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.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I am fine with this, and GW did say things would die.

yes but basic marine will disappear, that can be fine for you but it is not, in 2nd edition only termies was played...

Plenty of people played normal marines here in 2nd. Guess that depends on where you live and play.

 Marmatag wrote:

NOLA Chris wrote:
LD may be the Bravery equivalent for HTH,
roll a d6, add the number of wounds taken,
for every point over the LD an additional figure runs away?

I miss Init for HTH,
I thought they could have fixed it by giving +1 when charging
a further +1 for assault troops,
and extra +s for certain units (bikes, jump packs, etc)
I never have liked the old idea that a guy charging with a dagger hits before the 8 deep pike block behind a wall
(old hangover fears from Fantasy... shudder)

still, gonna be better for my Orkses!!

I agree with all of the init comments above. removing it completely is not how i would have gone, but, i'm not authoring the rules.

+1 Init when charging and another +1 for certain troops is just more special rules for somebody to learn, when GW are said to be looking to simplify.

What we don't yet know is the context this type of stat line has within the core rules of the game, which will be vastly changed. Maybe there will be special rules that allow certain units, armed with special weapons to strike first even when charged, who knows? At this stage, I almost wish they hadnt released the unit profiles without giving them some context and explanation!

ERJAK wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:
I'm curious as to how multiple rounds of combat work without initiative works. Does the charge just strike first every round? and WS, do marines really hit say, Lelith Hesperax on a 3+?

As opposed to a 4+?

5+, lillith is WS9, which is double +1 the marines WS.

In AoS you pretty much expect things to die. So, if a mass of archers shoot at a dragon. That dragon will probably take multiple wounds. The issue comes when that dragon then smashes into that pile of archers. Here is a perfect example using that dreadnought vs 10 tactical marines.


10 Tactical Marines shoot at the dreadnought
10d6 looking for 3+ to hit. Results in 7 hits. Strength 4 vs Toughness 7 should be 6+ to wound. Or say 2 wounds.
With 3+ save that might be 1 failure for 1 wound.

Now, the dreadnought attacks back with say a Multi-Melta. Assuming strength 8 with 1d6 wounds at Rend -2. That will hit the tactical squad 1 time, Wound on a 2+ and do about 4 wounds that are saved on a 5+. If 4 marines die they will have to make a Moral(Battleshock test) rolling 1d6+4 vs their 7 leadership. We will say the person rolls a 4 for 8 on the roll. Now, another marine dies with no save.

Its probably gonna kill a lot more, I can't picture the MM having such a low rend value.

Edit: We'll see that tomorrow, I guess, with the weapon profile. I am personally not looking forward to it.

If I had to bet, multi-damage weapons won't spill over, and will only cook one model. AoS has spillover, but I'm betting they won't keep that, so as to make horde-buster and big-stuff-buster weapons notably different.

That's another possibility, according to the main thread, we won't be able to shoot in melee like in AOS ( ), so its not a straight up copy paste.

how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

My guess would be that they limit the rend.

For example, a Terminator that gets hit with a lascannon with a rend of -5 would still get a 5+ save. Bumped to a 3+ with a Stormshield.

 blackmage wrote:
basic marines with only 1 W.... well if just "simple" weapons like bolters will have a rend -1, unless they will have some more special rules they will disappear from the tables like happened in 2nd edition.

The problem with Marines in 2nd Edition wasn't that they usually had a 4+ save (that was merely annoying). The problem was that they cost 30 points a piece, before any equipment was added.

Besides, extra info from Twitter posts has cover granting save bonuses. So remember your 2nd Edition mantra of "stick to cover unless you prefer dying" and marines should do just fine.

And of course, we still have no idea what form ASM's will take. 2nd Edition went overboard (why yes, I'm glad SW:A finally nerfed the bloody Shuriken Catapult!), with too many weapons having mods and the mods going far to high. If we reduce it to -1 to -3 (maybe -4) and get a lot more sparing with it (i.e. lasguns shouldn't have a -1 ASM for just one example) then it should fix the issue with most saves actually being one lower in practice than they actually were.

But to be sure, marines were underpowered in 2nd because they were so bloody expensive to field. At their current price, it is a lot more reasonable.

2 wounds termies... how many wounds will Paladins get then? I am intrigued...

I'm less annoyed after seeing this. Still unsure about vehicle damage facings, and the comments about the importance of positioning replacing Initiative have me worried they'll have tried to push melee too hard, but at least we've still got stat comparisons for the to-wound roll. Reserving judgement overall until I've seen more (weapon statlines will help in trying to figure out whether they're trying to bork the shooting/melee balance too hard).

 blackmage wrote:
how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

Depends. "Ignore Rend characteristic", "Ignore Rend characteristic unless it's -2 or better", and "If you take a wound or mortal wound roll a die, on a (4+ to 6+) ignore it" (more like a WHFB Ward save than an Invulnerable save) all exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
2 wounds termies... how many wounds will Paladins get then? I am intrigued...

Two, obviously. If GW had any interest in making Paladins good they'd have fixed them instead of making golder/shinier/better Paladins for all your allied-Imperial-deathstar needs.

