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'm working on my own version of the rules, and one of the things I aim to do is cut down on USR's as much as I can. Based on that...

Codex or Base Rulebook, what USR's are either slight modifications of the same base rule or the same rule with a different name (due to faction/race)?

I think they're all covered in the main rule book.

I'm pretty sure GW stopped doing that. They stopped giving units fluffy named versions of the rules a long time ago. Now they just give them the USR.

The only redundant rule i can think is Zealot because it's just Fearless+Hatred

Fear or fearless. One of those needs to be removed.

Any Non-Saving-Throw saving-throw [Feel No Pain, Reanimation Protocols] could be removed and replaced with +1 toughness, depending on model. For example, a typical Necron Warrior is wounded by a Bolter hit 1/8 times.

If you gave them +1 Toughness, they'd be wounded 1/6 times, and save an extra roll. You could instead bump the toughness boost to +2... which would mean a 1/12 casualty, but better odds to kill with dedicated weaponry like Plasma.

Plasma currently wounds a Necron Warrior 5/12 times [42%] ... standing in the open. If you instead gave them +2 T, they would be wounded 2/3 times [67%]. In my mind, that keeps them hard as nails to kill with Anti-Infantry guns, but still lets them get wrecked by a Battle Cannon, you know?


Armourbane vs Melta.

Poison vs Fleshbane.

Master Crafted vs Twin-Linked vs Re-roll To Hit... come up with one rule for it and call it a day. "Accurate".

Shred vs... Tank Hunter? Come up with one rule called "Deadly".

Eldar seem to have 3 different versions of Rending. Make them all Rending.

Necron Entropic Strike vs Gauss. Just call it "Disintegration".


Get rid of "Instant Death". Replace with a rule that certain weapons inflict multiple wounds [to the model] if unsaved. Call it "Smite" or something. Smite could even have a value. For example, a Power Fist has Smite 2, while a Thunder Hammer has Smite 3.

With no Instant Death rule, Eternal Warrior is redundant.

Remove the Ordnance Rule.

Combine all Fearless, Stubborn, ATSKNF, etc rules into one rule called "Discipline", or some such. This ability allows the unit to reroll a failed morale check. Done.

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

Get rid of Snap Shots. They're bs. Let the Tau keep overwatch, as it's kind of their thing.

Get rid of Invisibility. It's bs.

 greatbigtree wrote:

Armourbane vs Melta.

Agreed. Just call it Armour Bane.

Poison vs Fleshbane.

Agreed. Just call it Fleshbane.

Master Crafted vs Twin-Linked vs Re-roll To Hit... come up with one rule for it and call it a day. "Accurate".

Agreed.

Shred vs... Tank Hunter? Come up with one rule called "Deadly".

Aren't these rules kinda different. Ones a reroll and one is a bonus to hit and a reroll?

Eldar seem to have 3 different versions of Rending. Make them all Rending.

Yeah, Rending should just be Rending.

Necron Entropic Strike vs Gauss. Just call it "Disintegration".

Good call but it's not a USR is it?

Get rid of "Instant Death". Replace with a rule that certain weapons inflict multiple wounds [to the model] if unsaved. Call it "Smite" or something. Smite could even have a value. For example, a Power Fist has Smite 2, while a Thunder Hammer has Smite 3.

With no Instant Death rule, Eternal Warrior is redundant.

But there's a difference between instant death and model removal.

Remove the Ordnance Rule.

No way.

Combine all Fearless, Stubborn, ATSKNF, etc rules into one rule called "Discipline", or some such. This ability allows the unit to reroll a failed morale check. Done.

No, there is a reason ATSKNF exists.

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

No way. There needs to be a difference between various factions abilities. Otherwise you may as well bring back movement characteristics.

Get rid of Snap Shots. They're bs. Let the Tau keep overwatch, as it's kind of their thing.

No, the Tau have more than enough going for them as is.

Get rid of Invisibility. It's bs.

That's a psycic power not a USR.

Hammer of Wrath and Furious Charge seem to both be abstractions of the same basic concept.

 DeffDred wrote:
...

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

No way. There needs to be a difference between various factions abilities. Otherwise you may as well bring back movement characteristics....

...Now explain why having half a dozen special rules and values hidden in unit types is an improvement on just having movement characteristics.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:
...

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

No way. There needs to be a difference between various factions abilities. Otherwise you may as well bring back movement characteristics....

