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.

Pretty basic idea. Close Combat monsters should be harder to hit than your average joe. But, with that in min, they should hit EACH OTHER pretty well.

So, to harken back to 7th, you get the following:

WS 5-6: Hits on a 2+.

WS 7-8: Hits on a 1+, inflicts a -1 hit penalty to opponents in close combat.

WS 9-10: Hits on a 0+, inflicts a -2 hit penalty to opponents in close combat.

Obviously the exact conversions may need to be tweaked. Culexus Assassins, for instance, should NOT inflict a -1 hit penalty since they already are hit on 6s, but for the most part, I think this works well.

So an Avatar of Khaine, for instance, hits everything (even, say, a Daemon Prince) on a 2+, unless he's somehow getting a -3 or greater hit penalty, but is hit by, say, a Captain on a 4+, an ordinary Marine on a 5+, a Guardsman on a 6+, and Tau not at all.

This is honestly a problem I have with the current BS system more than the current WS system - The way everything caps out so easily. You can't go above 2+, except by getting 2+ rerollable. Used to be, you could get a 2+ that would be rerolled with anything from a 6+ all the way to a pure 2+ rerollable.

I quite like the idea of characters who are really good at shooting or hitting getting a +1 or +2 on top of their BS and/or WS. (Or hits on a 1+, if you prefer.)

That being said, I'm not so sure about inflicting penalties like that. The system in 7th worked because everyone would always hit on 5+ at the worst, no matter how poorly they were outmatched. With this system, though, some units could be effectively unable to hit, in the same way that Orks become completely neutered at shooting when going up against Raven Guard or whoever.

Waaaghpower wrote:
This is honestly a problem I have with the current BS system more than the current WS system - The way everything caps out so easily. You can't go above 2+, except by getting 2+ rerollable. Used to be, you could get a 2+ that would be rerolled with anything from a 6+ all the way to a pure 2+ rerollable.

I quite like the idea of characters who are really good at shooting or hitting getting a +1 or +2 on top of their BS and/or WS. (Or hits on a 1+, if you prefer.)

That being said, I'm not so sure about inflicting penalties like that. The system in 7th worked because everyone would always hit on 5+ at the worst, no matter how poorly they were outmatched. With this system, though, some units could be effectively unable to hit, in the same way that Orks become completely neutered at shooting when going up against Raven Guard or whoever.

The only people who would be unable to be hit would be formerly WS 9-10 people fighting Tau or Conscripts. (Or Grots, I guess.)

 JNAProductions wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
This is honestly a problem I have with the current BS system more than the current WS system - The way everything caps out so easily. You can't go above 2+, except by getting 2+ rerollable. Used to be, you could get a 2+ that would be rerolled with anything from a 6+ all the way to a pure 2+ rerollable.

I quite like the idea of characters who are really good at shooting or hitting getting a +1 or +2 on top of their BS and/or WS. (Or hits on a 1+, if you prefer.)

That being said, I'm not so sure about inflicting penalties like that. The system in 7th worked because everyone would always hit on 5+ at the worst, no matter how poorly they were outmatched. With this system, though, some units could be effectively unable to hit, in the same way that Orks become completely neutered at shooting when going up against Raven Guard or whoever.

The only people who would be unable to be hit would be formerly WS 9-10 people fighting Tau or Conscripts. (Or Grots, I guess.)

Or anyone with a 4+ to hit and a Power Fist.
Heck, Meganobz and Terminators would be effectively useless due to hitting on 6+. Anyone who is a 'Close combat monster' would basically be able to permanently live in melee with complete impunity.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
This is honestly a problem I have with the current BS system more than the current WS system - The way everything caps out so easily. You can't go above 2+, except by getting 2+ rerollable. Used to be, you could get a 2+ that would be rerolled with anything from a 6+ all the way to a pure 2+ rerollable.

I quite like the idea of characters who are really good at shooting or hitting getting a +1 or +2 on top of their BS and/or WS. (Or hits on a 1+, if you prefer.)

That being said, I'm not so sure about inflicting penalties like that. The system in 7th worked because everyone would always hit on 5+ at the worst, no matter how poorly they were outmatched. With this system, though, some units could be effectively unable to hit, in the same way that Orks become completely neutered at shooting when going up against Raven Guard or whoever.

The only people who would be unable to be hit would be formerly WS 9-10 people fighting Tau or Conscripts. (Or Grots, I guess.)

Or anyone with a 4+ to hit and a Power Fist.
Heck, Meganobz and Terminators would be effectively useless due to hitting on 6+. Anyone who is a 'Close combat monster' would basically be able to permanently live in melee with complete impunity.

