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 am wondering how everyone rates some special rules. A couple points to try and structure it:

0=This rule is so situational/has almost no effect

1=This rule is seldom useful

2=This rule has an average utility

3=This rule has excellent utility

4=This rule is almost overpowered

5=This rule is overpowered

I rate Night Vision a 0
Feel no Pain I give to ratings, first is the way i see the rule(stopping a wound from applying to a model but not other rules activated at the same time) a 2; The way it seems to be played by the majority a 4.
ATSKNF a 3
Battle Focus 3
Soul Blaze 1

Your thoughts?

Note: this is to help me rate Special Rules in my quest for a formula to balance 40K.

How is Night Vision a 0?

Surely, you mean Night Fighting?

Because ignoring a rule that lets you stack cover, not rarely up to 3+, is actually quite good. Situational? Sure, but certainly not the point of 0, IMO.

There's a huge difference between 2+ cover from Skilled rider jet bikes and 3+ cover or having acces to skip an entire shooting phase, where enemies benefit from 3+ ruins, rather than 4+ cover. Or skimmers with cover improving wargear, who can suddenly jink 2+ out in the open.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And forgive me for saying this, but don't you think this topic belong in general discussion? I don't see how this is actually rule propositioning?

Well he plays dark eldar (guessing by forum title,) and only 50% of games (roughly, and ignoring that wl trait,) will have night, and then only for one turn, and a lot of dark eldar players that I've seen have been going for a beta strike strat to get the most out of PFP before most of their models die, so they don't see much night.

As for me:
Furious charge: 1. I have to get close to charge, so anyone with their head on straight just moves up and charges me instead to take the charge bonus themselves.

Rage: see furious charge

Ignore cover: 3 for bad ap or short range, 5 for good ap or long range. 6 for good ap AND long range.

Deep strike: 1 for normal, 3 for accurate ones, 5 for accurate ones in shooty armies (farsight bomb being a good example.)

Soul blaze: 0. We've gone out of our way to remember the rule so many times, and I've literally never seen it wound a model. Such a waste of time.

Psyker: 0-5. All based on the ran-dumb rolls before the game. Definite 5 if someone with a guaranteed top tier power is taken.

Adamantium will: 1. Yknow what opponents do when they ACTUALLY HAVE offensive powers and you ACTUALLY HAVE Ada will? They target a different unit. Maybe a 2 on marine chapters with Ada will army wide.

Atsknf: a solid 2. I haven't seen an atsknf-hit and run yet this edition, and I watch batreps in addition to our own games. I've only seen it stop sweeps like twice, and both times the marine guy wanted his squad to die right then so he could shoot the enemies, so it actually hurt him. Have seen the standard fall back and auto regroup come in handy a few times, which is why it's not a 1, also because it stops fear, and fear is actually pretty devastating if you get hit by it. (On minotaurs it's still a 1 though.)

Fear: 0 if in the wrong matchup, 3 if it can actually apply.

All I can think of ATM without cracking open the rule book, and I'm comfy in bed.

Night Vision: 0.5. Yes, it's useful when it's useful, but as previously pointed out, that's generally only for one turn every other game with an army that isn't especially well equipped to alpha strike these days. Plus, I usually take raiders with night shields meaning my MCs are really the only thing to benefit from night fighting being in effect. As a result, I generally eschew warlord traits and other effects that increase the likelihood of night fighting.

Battle Focus: 3. I think non-eldar players overestimate its ability to keep units safe (hiding a whole unit behind cover with a run move is trickier than you'd think), but it consistently helps me get into shooting range or out of retallitory charge range.

Bladestorm: 3. Again, I think people fear it far more than they should, but it usually helps me kill a handful more infantry models each game.

Hatred/Fear Towards Slaanesh: 0. It almost never comes up, though that's partly my meta. Thing is, I'd generally rather shoot daemonettes to death than fight them in melee, and they're squishy enough that I don't particularly need to the hatred to wipe them out with countercharging harlequins.

ATSKNF: 3 I push my marine pretty hard, often pushing them into melee where they don't excel. Thanks to ATSKNF, they make an excellent tarpit or, failing that, can turn back around to keep wailing on my enemies after dropping out of combat.

Power From Pain: 1. Which is sad. There's enough strength 6+ out there that I frequently don't get the FNP benefits, and the fact that the FNP builds up so slowly has changed my alpha strikesr into beta strikers. Getting Furious Charge takes half a game, and by that point, I've usually been in melee for a turn or two. I play very assaulty and aggressively with my dark kin. Fearless hardly matters as dark eldar games are generally decided before turn 5. I don't believe the turn 6 or 7 benefits have every really mattered in my games. I think it helped me kill a tyranid prime once?

Old Power From Pain: Would have been a 3. You built your list around it, and it guaranteed you potent benefits assuming your opponent didn't focus fire you into oblivion.

Raptor Chapter Tactics: 2. It's pretty rare that I find a situation where the rending is really worth the lack of shots, but it's nice to have the option. This probably should have been the sniper rule instead or perhaps been rapid fire + rending so that you could get more shots. The stealth is nice but not amazing. The scout is great because it lets me do a combination of outflanking and deepstriking with my tac/terminator army.

 Zewrath wrote:
How is Night Vision a 0?

Surely, you mean Night Fighting?

Because ignoring a rule that lets you stack cover, not rarely up to 3+, is actually quite good. Situational? Sure, but certainly not the point of 0, IMO.

There's a huge difference between 2+ cover from Skilled rider jet bikes and 3+ cover or having acces to skip an entire shooting phase, where enemies benefit from 3+ ruins, rather than 4+ cover. Or skimmers with cover improving wargear, who can suddenly jink 2+ out in the open.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And forgive me for saying this, but don't you think this topic belong in general discussion? I don't see how this is actually rule propositioning?