...Now explain why having half a dozen special rules and values hidden in unit types is an improvement on just having movement characteristics.

Because I don't have to buy every codex to know how your unit moves

 CrownAxe wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:
...

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

No way. There needs to be a difference between various factions abilities. Otherwise you may as well bring back movement characteristics....

...Now explain why having half a dozen special rules and values hidden in unit types is an improvement on just having movement characteristics.

Because I don't have to buy every codex to know how your unit moves

But you have to buy every Codex to know what my to-hit roll is. Why is this any different? (Separate the move distance from the unit movement type, keep the types in the rulebook but indicate that things have a Movement stat and their speeds may vary, and the Swooping Hawks' 'we're Jump Infantry but we go 18"!' is less pulled out of your opponent's behind.)

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:
...

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

No way. There needs to be a difference between various factions abilities. Otherwise you may as well bring back movement characteristics....

...Now explain why having half a dozen special rules and values hidden in unit types is an improvement on just having movement characteristics.

Because I don't have to buy every codex to know how your unit moves

But you have to buy every Codex to know what my to-hit roll is. Why is this any different? (Separate the move distance from the unit movement type, keep the types in the rulebook but indicate that things have a Movement stat and their speeds may vary, and the Swooping Hawks' 'we're Jump Infantry but we go 18"!' is less pulled out of your opponent's behind.)

Because it's easier and simpler to have general movement for everyone with a few exceptions instead of everyone being a special snowflake

 CrownAxe wrote:
...Because it's easier and simpler to have general movement for everyone with a few exceptions instead of everyone being a special snowflake

I could easily turn that around and say it's easier and simpler to have differing movement distances rather than a plethora of special rules telling us which specific units get to move further under which circumstances. Would it be easier for everyone to have a general melee/ranged to-hit values with army-book special rules for the outliers than it is to have WS/BS?

Sniper.

Just keep them heavy, maybe give the unit precision shots and change it to either armourbane or fleshbane to flavour the type of sniper it is.

 n0t_u wrote:
Sniper.

Just keep them heavy, maybe give the unit precision shots and change it to either armourbane or fleshbane to flavour the type of sniper it is.

Instead of Sniper, maybe give them Rending with Precision Shots. Str X can be Str 5 or so.

 CrownAxe wrote:
The only redundant rule i can think is Zealot because it's just Fearless+Hatred

And even then it isn't really redundant because it gives the first round re-rolls to the entire squad, while Hatred only gives it to the model with the rule.

Honestly my problem is less with redundant USRs (because very few are) but nigh-unused or nigh-worthless ones.

Soul Blaze and Fear for example. If done right I'd be fine with them, but at the moment most things that would actually give a gak about Fear ignore it (except Orks) and Soul Blaze just does nothing in most circumstances: more Elite units shrug it off and it does so little damage Hordes don't care.

Similarly with Precision Shots/Strikes. You could probably name all the units with those rules in 40k on one hand (ok maybe 2 because of the Assassins). At that point you might as well just write the rule out in their entries rather than put them in the BRB.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
...Because it's easier and simpler to have general movement for everyone with a few exceptions instead of everyone being a special snowflake

I could easily turn that around and say it's easier and simpler to have differing movement distances rather than a plethora of special rules telling us which specific units get to move further under which circumstances. Would it be easier for everyone to have a general melee/ranged to-hit values with army-book special rules for the outliers than it is to have WS/BS?

Yes it would be easier. Most people I play against can't always remember what they need to hit with WS/BS.

 greatbigtree wrote:
Any Non-Saving-Throw saving-throw [Feel No Pain, Reanimation Protocols] could be removed and replaced with +1 toughness, depending on model. For example, a typical Necron Warrior is wounded by a Bolter hit 1/8 times.

If you gave them +1 Toughness, they'd be wounded 1/6 times, and save an extra roll. You could instead bump the toughness boost to +2... which would mean a 1/12 casualty, but better odds to kill with dedicated weaponry like Plasma.

Plasma currently wounds a Necron Warrior 5/12 times [42%] ... standing in the open. If you instead gave them +2 T, they would be wounded 2/3 times [67%]. In my mind, that keeps them hard as nails to kill with Anti-Infantry guns, but still lets them get wrecked by a Battle Cannon, you know?

