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.
2020/06/20 16:23:25
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
The Sorcerer on the left can be shot. The Sorcerer on the right cannot be shot.
Who here can guess the reason why?
Solution: The Left is secretly this scenario
Spoiler:
Hahaha, this is a pretty good one. Not sure how often it'll come up in games but it is interesting to think about. Is there a way to word a rule concisely that achieves the same effect as what we have, but also accounts for this edge case? (While also preventing weird, new edge cases?)
---
2020/06/20 16:24:11
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Alpharius wrote: Do many people actually play using "Power Levels" (and is there really any way to know this for sure?) and will "Power Levels" be continuing into 40K 9th?
They’ve said they will and they’ll be getting updated, unlike in 8th.
Don’t start the PL pros and cons here though. Plenty of salty threads telling people how they’re allowed to have fun already...
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
2020/06/20 16:26:07
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
That's how the DG bodyguard rule has always worked - it is different than the way most ones work in that it intercepts the hit rather than transferring the wound.
2020/06/20 16:28:03
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
yukishiro1 wrote: That's how the DG bodyguard rule has always worked - it is different than the way most ones work in that it intercepts the hit rather than transferring the wound.
Well, let's hope that carries over to all bodyguard units now. So much better than current system.
2020/06/20 16:35:42
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
The opposition player getting to go first after chargers seems like a subtle but potentially very powerful change.
I felt one of the negatives about assault was that you charged something vaguely threatening, rolled below average, and then got smashed twice in the face, probably losing the unit.
Admittedly, it will probably just make falling back even more attractive if they haven't changed anything with that.
Have to say I'm optimistic about the game - but my hype is starting to evaporate. I'm far too impatient on this "lets drip feed you one rule change a day" approach.
2020/06/20 16:43:07
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Not only that, but now my Crawlers can fire their nasty plagueburst mortars (which are now Blast weapons too) on the move without suffering a hit penalty!
Who'da thunk it that a mortar would end up being a blast weapon in the new edition. What a revelation.
The absolutely weird thing is they apparently do need a playtester to tell us that, because they're copy/pasting the 8th edition weapon profile which doesn't include blast.
I mean, they could show us updated profiles that are actually from 9th, but apparently... no. They're just not going to do that.
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2020/06/20 16:56:51
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Not only that, but now my Crawlers can fire their nasty plagueburst mortars (which are now Blast weapons too) on the move without suffering a hit penalty!
Who'da thunk it that a mortar would end up being a blast weapon in the new edition. What a revelation.
The absolutely weird thing is they apparently do need a playtester to tell us that, because they're copy/pasting the 8th edition weapon profile which doesn't include blast.
I mean, they could show us updated profiles that are actually from 9th, but apparently... no. They're just not going to do that.
They probably didn't update the stat blocks but instead just have an appendix labeled "blast weapons" that lists them alphabetically, groupes by faction.
2020/06/20 17:02:24
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Not only that, but now my Crawlers can fire their nasty plagueburst mortars (which are now Blast weapons too) on the move without suffering a hit penalty!
Who'da thunk it that a mortar would end up being a blast weapon in the new edition. What a revelation.
The absolutely weird thing is they apparently do need a playtester to tell us that, because they're copy/pasting the 8th edition weapon profile which doesn't include blast.
I mean, they could show us updated profiles that are actually from 9th, but apparently... no. They're just not going to do that.
They probably didn't update the stat blocks but instead just have an appendix labeled "blast weapons" that lists them alphabetically, groupes by faction.
Eh. They might do that.
I'm expecting a FAQ document (actually a slew of FAQs, one for each faction) with full profiles for any weapons that changed, though. Less chance of confusion, and to catch any other adjustments that need to be made to weapons at the same time. There are several where I'd change wording and/or dice. For example, the old demolisher cannon verbiage (5+ models, change to heavy d6) is still lurking in a few places and is completely unnecessary now.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/20 17:02:41
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2020/06/20 17:03:57
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Not only that, but now my Crawlers can fire their nasty plagueburst mortars (which are now Blast weapons too) on the move without suffering a hit penalty!
Who'da thunk it that a mortar would end up being a blast weapon in the new edition. What a revelation.
The absolutely weird thing is they apparently do need a playtester to tell us that, because they're copy/pasting the 8th edition weapon profile which doesn't include blast.
I mean, they could show us updated profiles that are actually from 9th, but apparently... no. They're just not going to do that.
They probably didn't update the stat blocks but instead just have an appendix labeled "blast weapons" that lists them alphabetically, groupes by faction.
