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 one of the biggest issues with Monstrous Creatures is that they have a ton of wounds and if you can't kill them with a round of fire power, they get to wreak as much havoc as if they were healthy.

If the MC is down to 25% of its total wounds, why not have a penalty to its stats to reflect its highly damaged state?

Weakened: A Monstrous Creature has taken considerable damage, impeding his movement and combat ability. The model suffers -1 inch to its movement during the movement phase, and -1 to all of its stats except wounds and leadership. If the model's wounds returns about the 25% range, the penalty is removed.

I like the idea, but you probably want to avoid messing with toughness, because the T5/T6 split is very delicate.

If anything, though I'd go further - a minor penalty at 50% and a more major at 25%.

An MC is just that, monstrous. There is also no reason why being shot up would not enrage it further, giving a bonus to S and T...

 SilverMK2 wrote:
An MC is just that, monstrous. There is also no reason why being shot up would not enrage it further, giving a bonus to S and T...

I don't know, maybe losing vital organs might slow it down?

I like it, but at the same time I can see flaws in the idea. The biggest one being making alpha strikes all the more prominent. Crippling an expensive monster by dedicating a round of shooting to it, so it becomes effectively useless is not fun for the MC's owner.

I think the decrease in ability works a bit more in AOS, as there isn't as much shooting involved. Some armies have it, but not all of them. In 40k, it's virtually ALL shooting, and most dominant armies have easy ways to knock a MC down a few notches with very little effort, making MC's go from being somewhat reliable to being a liability, and further hindering specific armies. (Chaos and Nids, specifically, who rely a LOT on MCs)

 SilverMK2 wrote:
An MC is just that, monstrous. There is also no reason why being shot up would not enrage it further, giving a bonus to S and T...

Most things tend to get weaker the more physical injuries they sustain. Getting shot in the neck, for instance, usually puts a damper on things for most creatures.

I like the rules.

 McNinja wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:
An MC is just that, monstrous. There is also no reason why being shot up would not enrage it further, giving a bonus to S and T...

Most things tend to get weaker the more physical injuries they sustain. Getting shot in the neck, for instance, usually puts a damper on things for most creatures.

I like the rules.

Get it right. Shot in the neck with a lascannon.

I'd rather it was something more in line with what happens when a vehicle gets a penetrating hit. Maybe something like this special rule:

Weakened - When a weakened model shoots, one weapon it shoots can only be fired as snap shots.


And make it that whenever a model suffers a wound or hull point and isn't destroyed, it becomes weakened until the end of the next turn.

 crimson_caesar wrote:
...and -1 to all of its stats except wounds and leadership...

and armor?

yeaaaah make Nids struggle even more. awesome idea!

concept makes sound sense pal but in the game, no. it doesn't fit with the current rules - it will just make tyranids players even more bummed.

It works just fine in Age of Sigmar for Monsters. With some tweaks, it could easily work here as well.

Like someone else said I think with so much shooting in 40k it would be a huge penalty on armies like bugs. Maybe just close combat wounds but that would be crazy to keep up with and I think there are already temporary effects (smash down I think) that can do this in 40k. If you are going to do it to monstrous creatures then the rule would need to be expanded to anything with multiple wounds. Nothing like that wounded space marine with a two foot claw sticking out of his neck still fighting at full power because...well he just does not care heh. Once you write a rule that would also affect space marines the xenophobes will cry foul so it won't happen hehe.

Only Space Marines with grav guns can deal with Monsterous creatures easily.

 Filch wrote:
Only Space Marines with grav guns can deal with Monsterous creatures easily.

bs. Tau's combined fire can wipe whole armies, MC's an all, off the board in only a couple of turns, Eldar Scatter bikes are nearly as bad, Dark Eldar and their proliferation of poisoned weapons is a bad day for MC's too. Necrons might not have as much rate of fire but given how survivable they are it's not such a big problem. Even IG come out ok with tanks like the LR Punisher.

I don't think the MC rules really need a nurf, just certain MC's.

 Imateria wrote:

I don't think the MC rules really need a nurf, just certain MC's.

This. MC rules are not necessarily overpowered in and of themselves. You'll notice that most Monstrous Creatures that people complain about have one or more of the following:

-2+ armor save.

-Options for a good invuln save.

-Options for built-in Feel No Pain.

-Very good movement options.

The Riptide hits all of these, the Dreadknight all but the FNP, etc.

My personal take on the issue is that things like the Riptide, if not made into Walkers, should have a USR "Mechanical" which makes Haywire essentially into Fleshbane w/Rending against them, Melta and Lance deals 1 additional wound with no saves of any kind allowed on a to wound roll of 6, Lance can never wound on worse than a 4+, etc.

 Imateria wrote:

 Filch wrote:
Only Space Marines with grav guns can deal with Monsterous creatures easily.

bs. Tau's combined fire can wipe whole armies, MC's an all, off the board in only a couple of turns, Eldar Scatter bikes are nearly as bad, Dark Eldar and their proliferation of poisoned weapons is a bad day for MC's too. Necrons might not have as much rate of fire but given how survivable they are it's not such a big problem. Even IG come out ok with tanks like the LR Punisher.