That pretty drastically changes the game, though. A model with multiple stacked saves but low Toughness performs very differently against high-strength weaponry than it will against low-strength high-volume-of-fire weaponry. If you want to drop special saves and just give bonuses to Toughness, that also causes conflicts with many special rules which confer bonuses to units that don't normally get it - Are Ork Boyz now going to be T5 if you attach a Painboy, and Bikers gonna be T6? Are Iron Hands going to get +1 Toughness base to represent their 6+ FNP, and then that bonus increases if they have other sources to improve it?
You mention that it'd be 1/6th of the time instead of 1/8th of the time as though it's no big deal, but it's those small changes in odds and variables, with modifiers to keep things fresh, that make the game interesting.

Armourbane vs Melta.

I sort of agree, but since Melta has certain rules which counter it, and is somewhat weaker, I think the difference is fine.

Poison vs Fleshbane.

Even more than Armourbane and Melta, these two are very different. 2+ FNP rarely exists, but FNP can grant re-rolls to wound for high Strength models, so taking a poisoned weapon on a model like a Daemon Prince can pay off in spades.

Master Crafted vs Twin-Linked vs Re-roll To Hit... come up with one rule for it and call it a day. "Accurate".

Except that all of these function differently. Master Crafted gives one re-roll, Twin Linked gives rerolls on shooting, other sources of Re-rolls to hit often have their own little modifiers. (For example, if Prescience gave the Twin-linked rules instead of Re-rolls to Hit, then it would make any Flamers it gets cast on far more powerful.) There are some redundant sources of rerolls that don't have any real reason to exist separately, but the two actual rules that you list both have separate and specific reasons to exist.

Shred vs... Tank Hunter? Come up with one rule called "Deadly".

Except that those both target different types of units. Shred doesn't work against vehicles, Tank Hunter doesn't work against infantry. (And in case you want to bring it up, Monster Hunter only works against MCs and GMCs, so it also has a reason to be separate from Shred.)

Necron Entropic Strike vs Gauss. Just call it "Disintegration".

Fair enough, I suppose.

Get rid of "Instant Death". Replace with a rule that certain weapons inflict multiple wounds [to the model] if unsaved. Call it "Smite" or something. Smite could even have a value. For example, a Power Fist has Smite 2, while a Thunder Hammer has Smite 3.

Except that this doesn't take into account how tough the target is - A Great Unclean One isn't going to care much about the Power Fist that's hitting him, but a Commisar sure will. Not to mention that some weapons (especially Melee weapons) change drastically in power level based off of who's wielding them - A Guardsman who's been hit with Enfeeble will be doing less damage with a Power Fist than a regular Space Marine with a Power Axe, but by your rule then the Power Fist would still be causing more wounds than the axe.
'Instant Death' exists to represent models getting hit by an attack so overpowered against them that it gibs them into tiny bits. That's why it scales - Certain creatures gib at different levels. That scaling is important to make balance interesting. (Otherwise, there'd be no reason to take high-toughness multi-wound models, since they're just going to go down to Smite in one hit anyways.)

Remove the Ordnance Rule.

Why? It changes the guns that it is given to dramatically. It's not redundant in the slightest.

Combine all Fearless, Stubborn, ATSKNF, etc rules into one rule called "Discipline", or some such. This ability allows the unit to reroll a failed morale check. Done.

So... Take a half dozen rules of various power levels and applications, nerf nearly all of them to the point of being almost useless, and then fuse them into a single rule? Yeah, that sounds like a terrible idea. (Just from the three you listed: Fearless offers small drawbacks and makes the unit who has it slightly more vulnerable, but offers massive protection against Leadership based issues. ATSKNF is slightly weaker and you can occasionally break and run, but it offers great utility, and Stubborn is fairly weak, but makes many units far better in Close Combat since they no longer break easily after losing a fight, making it great for bogging down enemies.)

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

Again, you're boiling down many different units with variable effects into a single, weaker rule. Fleet offers the ability to run better, but it also can give a more reliable charge instead, giving tactical decisions and choices to make for the controlling player. You seem to like taking strategy and complexity out of the game.

Get rid of Snap Shots. They're bs. Let the Tau keep overwatch, as it's kind of their thing.

I'd be sort of okay with this in theory, but only if all of the rules were re-set to how they worked in 5th edition. Too many rules interact heavily with Snap Shots - Without them, Fliers become impossible to deal with for many armies, and as with so many of your other """fixes""", it takes versatility and decision making away from many, many armies. Also, it very drastically changes how powerful Melee armies will be, and while that's not inherently a bad thing, it does throw a lot of balance way out of whack.