Good thing that people can retreat from combat with absolutely no penalties, neh?

I'm open for tweaking it, I just feel that it's a little silly that a Daemon Prince, Avatar Of Khain, or Eversor Assassin is just as easy to hit as an ordinary Conscript.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
This is honestly a problem I have with the current BS system more than the current WS system - The way everything caps out so easily. You can't go above 2+, except by getting 2+ rerollable. Used to be, you could get a 2+ that would be rerolled with anything from a 6+ all the way to a pure 2+ rerollable.

I quite like the idea of characters who are really good at shooting or hitting getting a +1 or +2 on top of their BS and/or WS. (Or hits on a 1+, if you prefer.)

That being said, I'm not so sure about inflicting penalties like that. The system in 7th worked because everyone would always hit on 5+ at the worst, no matter how poorly they were outmatched. With this system, though, some units could be effectively unable to hit, in the same way that Orks become completely neutered at shooting when going up against Raven Guard or whoever.

The only people who would be unable to be hit would be formerly WS 9-10 people fighting Tau or Conscripts. (Or Grots, I guess.)

Or anyone with a 4+ to hit and a Power Fist.
Heck, Meganobz and Terminators would be effectively useless due to hitting on 6+. Anyone who is a 'Close combat monster' would basically be able to permanently live in melee with complete impunity.

Good thing that people can retreat from combat with absolutely no penalties, neh?

I'm open for tweaking it, I just feel that it's a little silly that a Daemon Prince, Avatar Of Khain, or Eversor Assassin is just as easy to hit as an ordinary Conscript.

I think a -1 to-hit would be OK for the best of the best, it's just the -2 that seems too potent.

Is it, though?

No really-I haven't run the numbers. I don't know.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Is it, though?

No really-I haven't run the numbers. I don't know.

Mostly, yeah. -1 penalties are really, really strong already, something that GW doesn't seem to realize - Characters and stuff can shrug them off, but anything that lacks a 2+ to begin with is going to be in a really bad way. (Not to mention that it removes the possibility of using about 95% of special 'on-a-certain-roll' effects.)
-2 will halve the damage of dedicated close combat units, third the damage of dedicated CC units with power fists, and anyone who doesn't get a natural 3+ might as well not show up to the fight.

I swear to an uncaring universe, that this topic comes up and it's always exactly the same thing.

"My bolters don't bolt hard enough"

"My Marines don't Marine hard enough"

"My Choppy Dude of Super Death to Everything doesn't Chop hard enough"

"My Psyker of unimaginable power doesn't Psyk hard enough"


AS SUCH! Everything else must be made sucky, to allow my super snowflake awesome mother fething duder of awesome mother fething dudeness to AWESOMELY DUDE!


It's a severely limited game, with 7 degrees of difficulty scale, and one of them is 50/50. One of those is impossible to pass, and the other is impossible to fail. Between those, you have two "probably going to happen" and "probably not going to happen". People don't like auto-fail or auto-ass, so you really only have 5 functional degrees of difficulty scale, to represent the actions between Guardsmen and Knight Titans. And again, one of those options represents even capability. So there are only

2 gradients

between the capabilities of Guardsman, and the capabilities of a Knight Titan. You can achieve success at even, slightly better, or substantially better. And those two gradients have to encompass everything between Guardsman and Knight. All Strength values must be represented between those two functions. Your Balistic Skill between a well trained soldier, and the most capable marksmen in the galaxy have two gradients to work with. A Marine, hit by non-overcharged plasma, which is essentially as small chunk of BURNING STAR is not harmed 1/3 of the time. Because a Guardsman is wounded 5/6 times, some how, and not always.

Like, being at the centre of a tiny nuclear fusion reaction gives you a 1/6 chance of survival? NO! But the game has to represent incredibly disparate levels of ability and power, in 5 gradients.


So, for the love of that same, uncaring universe, never again complain about Melee characters somehow needing to hit on 2+, and then for no reason, make other units not be able to hit them as well. Accept, that this game is a terrible abstraction of incredible abilities being shoehorned into the same game, and that it MUST make sacrifices of sense and reason in order to fit within the parameters of a d6.

 greatbigtree wrote:
.....Accept, that this game is a terrible abstraction.....

Okay, universe appeased. Thank god i'm not spending money on it. Moving on.

How about instead of a penalty for enemies to hit, the superior attacker gets a bonus to Armor saves - reflecting the fact the attacker parries or otherwise avoids enemy attacks that would have otherwise hit?