Yes, I did indeed mean Night Vision, as it does only apply randomly. Not a very useful rule 50% of the time, and the 50% it does come into play it is only good for maybe 20% of the game, usually less since many games will go past 5 turns. However rate it as you desire, as I want to use this a benchmark for later work. I also will want to know how other people rate the strength of an attack, the AP of an attack, the skill of the attack, and number of attacks, but that is for another time.

As to the section it is in, I chose this one because I want to use this as a gauge for figuring the point values for Special rules when added to a model. It may be better in the other one as you suggest though. Just a random choice based on my intent.

If the Mods believe it should be in the other section, they may move it.

 megatrons2nd wrote:

 Zewrath wrote:
How is Night Vision a 0?

Surely, you mean Night Fighting?

Because ignoring a rule that lets you stack cover, not rarely up to 3+, is actually quite good. Situational? Sure, but certainly not the point of 0, IMO.

There's a huge difference between 2+ cover from Skilled rider jet bikes and 3+ cover or having acces to skip an entire shooting phase, where enemies benefit from 3+ ruins, rather than 4+ cover. Or skimmers with cover improving wargear, who can suddenly jink 2+ out in the open.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And forgive me for saying this, but don't you think this topic belong in general discussion? I don't see how this is actually rule propositioning?

Yes, I did indeed mean Night Vision, as it does only apply randomly. Not a very useful rule 50% of the time, and the 50% it does come into play it is only good for maybe 20% of the game, usually less since many games will go past 5 turns. However rate it as you desire, as I want to use this a benchmark for later work. I also will want to know how other people rate the strength of an attack, the AP of an attack, the skill of the attack, and number of attacks, but that is for another time.

As to the section it is in, I chose this one because I want to use this as a gauge for figuring the point values for Special rules when added to a model. It may be better in the other one as you suggest though. Just a random choice based on my intent.

If the Mods believe it should be in the other section, they may move it.

I see. Well, due to it's potential (Night Vision) I'd say 3 or 4 but due to the fact that Night Fighting rarely comes into play, making it extremely situational, I'll give it a 1. 2 if playing Dark Eldar.

As per your criteria, I'll rate the Jink USR a solid 5.
The rule is just way to much open to abuse and really, it should be a seperate save that can't be improved beyond 4+ (except in the case of skilled riders). It makes no sense that you can't "dodge" a wave serpent shield's ray (when you're perfectly able to dodge lasercanons with beams that, I assume, travels at the speed of light) just because you have ignore cover USR.
Templates and blast weapons that have ignore cover USR should also be able to ignore Jink saves, but not normal ignore cover weapons. This would also get rid of the ridiculous 3+ saves in the open that so many skimmers seem to sport.

Tank hunter is a solid 4, it should be 3, but most units with acces to this USR pushes it up to 4.

Ignore cover is 4, for reasons I assume are obvious.

I am fairly certain that Ignores Cover does ignore Jink saves, as a Jink Save is a cover save. The Dark Reapers Range Finder only stops the Jink save, not all cover saves. Unless I missed a rule change somewhere.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
I am fairly certain that Ignores Cover does ignore Jink saves, as a Jink Save is a cover save. The Dark Reapers Range Finder only stops the Jink save, not all cover saves. Unless I missed a rule change somewhere.

You misunderstand. My issue with Jink is that IT IS a cover save. It should be a separate save, simply called "Jink save" which is always a straight 4+ and 3+ if you're skilled rider. The only way to bypass Jink saves, like AP bypasses armour saves, should be with template weapons and blast weapons that have the ignore cover rule.

 Zewrath wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
I am fairly certain that Ignores Cover does ignore Jink saves, as a Jink Save is a cover save. The Dark Reapers Range Finder only stops the Jink save, not all cover saves. Unless I missed a rule change somewhere.

You misunderstand. My issue with Jink is that IT IS a cover save. It should be a separate save, simply called "Jink save" which is always a straight 4+ and 3+ if you're skilled rider. The only way to bypass Jink saves, like AP bypasses armour saves, should be with template weapons and blast weapons that have the ignore cover rule.

Got it. I will agree with that assessment. I also think that blasts should be able to hit a flyer, as flak is very effective against fast moving targets. But that is a discussion for elsewhere as well.

The basic point is "jink" should be like "dodge" and be an Invulnerable save with limitations/exceptions.

Death Korps: 3, might be 4 when used on artillery carriages, but I disagree



Rule copied from http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/d/dkksiegelist.pdf its free and legit so don't hit me mods :(

Champion of Chaos=negative infinity

Nearly every rule in csm codex = negative 6

votlw= useless

Mark of Not Nurgle= why are you not taking MoN?

Icon of decay and fire= useless beyond comprehension.

Mutilator weapons= double the worthless

that random rule for possessed= random fail.

Gift of Mutation= Gift of Garbage

Acute Senses 2
I liked it better as night fighting, but really unless your gonna run the SW codex CAD its just depressing

Counter Attack 3 I love to be able to match opponents attacks when they charge me! maybe a 4 haha

Champion of Chaos 3: Used to think this was worthless then my Khorne lord got plus one wound and fnp he basically turned into a Nurgle Khorne lord!

Furious Charge 5: Strength 5 Berzerkers Yes please!

All marks of chaos excluding Teezntch: 4: Good abilities for cheap pretty good!

Magic Mark 3: Only good for models that have an invuln save

Daemon 2: Fear and a 5+ invuln nice, but not great.