Get rid of Invisibility. It's bs.

No arguments here, though it's not really 'Redundant' so much as it is 'Poorly thought out and overpowered'.

@Stormonu.
When you have sorted out the excess rules.Would you please write the rules as 'core rules' , and 'special rules' in your rule set like every other rule set.
'Universal special rules' are such an oxymoron.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 greatbigtree wrote:
Any Non-Saving-Throw saving-throw [Feel No Pain, Reanimation Protocols] could be removed and replaced with +1 toughness, depending on model. For example, a typical Necron Warrior is wounded by a Bolter hit 1/8 times.

If you gave them +1 Toughness, they'd be wounded 1/6 times, and save an extra roll. You could instead bump the toughness boost to +2... which would mean a 1/12 casualty, but better odds to kill with dedicated weaponry like Plasma.

Plasma currently wounds a Necron Warrior 5/12 times [42%] ... standing in the open. If you instead gave them +2 T, they would be wounded 2/3 times [67%]. In my mind, that keeps them hard as nails to kill with Anti-Infantry guns, but still lets them get wrecked by a Battle Cannon, you know?

That pretty drastically changes the game, though. A model with multiple stacked saves but low Toughness performs very differently against high-strength weaponry than it will against low-strength high-volume-of-fire weaponry. If you want to drop special saves and just give bonuses to Toughness, that also causes conflicts with many special rules which confer bonuses to units that don't normally get it - Are Ork Boyz now going to be T5 if you attach a Painboy, and Bikers gonna be T6? Are Iron Hands going to get +1 Toughness base to represent their 6+ FNP, and then that bonus increases if they have other sources to improve it?
You mention that it'd be 1/6th of the time instead of 1/8th of the time as though it's no big deal, but it's those small changes in odds and variables, with modifiers to keep things fresh, that make the game interesting.

Armourbane vs Melta.

I sort of agree, but since Melta has certain rules which counter it, and is somewhat weaker, I think the difference is fine.

Poison vs Fleshbane.

Even more than Armourbane and Melta, these two are very different. 2+ FNP rarely exists, but FNP can grant re-rolls to wound for high Strength models, so taking a poisoned weapon on a model like a Daemon Prince can pay off in spades.

Master Crafted vs Twin-Linked vs Re-roll To Hit... come up with one rule for it and call it a day. "Accurate".

Except that all of these function differently. Master Crafted gives one re-roll, Twin Linked gives rerolls on shooting, other sources of Re-rolls to hit often have their own little modifiers. (For example, if Prescience gave the Twin-linked rules instead of Re-rolls to Hit, then it would make any Flamers it gets cast on far more powerful.) There are some redundant sources of rerolls that don't have any real reason to exist separately, but the two actual rules that you list both have separate and specific reasons to exist.

Shred vs... Tank Hunter? Come up with one rule called "Deadly".

Except that those both target different types of units. Shred doesn't work against vehicles, Tank Hunter doesn't work against infantry. (And in case you want to bring it up, Monster Hunter only works against MCs and GMCs, so it also has a reason to be separate from Shred.)

Necron Entropic Strike vs Gauss. Just call it "Disintegration".

Fair enough, I suppose.

Get rid of "Instant Death". Replace with a rule that certain weapons inflict multiple wounds [to the model] if unsaved. Call it "Smite" or something. Smite could even have a value. For example, a Power Fist has Smite 2, while a Thunder Hammer has Smite 3.

Except that this doesn't take into account how tough the target is - A Great Unclean One isn't going to care much about the Power Fist that's hitting him, but a Commisar sure will. Not to mention that some weapons (especially Melee weapons) change drastically in power level based off of who's wielding them - A Guardsman who's been hit with Enfeeble will be doing less damage with a Power Fist than a regular Space Marine with a Power Axe, but by your rule then the Power Fist would still be causing more wounds than the axe.
'Instant Death' exists to represent models getting hit by an attack so overpowered against them that it gibs them into tiny bits. That's why it scales - Certain creatures gib at different levels. That scaling is important to make balance interesting. (Otherwise, there'd be no reason to take high-toughness multi-wound models, since they're just going to go down to Smite in one hit anyways.)

Remove the Ordnance Rule.

Why? It changes the guns that it is given to dramatically. It's not redundant in the slightest.

Combine all Fearless, Stubborn, ATSKNF, etc rules into one rule called "Discipline", or some such. This ability allows the unit to reroll a failed morale check. Done.