So there won't be updated rules with the App for the old books I guess but just the old rules with the remark "please use the Appendix in the printed books"
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2020/06/20 17:12:58
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: They said blast weapons will be defined on the appendix of the core rule book, and gave us no idication of day one errata dor those weapons as well.
Where'd they say they were taking the lazy and half-effort way?
And why did you suddenly change from 'probably' to 'they said?'
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/20 17:13:42
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2020/06/20 17:13:43
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
yukishiro1 wrote: That's how the DG bodyguard rule has always worked - it is different than the way most ones work in that it intercepts the hit rather than transferring the wound.
Well, let's hope that carries over to all bodyguard units now. So much better than current system.
Agreed. I think this version of the bodyguard rule makes a lot more sense than all the other variants. It also would make it easier if all bodyguard abilities worked in a similar manner to each other.
2020/06/20 17:18:55
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: They said blast weapons will be defined on the appendix of the core rule book, and gave us no idication of day one errata dor those weapons as well.
Where'd they say they were taking the lazy and half-effort way?
And why did you suddenly change from 'probably' to 'they said?'
Probably refered to exactly how they'll executed, they said has to do with the general statement they made back when they told us blasts where a thing when everything was announced.
2020/06/20 17:19:47
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: They said blast weapons will be defined on the appendix of the core rule book, and gave us no idication of day one errata dor those weapons as well.
Where'd they say they were taking the lazy and half-effort way?
And why did you suddenly change from 'probably' to 'they said?'
It was mentioned by Stu Black in one of the Warhammer Dailies. There's an appendix in the core rulebook which lists every blast weapon at launch, and when codices are redone they'll receive the proper keywording.
2020/06/20 17:20:08
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: They said blast weapons will be defined on the appendix of the core rule book, and gave us no idication of day one errata dor those weapons as well.
Where'd they say they were taking the lazy and half-effort way?
And why did you suddenly change from 'probably' to 'they said?'
They said it in the streams and I think also in one of the articles, Blast rules will be given by an Appendix in the Core Rule book which will list the weapon and their rules
something we had before, just that player usually ignore it and say that only Codex Errata counts and changes in the Appendix are just mistakes anyway
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2020/06/20 17:20:19
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
yukishiro1 wrote: That's how the DG bodyguard rule has always worked - it is different than the way most ones work in that it intercepts the hit rather than transferring the wound.
Well, let's hope that carries over to all bodyguard units now. So much better than current system.
Agreed. I think this version of the bodyguard rule makes a lot more sense than all the other variants. It also would make it easier if all bodyguard abilities worked in a similar manner to each other.
I could see others, namely Calgar's guard, act as if are units of 3+ for LoS purposes.
2020/06/20 17:24:14
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: They said blast weapons will be defined on the appendix of the core rule book, and gave us no idication of day one errata dor those weapons as well.
Where'd they say they were taking the lazy and half-effort way?
And why did you suddenly change from 'probably' to 'they said?'
They said it in the streams and I think also in one of the articles, Blast rules will be given by an Appendix in the Core Rule book which will list the weapon and their rules
something we had before, just that player usually ignore it and say that only Codex Errata counts and changes in the Appendix are just mistakes anyway
All 174 Blast weapons and Relics listed in the back of the new Warhammer 40,000 Core Book gain this ability. Here’s a selection of five of them, and why we’re happy to see them included:
– Barbed Strangler (the Tyranids get to shoot up enemy hordes too!)
– Deathstrike missile (yes, your favourite ICBM is getting EVEN DEADLIER)
– D-cannon (yay – more warp displacement for everyone!)
– Squig launcha (nomnomnom)
– Phlegm bombardment (now extra icky)
2020/06/20 17:28:47
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Since the player who isn’t taking their turn gets to choose the first non-charging unit to fight with, the Foul Blightspawn’s Revolting Stench ensures that the Blightlords will fight first against any enemy units that dare charge them
Chargers still fight first, but now once those are all done with the charger, the other player starts the pattern?
EDIT- Nvm, missed the conversation already. OOf.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/20 17:30:13
PourSpelur wrote: It's fully within the rules for me to look up your Facebook page, find out your dear Mother Gladys is single, take her on a lovely date, and tell you all the details of our hot, sweaty, animal sex during your psychic phase.
I mean, fifty bucks is on the line.
There's no rule that says I can't.
yukishiro1 wrote: That's how the DG bodyguard rule has always worked - it is different than the way most ones work in that it intercepts the hit rather than transferring the wound.
Well, let's hope that carries over to all bodyguard units now. So much better than current system.
Agreed. I think this version of the bodyguard rule makes a lot more sense than all the other variants. It also would make it easier if all bodyguard abilities worked in a similar manner to each other.
