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.

I was thinking about how Assault works in 40k, and wondering if there was a way to change it that might allow some more units to find it useful. I noted the annoyance people feel for things like Warp Talons and Daemons not having Grenades, and frustrating assaulting a unit in cover can be.

So I was thinking:
- A unit that charges another unit in the Assault phase receives +1 A and I during that phase.
- If an unengaged unit is charged, and the charging unit moves through difficult terrain, the charged unit receives +5 I for that phase.

The bonus Initiative reflects the impact of the charge, giving a very slight addition to the 'do I stand here and shoot 'em or do I charge?' decision. The additional Initiative means chargers are before things like Axes and Fists, Guardsmen in cover would strike at Ini Step 8, which is a heck of an advantage still, and wargear that adds or subtracts I might gain a slight edge in some situations.

Thoughts? I figured charging the BRB rules with perhaps a couple of errata sentences for some Codices would be better than trying to refix assault for each unit that might want to be assaulting in each individual codex.

What's the point of the +5 I though? Isn't that basically what opponents hiding behind cover will be? Warp Talons will still be only initiative 5 (slaanesh 6) so in the end it really makes no difference except for on a very small number of models that are I8+.

For now, yes. But it could be a different amount for the defenders, or attackers could get other bonuses.

I just thought the flat 'At I' or 'I1' was too limiting.

Questions:

What about assault / defensive grenades?
What about units with the "ignores difficult terrain" rule?
What about jump / jet infantry or monstrous creatures?
Would stealth / shroud come into play?

In my head I had thought:
Assault grenades removes the I bonus for being in cover.
Defensive grenades removes the extra attack but not the I bonus for charging.
I would probably say ignores difficult terrain ignores or reduces the bonus for being in cover.
I'd probably not include bonuses for stealth/shrouded, they feel more centred on shooting to me.

I see reason in all that.

I'd go with "Ignores difficult terrain = Ignores I Penalty / Bonus"

While "Move through Cover = Reduces I Penalty / Bonus by 1D6 (To a minimum of the charged units base I)"
This way you can account for them moving through cover at different rates / tripping over themselves.