(Only sort of kidding.)

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I'm less annoyed after seeing this. Still unsure about vehicle damage facings, and the comments about the importance of positioning replacing Initiative have me worried they'll have tried to push melee too hard, but at least we've still got stat comparisons for the to-wound roll. Reserving judgement overall until I've seen more (weapon statlines will help in trying to figure out whether they're trying to bork the shooting/melee balance too hard).

 blackmage wrote:
how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

Depends. "Ignore Rend characteristic", "Ignore Rend characteristic unless it's -2 or better", and "If you take a wound or mortal wound roll a die, on a (4+ to 6+) ignore it" (more like a WHFB Ward save than an Invulnerable save) all exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
2 wounds termies... how many wounds will Paladins get then? I am intrigued...

Two, obviously. If GW had any interest in making Paladins good they'd have fixed them instead of making golder/shinier/better Paladins for all your allied-Imperial-deathstar needs.

(Only sort of kidding.)

paladins still get fnp, force weapons and are brotherhood of psychers.

I'm pleased I stat went away. It was largely useless anyways. Movement stat is nice if they don't ruin it by adding in a bunch of special rules to modify it. WS moving to fixed isn't too dramatic and may actually make it more of a valuable stat. As it stands, most everything is hitthing on a 3 or 4 anyways, so at least now we'll have some decent variation.

 blackmage wrote:
how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

It usually says "Ignores this mortal wound on an XX"

Here's an example unit. https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-chaos-knights-en.pdf

Are we sure that vehicle AV has been removed?
People have been wanting the Dread to become an MC or faux MCs to become vehicles for a good long while.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Are we sure that vehicle AV has been removed?
People have been wanting the Dread to become an MC or faux MCs to become vehicles for a good long while.

Yes. The Dreadnought Is T 7 W 8 Sv 3+
Which hilariously is equal to making it armour 10(for strength 4 stuff) or 11 for everything else

(Based off current wound chart of course)

I was thinking about the dear example, and multimeltas probably aren't the weapon they will use to fight hordes, instead, they will probably use an assault cannon.

I'm betting assault cannons do something different now since AP isn't all or nothing, maybe they will be salvo, or my guess they get extra hits when you roll a six to hit, either exploding dice like in some systems (which would be a fun mechanic), or they function similar to tesla for Crons, roll a six get two hits instead of one. Probably has -2 rend modifier, and a six strength. You could get some serious marine murder on with that.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Are we sure that vehicle AV has been removed?
People have been wanting the Dread to become an MC or faux MCs to become vehicles for a good long while.

Yes.In the live FAQ they said AV is removed. At min 18 they start to talk about AV.

yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

But, W8/Sv3+, which matters an awful lot. That will last a lot longer than an AV11/HP3 version would. In practice it'll last a lot longer than the existing AV12/HP3 version.

Also, in the Q&A, they specifically said that AV was going away and everything has a T value now. The community website says the same: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/25/warhammer-40000-unit-profiles/. For better or for worse, they are not really known for flat-out lying about these sorts of things, so I'm inclined to believe it, though I don't doubt there's some fungus around somewhere. (Void shields, maybe?)

 blackmage wrote:
yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

Easiest solution on their end would be to make invulnerable saves ignore all modifiers.

 Luciferian wrote:

 blackmage wrote:
yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

Easiest solution on their end would be to make invulnerable saves ignore all modifiers.

Yep. Or treat them as a +save mod applied after the negative.

 Luciferian wrote:

 blackmage wrote:
yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

Easiest solution on their end would be to make invulnerable saves ignore all modifiers.

That's basically what it was in 2nd Edition when they were referred to as "unmodified saves".

The important question is going to be if they are taken instead of or in addition to a normal armour save. 2nd Edition allowed you to take all of your saves, most following editions of 40k nipped that in the bud, and even SW:A changed that (despite being built directly on the 2nd Edition/Necro engine). But from the sounds of AoS it went the opposite route and allows for a post-save roll to ignore wounds (which is more like WFB and 2nd Edition).

If units can take all their saves and they let terminators keep the 5+ invuln, then they just got a whole hell of a lot tougher (same if they ignore ASM's below a certain threshold).

There are still a ton of unknowns here, and it is intriguing to see it unfold.

Oh well.
R.I.P. AV - I will miss you.

I am hype, termies and dreadnoughts looking alot better than before!

I don't even own nurgle termies, but now I need to decide whether to get the FW upgrade set or wait for new ones!!

This is the post I've been waiting for to start my ork mek army stomped,morkanauts,deff dreads I can't wait to watch 7th and eddition burn and celebrate a new beginning thank you GW.

Can I just put in a vote to remove the stupid use of the word "rend". Just say save modifier or something simple. If you want to simplify the game, stop code-wording everything.

 Rippy wrote:
I am hype, termies and dreadnoughts looking alot better than before!

I don't even own nurgle termies, but now I need to decide whether to get the FW upgrade set or wait for new ones!!

I would wait for new ones. If nothing else, I have high expectations for all of GW's new models.