

A scout is a scout is a scout.

I don't care what fluff you want to try and justify what with, they should all have the same statline throughout every codex. If they want to choose 4s across the board, so be it. Just be consistent.

The weapon availability and tactics should be the main differences between chapters. Not the stat lines.

Nvs wrote:
A scout is a scout is a scout.

I don't care what fluff you want to try and justify what with, they should all have the same statline throughout every codex. If they want to choose 4s across the board, so be it. Just be consistent.

The weapon availability and tactics should be the main differences between chapters. Not the stat lines.

There was a time when they were all WS/BS4 and then there was a time when they were all WS/BS3 (except the Space Wolves). It will get back to them having the same line eventually.

Don't give a . Never liked the look of the scout models, not to mention no specials and worse save outside of cover. They just seem unimpressive compared to firepower you can pack into tactical squads. I'd rather pay points on units that can actually kill something on objectives and stay on them rather than take pot shots from a camp.