How Would You Handle The Return Of USRs?

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.

**JNAProductions**

PenitentJake wrote:
The only way USR's will make me happy is if their rules text is printed on datacards in Codices as well as the BRB.

The fact that they weren't in all the previous editions that included them is the reason why I hated them.

40k is always going to be a BRB + Codex game, so you are always going to need both to play, but in the current version of the game, each of the necessary books is complete- neither contains the name of a rule which can only be found in another book.

I have come around to USRs; I agree that the game is enhanced by common language. But the endless cross referencing that was required in previous version, not to mention the dissatisfaction I felt at buying books which did not contain the text for the rules included in the book killed me.

Lots of folks are legitimately frustrated about the DLC of campaign books because they feel those make Codices FEEL incomplete. In previous editions of the game that included USRs. Codices actually WERE incomplete.

I get it: since you need the BRB anyway, it didn't feel like that big a deal to some people. But that doesn't the fact that previous Codices were incomplete.

Oh, 100% any USR used in a Codex should be reprinted, in full, in an appendix. Probably EVERY USR, even ones that that Dex doesn't use.

And 100% there should be reminder text on datasheets.

**Jarms48**

I would love USR to come back. We don't need a dozen different types of FNP, -1 Damage, etc.

Just come up with a single name and put that rule in the BRB as well as on that units datasheet.

That was literally the only issue from the old USR system. The unit datasheet would only ever mention the rules name so you had to constantly flip between the codex and rulebook which slowed down play. Especially when several had similar sounding names.

**Apple fox**

Do both, expanded and quick reference sheets.
This is effectively how every game I play has done it for years, and USRs done right shouldn’t need lots of looking up for the most part.
They are supposed to be often used rules that players should be able to utilise fast.
They are no different from other things on the sheet that don’t need to be expanded on every sheet.

The stat block itself is short hand for a type of universal rule.

So giving players some choice should Be a good compromise.
It’s really a GW problem that’s unique to them for the most part.