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.

So I've noticed a tendency these last year of Warhammer 40k, and that is that the system, or rather the company, supports the High Defence, Low Health approach to the rules for their models. What I mean by that is, that models generally are made very resilient to damage, but can take fewer hits in return. Good examples of this could be the Knights, who have 6 HP (a low amount for such huge models), but high AV (13 isn't high per say, but it's still a mouthful) in the front arc, and of course the infamous Ion Shield, which can give 4++ to a select facing, effectively cancelling out half the hits thrown at the thing. Another could be the current Necrons, who have so many goddamn saves that nothing short of siege artillery will take them down for good, or even most armies' commanders, who, despite them being the heroes of the story, rarely have more than 3 W's.

I don't like this tendency. If I ever have to choose between High Defence, Low Health and Low Defence, High Health, I'll always choose the latter, simply because it means that every hit, shot and wound will be felt. If you have to throw 50 Lasgun shots at a model, and only one hit actually removes the target's one Wound, it feels like you were incredibly lucky to have thrown all those dice at the problem, but if you throw 50 Lasgun shots at a model, that ends up taking away all the model's five Wounds in one go, it seems like each hit made a difference, or at least more so.

What could be done to mitigate this, I don't know, but you could, for example, start out by giving certain models a higher amount of W, and lowering their Armour. Centurions could easily be given a 3+ in exchange for three W, and think of how cool it would be for the Astra Militarum to have vehicles with higher HPs than others, losing one or two points in AV for another HP. Most of all I'd love for the Knights to have more HPs, but remove the Ion Shield or give it some other bous that doesn't flat-out invalidate half the hits thrown at it. On the unit front, I very much believe the same thing - It's more interesting when you have more models, who are easier to remove, instead of a few models who may/may not be squashed by a lucky shot. In the case of the Necrons, removing that asinine super-FNP roll would go a long way, and instead let each unit be regenerated by a Lord or Overlord attached to it - That would be more dynamic, and give incentive to really blast the metal gaks to heaven, rather than pathetically throwing everything you have at them in the hope that something sticks.

What do you guys think? Quality or Quantity?

I like quantity, in principle, but there's a problem: the "double toughness causes Instant Death" rule.

What this winds up meaning is that for any T3 units, multiple wounds are almost meaningless except against lasgun/bolter fire. T4/multiwound has the well-known nemeses (krak missile, lascannon, melta). T5/multiwound becomes really hard to crack, since only S10/D can ID them, and T6/multiwound becomes infuriatingly hard to kill (this is why folks love/hate MCs right now, for example).

I propose this be fixed by replacing that rule with "double toughness == 2 wounds, no FNP".

Oh right, the Instant Death by double S rule. My faaaavourite rule.

I'd do something about that, too. I think your idea is pretty neat, actually - if you have double S, you simply cause two W's, who must Wound and be saved individually. That would mean that stuff like a Nob could be blown up by one rocket, but he also just might survive, if he's lucky.

Concerning the Riptide, I see absolutely no reason why it should have a 2+, let alone a 5++. It's described as being very well armoured, using the same plating as the Iridium suit, but that doesn't mean that it's that good crunchwise - It might mean that it has a higher T (which it does) and Wounds (which it does), but still the Crisis standard 3+. The Shield Generator could easily be made into something more unique, something like "Any AP 3 weapon firing at a Riptide doesn't ignore Armour like normal, and must roll against its Armour Save as normal", representing the Shield being made to take out rockets and missiles primarely, but being too weak to fully defend against high-velocity weaponry and lasers and stuff. The Nova ability could then encompass AP 2/1 weapons as well, leaving the Riptide with what amounts to an 3++ for a round.

As a CSM player who uses obliterators and such in almost every game, I find it quite annoying to keep track of multi- wound models and those are maybe five or six 2- wound models. So, on a practical note, one- wound models with harder saves make the game smoother and quicker, which is another area 40k struggles in to begin with.

Now, potentially, this is a great idea for balance and to make the game more fun, but I would love to see some specifics. You mentioned Imperial Knights and I'm not sure I agree with your sentiment. 6HP is decent. How many do you want? 8? 10? Crunch-- wise, removing the ion shield is cool, but then everyone's inner fluff-bunny cries a little because the ion shield is a cool item that has a big part of the fluff worked around it. Mechanically, the ion shield is also cool because its one of the last things in 40k that presents real tactical decision making. Converting that to additional HP would remove that whole notion.

I've thought about this before. Maybe all sergeant- level characters (Vet Sgt, CSM champions, Nobs) deserve to be 2W (3 in the case of Ork Nobs), and on account of instant death, that wouldn't really off set anything catastrophically. Independent characters (HQs and the like) could gain +1W if we weakened invul saves bu a point maybe, or made them more expensive to acquire, perhaps?

I don't really think this is a quantity over quality issue either. Stronger saves represent characters having access to higher quality wargear than the no- name plebs they command. SM maybe could be pushed up a little but then we get into that other debate about how well represented SM are on TT. But your IG commander? That seventy- year old war veteran? 50+ years of service may have hardened his nerves, but that has done nothing good for his physical health, so additional wounds are not appropriate. He's a decorated commander, so he gets an invul to commemorate his service.