I could see others, namely Calgar's guard, act as if are units of 3+ for LoS purposes.
It wouldn't matter if they counted as 3+ models (my earlier suggestion in this thread), if the hits on a character can be allocated to a bodyguard unit within 3" on a 2+. I wasn't aware of this rule for Deathguard, but hope it becomes universal as the current variations of MW transference are a PITA. It's simple and effective. Just give all appropriate units the "bodyguard" keyword, and put the rule in the book.
2020/06/20 17:53:30
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
diepotato47 wrote: We may actually get the rules a bit earlier than the release, iirc the app goes live on the day preorders open, and the app may be fully equip with rules and new power levels.
Honestly I'm hoping we see the full free rules go live on WHC as well when the pre-order pops up.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now.
2020/06/20 17:57:22
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
diepotato47 wrote: We may actually get the rules a bit earlier than the release, iirc the app goes live on the day preorders open, and the app may be fully equip with rules and new power levels.
Honestly I'm hoping we see the full free rules go live on WHC as well when the pre-order pops up.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
I always hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
2020/06/20 18:00:31
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
GW wrote:As well as championing the use of ‘pure’ Death Guard armies, uncorrupted by the ‘clean taint’ of allies...
Fun fact: The Death Guard can take units from their own Codex and still lose their army abilities. So much for "pure" without any allies. Moving on...
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:My favorite change of the new edition is how many more Command points the servants of the Plague God have at their disposal.
You mean to say that the general new rules for CP apply to Deathguard? Un-fething-believable! Not a strong start kids...
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:With the new edition’s matched play missions, it’s more important than ever to keep sight of your objectives.
Hang on... what did GW say about this guy?
"...Sam is a well established tournament organiser and a regular on the top tables and podiums of events across the USA. "
And he was losing sight of his objectives in 8th?
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:My Daemon Engines, Terminators and Characters will confidently hold the center of the battlefield while I grind down the enemy in a battle of attrition, leaving my Poxwalkers and Plague Marines free to take advantage of the terrain to advance and claim objectives.
That literally has nothing to do with 9th. That's just your overall strategy for playing your army.
GW wrote:Sam’s not done yet...
Did... did he start? 'Cause he wasn't really told us anything yet.
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Under the new rules, my Plagueburst Crawlers are just as deadly with their plaguespitters even while locked in combat.
You mean to say that the general new rules for Vehicles also apply to Deathguard vehicles? Un-fething-believable!
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Not only that, but now my Crawlers can fire their nasty plagueburst mortars (which are now Blast weapons too) on the move without suffering a hit penalty!
Who'da thunk it that a mortar would end up being a blast weapon in the new edition. What a revelation.
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Since the player who isn’t taking their turn gets to choose the first non-charging unit to fight with, the Foul Blightspawn’s Revolting Stench ensures that the Blightlords will fight first against any enemy units that dare charge them.
But that's a rule they already have. What relevance is this to 9th?
These previews are just so bad. And this one stinks.
Geddit? Stinks? Because it's about Nurg... never mind...
You seem to forget that the Faction Focus articles are aimed at specific players of specific armies that have not seen the rules previews or don't have the understanding of them like some long term players do. I'll give you that the vast majority of posters on dakka have dissected and analayzed the new rules but not everyone who plays 40k has been following the WHC site lately.
It seems awfully condescending to make statements such as you have been making. Some fairly new people to 40k might appreciate the articles.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 00:20:11
2020/06/20 20:57:17
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
The Sorcerer on the left can be shot. The Sorcerer on the right cannot be shot.
Who here can guess the reason why?
Solution: The Left is secretly this scenario
Spoiler:
Hahaha, this is a pretty good one. Not sure how often it'll come up in games but it is interesting to think about. Is there a way to word a rule concisely that achieves the same effect as what we have, but also accounts for this edge case? (While also preventing weird, new edge cases?)
I am sure it will be frustrating for all three of the people this actually happens to every year.
Wakshaani wrote: Lordy, but that bodyguard rule should be how it works for *all* bodyguards in all codexes, bar none.
Heck, if you did that, and got rid of the 5+ feel no pain, Tau drones would be acceptable again.
Seriously, that core mechanic is perfect.
Seriously people need to get past their hatred for drones, they arn't bodyguards they are a flyijg stormshield. Also without them half the tau codex would need to be 1/3rd cheape6than it already is to viable and you know people would complain twice as hard if Tau list with 1/3 rd more firepower went first.
Death Guard bodyguards work the you body guard gets a MW per wound works if your charictor is tougher/better save.
Not to mention who ouside of the rediculous nlos marine's is sniping your charictors?