So... Take a half dozen rules of various power levels and applications, nerf nearly all of them to the point of being almost useless, and then fuse them into a single rule? Yeah, that sounds like a terrible idea. (Just from the three you listed: Fearless offers small drawbacks and makes the unit who has it slightly more vulnerable, but offers massive protection against Leadership based issues. ATSKNF is slightly weaker and you can occasionally break and run, but it offers great utility, and Stubborn is fairly weak, but makes many units far better in Close Combat since they no longer break easily after losing a fight, making it great for bogging down enemies.)

Movement enhancing abilities / effects, like fleet, or running, or Imperial Guard Orders, or whatever. This unit has +3" movement [until end of turn, if applicable].

Again, you're boiling down many different units with variable effects into a single, weaker rule. Fleet offers the ability to run better, but it also can give a more reliable charge instead, giving tactical decisions and choices to make for the controlling player. You seem to like taking strategy and complexity out of the game.

Get rid of Snap Shots. They're bs. Let the Tau keep overwatch, as it's kind of their thing.

I'd be sort of okay with this in theory, but only if all of the rules were re-set to how they worked in 5th edition. Too many rules interact heavily with Snap Shots - Without them, Fliers become impossible to deal with for many armies, and as with so many of your other """fixes""", it takes versatility and decision making away from many, many armies. Also, it very drastically changes how powerful Melee armies will be, and while that's not inherently a bad thing, it does throw a lot of balance way out of whack.

Get rid of Invisibility. It's bs.

No arguments here, though it's not really 'Redundant' so much as it is 'Poorly thought out and overpowered'.

Spot on.

I agree that there is a certain amount of bloat in 40k at the moment, and sure things could do with a little simplification. But there's really no need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

For me, the intracacies of the game are what make it so rich and interesting. I enjoy the fact that all these different rules can interact with each other and affect each other in different ways.

 Stormonu wrote:
I'm working on my own version of the rules, and one of the things I aim to do is cut down on USR's as much as I can. Based on that...

Codex or Base Rulebook, what USR's are either slight modifications of the same base rule or the same rule with a different name (due to faction/race)?

This is really hard to do without knowing what your other changes are to the core rules are. For instance, if I change it so that Run and Charge distances are a fixed value instead of a random dice roll then Fleet and Crusader, as they currently exist, become redundant.

One thing that can be done is for faction specific rules to be removed from the BRB, And They Shall Know No Fear (which should be removed completely to be honest), Power of the Maschine Spirit, Vector Dancer etc should not have been in there to start with.

Remove the shooting section of Slow and Purposeful. Make SnP a movement restricting USR, and let Relentless cover the shooting portion. Means giving current SnP models Relentless, though.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
Sniper.

Just keep them heavy, maybe give the unit precision shots and change it to either armourbane or fleshbane to flavour the type of sniper it is.

Instead of Sniper, maybe give them Rending with Precision Shots. Str X can be Str 5 or so.

Realistically, Sniper needs to be its own thing and reworked entirely.

Remove precision shots entirely, and make it a property of sniper weapons. Precision shots was a good idea, the problem was they made it too wide spread. It should not have been a USR.

Drop Fear.
Pinning needs a rework. It should not be dropped, as the game does need some sort of suppression mechanic.

Generally speaking, unless its a common rule that sees frequent use and has an actual impact on the game, it should be dropped from the USR list.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Remove precision shots entirely, and make it a property of sniper weapons. Precision shots was a good idea, the problem was they made it too wide spread. It should not have been a USR.

That's not the problem with Sniper weapons though.

It's the Strength X with a flat Wounding roll, the low ROF and it being a Heavy weapon, the loss of the biggest benefit(the ability for you to pick a target out from an attacking squad) on Overwatching, alongside the lack of it causing multiple Wounds against larger targets like MCs and GMCs.

I would make Sniper weapons have a relatively high Strength(6 or so feels about right) and make the Sniper special rule grant:
Shred
Rolls on the Strength D table instead of Rending on 6s to Wound.
Precision Shots

The ability for Precision Shots on Overwatch if the firing model did not move during its Movement Phase.

Drop Fear.
Pinning needs a rework. It should not be dropped, as the game does need some sort of suppression mechanic.

I would say Fear needs a rework alongside of Pinning.

Practically speaking, Pinning needs to be something that just happens with Shooting Attacks during the Shooting phase rather than a unique property of certain weapons.