I don't think the MC rules really need a nurf, just certain MC's.

But DE are helpless before gargantuan MCs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lukash_ wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

I don't think the MC rules really need a nurf, just certain MC's.

This. MC rules are not necessarily overpowered in and of themselves. You'll notice that most Monstrous Creatures that people complain about have one or more of the following:

-2+ armor save.

-Options for a good invuln save.

-Options for built-in Feel No Pain.

-Very good movement options.

The Riptide hits all of these, the Dreadknight all but the FNP, etc.

My personal take on the issue is that things like the Riptide, if not made into Walkers, should have a USR "Mechanical" which makes Haywire essentially into Fleshbane w/Rending against them, Melta and Lance deals 1 additional wound with no saves of any kind allowed on a to wound roll of 6, Lance can never wound on worse than a 4+, etc.

The problem with the MC USR is that everything in it is good. Ignoring all armor in melee alone is amazing. Vehicles, on the other hand, have a lot of downsides in their rules. MCs need more downsides, or higher cost in general. They stomp all over everything.

I think only certain MCs and gargantuan creatures have a problem. The only glaring problem, and maybe it should only apply to gargantuan creatures is the freaking toe in cover gives the whole model a cover save thing. Either even the playing field and let vehicles have that too or change it to how it works for vehicles. Seriously that rule is Bull.

I like the idea of adding in penalties or downsides for monstrous creatures. Doing so would be good for game balance as they could then offset this with new upsides too!

 NorseSig wrote:
I think only certain MCs and gargantuan creatures have a problem. The only glaring problem, and maybe it should only apply to gargantuan creatures is the freaking toe in cover gives the whole model a cover save thing. Either even the playing field and let vehicles have that too or change it to how it works for vehicles. Seriously that rule is Bull.

Other glaring problems include GMCs being immune to everything in the book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yarium wrote:
I like the idea of adding in penalties or downsides for monstrous creatures. Doing so would be good for game balance as they could then offset this with new upsides too!

MCs need no more upsides. They are already the best thing in the game hands down bar none.

Martel732 wrote:

 NorseSig wrote:
I think only certain MCs and gargantuan creatures have a problem. The only glaring problem, and maybe it should only apply to gargantuan creatures is the freaking toe in cover gives the whole model a cover save thing. Either even the playing field and let vehicles have that too or change it to how it works for vehicles. Seriously that rule is Bull.

Other glaring problems include GMCs being immune to everything in the book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yarium wrote:
I like the idea of adding in penalties or downsides for monstrous creatures. Doing so would be good for game balance as they could then offset this with new upsides too!

MCs need no more upsides. They are already the best thing in the game hands down bar none.

Well yeah I agree GMCs need some tweaks to be vulnerable to more things, however, I don't want changes that will nerf tyranids. And I agree MCs are strong enough they don't need buffs (Tyranids issues lie in their poor rules rather than their being mcs. Their being mcs is what keeps them relevant). Vehicles need a buff to be on par with MCs/GMCs IMO.

Just make Nids cheaper. Done. Ultralisks aren't the best top-end unit in SCII, but the zerg can field more of them more quickly than BCs or carriers. If the Nids can field 20+ MCs, they don't have to be WK special.

While this may help to deal with some troublesome MC 's ... It would seriously hinder some armies that rely on MC 's to have a chance... Tyranids and CSM both rely on MC 's. A daemon Prince isn't really THAT hard to deal with and it is one of the few units CSM can field and hope to do anything with. Nerfing Monsterous Creatures would seriously nerf CSM- which is currently the worst codex there is.

 KhorneontheCobb wrote:
While this may help to deal with some troublesome MC 's ... It would seriously hinder some armies that rely on MC 's to have a chance... Tyranids and CSM both rely on MC 's. A daemon Prince isn't really THAT hard to deal with and it is one of the few units CSM can field and hope to do anything with. Nerfing Monsterous Creatures would seriously nerf CSM- which is currently the worst codex there is.

I still think BA are worse, but it's close. The fact that CSM have access to MCs alone helps.

Martel732 wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 Filch wrote:
Only Space Marines with grav guns can deal with Monsterous creatures easily.

bs. Tau's combined fire can wipe whole armies, MC's an all, off the board in only a couple of turns, Eldar Scatter bikes are nearly as bad, Dark Eldar and their proliferation of poisoned weapons is a bad day for MC's too. Necrons might not have as much rate of fire but given how survivable they are it's not such a big problem. Even IG come out ok with tanks like the LR Punisher.

I don't think the MC rules really need a nurf, just certain MC's.

But DE are helpless before gargantuan MCs.

It's certainly much more of a struggle but can definitely be done, a Talos with Ichor Injectors for Fleshbane and Instant Death can certainly do a fair bit of damage in combat (killed a Stormsurge with a Dark Artisan formation yesterday so I know it's doable). Also, I pointed to 5 armies, your best result was to point to the struggles only the one of them would have, and even then only against Gargantuan Monsterous Creaters (I really think we need to consider GMC's separately, it's their whole mass of special rules and rules negation that makes them so damn tough.)?

