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.

 some bloke wrote:
Actually, having these things as Once Per Turn and Once Per Unit would lead to very diverse and interesting lists.

By that I mean that the ability is tied to the unit, and the ability is also named, such that you cannot use the same named ability more than once per turn. Each unit can only use their abilities once per game.

So you could have 3 units of >latest hotness< but you could only use their double-tap stratagem once per game, on different units, once per unit, once per turn.

So if squad 1 double taps, they can never double-tap again and the other units cannot double-tap either.


Alternatively you could take 3 different units with their own unique abilities and then you could use each of their abilities in the same turn, once per game, making them a more flexible army.

Sometimes I like fielding a themed list that has multiples of the same unit though. Or sometimes I just really like a unit and want to field the same unit multiple times. I'd rather not have one of those units be rendered less effective because the first instance of that unit is hogging the stratagem. Heck, that's already kind of an issue for units with access to such strats. Seems like it would be better to just remove strats like that entirely and let units stand on their own.

That seems like a really contrived gamey way of enforcing list diversity. Thematically it feels terribly wrong.

Seconding the 'special abilities' being an issue as a part of stratagem.

I suggest decoupling special abilities from stratagems, and give it its own unique resource to be spent. The currency can be generated as a function of game round + objectives held. This makes the game more deadly as rounds progress instead of "dump your CP, suicide your units, before your opponent dumps their CP and suicides their units.

Then, GW needs to really develop series of generic interrupt stratagems available to all armies, then come up with 1~3 army/chapter specific oomphs; this is the chapter tactic. BY decoupling special abilities from stratagems that use standard CP as resource will have some leftover CP's to use on the now-not-so-free chapter tactics.

Now that I've gotten my hands on the new AoS rulebook, I think I kind of like the idea of turning "ability" strats into command abilities tied to characters. Especially if you made sure most factions had a decent number of cheap characters appropriate for their various units (so a shadow king/night fiend character that doesn't eat up a force org slot for mandrakes, for instance). It makes sense that more complicated maneuvers would be tied to to the army's leaders calling out plays, and it gives various sniper and anti-character options more significance.

As someone said on the first page, a 1:1 copy and paste probably wouldn't work, but I do sort of like the idea of the command phase featuring characters actually giving commands. Maybe allow a number of heroic actions per command phase based on the game size? This would serve to both prevent players from dumping all their CP on the first couple turns and would also mean that your character selection defines which command abilities you have access to.