Generally speaking, unless its a common rule that sees frequent use and has an actual impact on the game, it should be dropped from the USR list.

How common does a rule have to be though for it to be a USR? If every Codex has just one weapon or unit with a trait, is that enough or should it be a Codex specific explanation?

Where do you draw the line?

How many units have ATSKNF? Only marines, right? Then its not universal. Its a rule that could only be found on marines.

How many weapons have the graviton rule? The only ones that come to mind are found in Space Marine lists.

Lance is found only in Dark Eldar and Eldar lists, right? Then its not universal.

How many examples of concussion can you think of? I can only think of power maces, and even then its a fairly useless rule, as it only procs on unsaved wounds, thus making it too situational to be even considered a worthy rule to begin with.

If its found frequently across all codices, its universal. If there's only a few examples that are found in rare cases or primarily in a single codex, then its not universal.
Hammer of Wrath is universal, as its rule that applies to all jump infantry, bikes and monsterous creatures, which could be found in several codices.

A lot of the so called USRs should not be there, and should have stayed in their relevant codex.

And They Shall Know No Fear is in SW, BA, DA, DW, GK, SM, and IA codexes.

Graviton exists in Cult Mechanicus and Mechanicum as well as SM and DA.

Lance can be found in Mechanicum as well as DE and Eldar.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How many units have ATSKNF? Only marines, right? Then its not universal. Its a rule that could only be found on marines.

Marines, across at least five books. DA, SW, BA, Codex Marines, Deathwatch off the top of my head. I don't have Grey Knights so can't say if it's 6 for sure.

How many weapons have the graviton rule? The only ones that come to mind are found in Space Marine lists.

Grav-Cannons, Grav-Guns, Grav-Pistols, Heavy Grav-Cannons.
Three of those weapons are in three different books(Cannons, Guns, and Pistols are all three in CM, DA, and BA), two of them(Grav-Guns and Grav-Pistols) are in Deathwatch, and one(Heavy Grav-Cannons) are found exclusively in Cult Mechanicus.

Lance is found only in Dark Eldar and Eldar lists, right? Then its not universal.

Pretty sure Lance is at least also found in Tyranids, as part of a Zoanthrope power. Don't have the book handy right now.

If its found frequently across all codices, its universal. If there's only a few examples that are found in rare cases or primarily in a single codex, then its not universal.

A lot of the so called USRs should not be there, and should have stayed in their relevant codex.

But again, where do you draw the line?

It's pretty obvious that, say, Canticles of the Omnissiah, shouldn't be in the main rules but the other stuff kind of works.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
And They Shall Know No Fear is in SW, BA, DA, DW, GK, SM, and IA codexes.

Right, so marines then. Hardly universal.

Graviton and lance have a slightly better distribution, but its still only like 2-3 armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

But again, where do you draw the line?

It's pretty obvious that, say, Canticles of the Omnissiah, shouldn't be in the main rules but the other stuff kind of works.

Do necrons, orks, Tau, Eldar, Imperial Guard, tyranids and Chaos have ATSKNF, Graviton weapons, missile locks, blind, concussion and Power of the Machine spirit?
Please point to the units with the demon rule in a necron, grey knights or tau army.
No? Then they aren't universal.

Hammer of Wrath is a universal rule that applies to several unit types, all of which are represented in all armies. That's where I draw the line.

So you are saying that if a rule is in 2-3, even as high as 6 books, it should be reprinted 2-6 times (with all the potential for error this causes) instead of in the BRB once, because it isn't "universal" enough.

Okay.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Guard don't have Slow and Purposeful, Blind, or Soul Blaze either, so they aren't universal.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So you are saying that if a rule is in 2-3, even as high as 6 books, it should be reprinted 2-6 times (with all the potential for error this causes) instead of in the BRB once, because it isn't "universal" enough.

Okay.

Considering how they are all the same army with a slight variations in theme and options, yeah.
The fact that there are several different types of marine codices is another problem for another day. What about a mordian codex? Or a Bad Moons codex? What about all of the different craftworlds?
I am just not of the opinion that marines = everything in the game, enough to be considered universal

As for errors, that's why the copy function exists. Never stopped GW before 7th ed.
There's also such a thing as proof reading. But as we all know, a company who charges 30 or so bucks for a book that's going to be obsolete in 4 years should never be expected to proof their work.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Guard don't have Slow and Purposeful, Blind, or Soul Blaze either, so they aren't universal.

Yeah, they aren't