Honestly the weakenesses of vehicles doesn't make MC's over powerd, far from it, it just makes vehicles weak. and if we're really considering weakening MC's as they take wounds, shouldn't this be applied to all multi wound models as well? If I've knocked several wounds of a Chapter Master and this mechanic exists in the game, then that CM shouldn't be swinging that Thunderhammer at full strength either.

Ever heard of the term "as dangerous as a wounded animal" before? This makes no sense, especially considering MCs in a nutshell are actually not that bad at all. The vast majority of them are crap, and this not only makes them weaker but it adds another tedious thing to keep track of.

Nidz are the easiest MCs to kill, Squiggoths are mediocre, Daemons are fine now that they cant flying circus you to death, and DKs at least have to sit in the dangerzone of nasty guns even if its still pretty strong, its not the worst thing ever.
The only MC that has a massive problem on the game is Riptides, and its only its guns that are the problem not its MC status. Its guns outshine tanks in potential, and since its suppose to be a frontline bulletsponge it shouldnt have such guns. Altering MC rules would not make it less powerful until MCs are actually worse than regular models. WK isnt an MC so thats out of this particular debate.

You dont nerf the general rule when a couple of units with the general rule are too strong. Nids suffer enough.

Not enough for my BA. They still stomp BA into the ground mercilessly.

DK are also stupid for their points.

And Tyranid MCs are better than anything in my codex. I have to buy overpriced power weapons to ignore armor in CC.

Just wanted to point out something that most people have observed I'm sure.

Notice how 40k has been pushed more in favor of big powerful multi-wound/hp units? Think about it:
Imperial Knights, Castellans, Kataphron Destroyers, Wraith Knights, Riptides, Flying Hive Tyrants...

For many armies, troops are just a tax. Almost completely useless. Look at Chaos Space Marines, most of the time you take cultists just because you have to. I'm no Tyranid player, but aren't they sort of in the same boat? Eldar prefers bike units over infantry most of the time. Ork mobs are having a rough time. Daemonkin would scrap the troops choice in a heartbeat. I've seen many powerful Tau lists that use pathfinders (I think?) for the troops instead of fire warriors.

If it wasn't for formations, I think we'd see even less troops. My point is strong MCs AND GMCs are clogging the game up. If we have to see super heavies and super powerful monsters in the game, an unwise decision on GWs part, let's make them more manageable.

To the Tyranid players: I don't want to see your codex suffer, I love Tyranids, they're a super cool codex. But aren't they called the Swarm faction? I'd love to see more swarms on the field with some big monsters leading them. I'm pretty sure every MC abd GMC could use this weakened rule, but nids just need other buffs in general.

You could easily make Tyranid MCs stronger simply by making their MCs require a 3D6 Leadership test to shoot at if theres swarms around them - otherwise you gotta shoot the swarms. Offensively theyre strong, defensively theyre crap.
Something along the lines of 10+ Gaunts of any form (or gene stealers i guess) around an MC cause any unit targeting the MC to perform a 3D6 LD first. Less than 10, no leadership required they can shoot the MC unhindered. Warriors could have the same effect, though say 15-20 gaunts as the threshold since theyre not quite as important.

Or maybe rather than subtracting a wound from a MC, we could instead subtract one from any other stat in its statline? A lot of it would be situational, but I could see several reasons for them.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
You could easily make Tyranid MCs stronger simply by making their MCs require a 3D6 Leadership test to shoot at if theres swarms around them - otherwise you gotta shoot the swarms. Offensively theyre strong, defensively theyre crap.
Something along the lines of 10+ Gaunts of any form (or gene stealers i guess) around an MC cause any unit targeting the MC to perform a 3D6 LD first. Less than 10, no leadership required they can shoot the MC unhindered. Warriors could have the same effect, though say 15-20 gaunts as the threshold since theyre not quite as important.

Like I said in your thread, that would have been fine when you had to still roll for Target Priority.

That is loooong since gone. In this day and age, a better thing to do would be to make it so Tyranid MCs/Character MCs could join Broods of MCs or lesser beasts. Make them have a "hierarchy" similar to stuff like Commissars and Priests for the Guard, where the HQ Warrior choice can join units of Gaunts and Tyrants can join units of Gaunts, Warriors, or Carnifex and have Trygon/Mawloc Primes being able to join units of Raveners, Trygons, or Mawlocs. Make it so Venomthropes can join any ground-based unit of beasties and shazam!

Give a special rule where these things get to make "Look Out, Sir!" rolls and that they are not susceptible to the rule for Majority Toughness and you suddenly have a bit more sturdy beasts going through.

I would also say that there's room for some more "fun" and "thematic" rules, but I'll post those there instead.

Going into what we're discussing here?
Age of Sigmar, IMO, has it right with Monsters. Lots of Wounds(Archaon has 20 Wounds) and losing Wounds affects his Movement, the number of attacks Dorghar's Three Heads make, and the To Hit value for his Monstrous Claws. The scale for those being affected is a bit wider than just "1 Wound=-1 Attack, 1" Move, and -1 To Hit" as well, with it being 1-3, 4-6, and 7+ to affect those stats.