2020/06/20 21:33:49
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
GW wrote:As well as championing the use of ‘pure’ Death Guard armies, uncorrupted by the ‘clean taint’ of allies...
Fun fact: The Death Guard can take units from their own Codex and still lose their army abilities. So much for "pure" without any allies. Moving on...
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:My favorite change of the new edition is how many more Command points the servants of the Plague God have at their disposal.
You mean to say that the general new rules for CP apply to Deathguard? Un-fething-believable! Not a strong start kids...
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:With the new edition’s matched play missions, it’s more important than ever to keep sight of your objectives.
Hang on... what did GW say about this guy?
"...Sam is a well established tournament organiser and a regular on the top tables and podiums of events across the USA. "
And he was losing sight of his objectives in 8th?
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:My Daemon Engines, Terminators and Characters will confidently hold the center of the battlefield while I grind down the enemy in a battle of attrition, leaving my Poxwalkers and Plague Marines free to take advantage of the terrain to advance and claim objectives.
That literally has nothing to do with 9th. That's just your overall strategy for playing your army.
GW wrote:Sam’s not done yet...
Did... did he start? 'Cause he wasn't really told us anything yet.
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Under the new rules, my Plagueburst Crawlers are just as deadly with their plaguespitters even while locked in combat.
You mean to say that the general new rules for Vehicles also apply to Deathguard vehicles? Un-fething-believable!
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Not only that, but now my Crawlers can fire their nasty plagueburst mortars (which are now Blast weapons too) on the move without suffering a hit penalty!
Who'da thunk it that a mortar would end up being a blast weapon in the new edition. What a revelation.
A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Since the player who isn’t taking their turn gets to choose the first non-charging unit to fight with, the Foul Blightspawn’s Revolting Stench ensures that the Blightlords will fight first against any enemy units that dare charge them.
But that's a rule they already have. What relevance is this to 9th?
These previews are just so bad. And this one stinks.
Geddit? Stinks? Because it's about Nurg... never mind...
You seem to forget that the Faction Focus articles are aimed at specific players of specific armies that have not seen the rules previews or don't have the understanding of them like some long term players do. I'll give you that the vast majority of posters on dakka have dissected and analayzed the new rules but not everyone who plays 40k has been following the WHC site lately.
It seems awfully condescending to make statements such as you have been making. Some fairly new people to 40k might appreciate the articles.
I know there's a fair amount of hyperbole in these posts from H.B.M.C but I do think they're doing a bit of a disservice to the articles. Firstly, as you say, they're not really aimed at the forum-goers here, but at less experienced or very new gamers. Secondly, while they may be mentioning general gameplay rules that affect everyone those rules don't affect every army equally and some will get more use out of them than others. IG, for example, will get more out of the new vehicle rules than Eldar.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 00:19:32
2020/06/20 22:45:56
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Slipspace wrote:
I know there's a fair amount of hyperbole in these posts from H.B.M.C but I do think they're doing a bit of a disservice to the articles. Firstly, as you say, they're not really aimed at the forum-goers here, but at less experienced or very new gamers. Secondly, while they may be mentioning general gameplay rules that affect everyone those rules don't affect every army equally and some will get more use out of them than others. IG, for example, will get more out of the new vehicle rules than Eldar.
The articles are for whoever reads them. Mostly, because they're on the GW sites, they're for people who are already familiar with GW games- that's just how it works, new people don't go looking for summaries of edition changes- it doesn't matter to them, and new players also don't get much of anything out of a shallow dive into a few past edition soundbytes.. Even if they are somehow intended for 'new gamers,' they're still repeating the same information over and over again. 'New' doesn't mean 'idiot'
Second, no. Mechdar gets a lot of use out of vehicle rules, aircraft rules, etc. Foot eldar care just as much about cover, terrain and combat and definitely overwatch. Different army builds within the same army are going to care about different parts of the rules changes, offensively and defensively (a guard parking lot doesn't care much about overwatch changes offensively, but does defensively, while an aspect army cares a lot about not being shot to pieces.
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2020/06/21 00:03:22
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
However, to me, the key difference is how there are actually two "different" sets of rules for MTG. There are the "plain language" rules that almost everyone learns/is taught from, and then there are the Comprehensive (formal) rules. Most players never even look at the Comprehensive Rules, but they exist as an arbiter, not as casual reading.
The rules for Magic weren't always that way. They evolved that way over time because the people who were involved in judging games were Computer Scientists by trade.
It's also worth noting that each edition of Magic also had rules changes that fundamentally changed the game and made some cards unplayable or work very differently. Damage on the stack is something that comes to mind.
2020/06/21 00:22:18
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Hive Fleet Hercual - 6760pts
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. 