Personally I'm thinking more among the lines of giving units that are supposed to be CC specialists an extra saving throw in CC instead of a flat penalty to hit to whatever is attacking them. Something among the lines of "whenever this unit gets hit by a melee attack, roll a D6. On a 5+/6+ (depends on how strong that unit is supposed to be), that hit is ignored.". This would represent your model(s) blocking/ parrying or dodging an attack. This avoids the problem of unwieldy weapon users or T'au not being able to hit at all while still offering extra protection to your Swarmlord or Solitaire.

 Stormonu wrote:
How about instead of a penalty for enemies to hit, the superior attacker gets a bonus to Armor saves - reflecting the fact the attacker parries or otherwise avoids enemy attacks that would have otherwise hit?

The only problem I see here is that you have units that potentially wouldn't benefit from this much. Even if we changed "armor save" to saves in general, guys like the Solitaire would basically just go from a 3+ to a 2+ and then never go up from there. Not a bad thought though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pandabeer wrote:
Personally I'm thinking more among the lines of giving units that are supposed to be CC specialists an extra saving throw in CC instead of a flat penalty to hit to whatever is attacking them. Something among the lines of "whenever this unit gets hit by a melee attack, roll a D6. On a 5+/6+ (depends on how strong that unit is supposed to be), that hit is ignored.". This would represent your model(s) blocking/ parrying or dodging an attack. This avoids the problem of unwieldy weapon users or T'au not being able to hit at all while still offering extra protection to your Swarmlord or Solitaire.

That might work. Though I feel like you'd have to make it at least a 5+ "FNP" type effect in order to make it feel worhtwhile. A 6+ FNP on an elite model with a handful of wounds mostly just feels like extra rolling, and it might be even more frustrating to watch your extra layer of melee prowess protection consistently failing to actually protect you. Of course, making it better than a 5+ quickly starts to feel a bit OP, so... hmm.

Are we sure that making it impossible for really talented melee combatants to be hit by the least graceful units in the game is a bad thing? Like, if we're talking about things that were formerly WS 7 or higher imposing a -1 penalty and things that were WS 9 or higher imposing a -2 penalty, then we're really just looking at...

*Some greater daemons
*Phoenix Lords
*Most dark eldar HQs (which include things like succubi)
*Harlequin characters
* Maybe a couple of marine characters?
*Primarchs

In an edition where falling back voluntarily is a thing, I'm not sure I mind the thought of fire warriors literally not being to hurt my solitaire in melee, where he is meant to be amazing and they are meant to be awful. It certainly seems less annoying (if less hillarious) than, "So then my fire warrior put up his dukes and boxed a legendary solitaire to death. It was great. The little bopped the supernatural, inhumanly fast guy right in the jaw, and he just passed out in front of us. Y'know, those guys are a lot less glittery when they're laying on the ground unconscious."

I"m all for some limited amount of melee to-hit penalties against certain characters though. My various eldar characters all get a little scared when they charge an opponent that still has CP left because it's weirdly easy for everyone in the unit to interrupt my chargers and then bludgeon my ancient and powerful master of melee combat to death.

Close combat represents more than just punches and kicks, you know? Like...

Pistol Shots - Tough do dodge
Grenades - Tough to dodge
Mines and traps - Tough to dodge
10 guys at once, all trying to poke a bayonet into you. - Reasonably easy to dodge

It's not all one-on-one. Sometimes, you're knee deep in alien goo. Your mobility is much less significant at that point. Or maybe, your opponents all have their backs to a wall, and start firing a wall of bullets / las blasts at you. And you're like, "Glad my non-lethal training in gladiator style combat prepared me for a wall of ammunition flying towards me at the speed of light. I'm just... yup... gonna dodge that... because Hummies is chumps yo."

Do you have any idea why things like D-Day were not one-sided punch outs? Because the defenders had machine gun nests. And the attackers had all kinds of hand-to-hand combat training, I'm sure. And it meant just about feth-all because they were all busy being shot, by near-solid lines of hollow points, strafing back and forth. At some point, you've got to concede that trying to stab something to death when the other something has a gun is just fantasy, and you're using a d6 to attempt to portray that interaction. Don't take a chain-axe to a gun fight, I always say.

The only way 40k could start to represent "fantastic capability" as being better than "incredible capability" as being better than "Super Human" capability as being better than "well trained human" is to make a Well trained human succeed on a 5+. Anything worse than "Well trained human" succeeds on a 6+. You would have to prohibit negative modifiers, or have a 6 is always successful rule.

6+ Worse than well trained human. Orkish Ballistic Skill
5+ Equal to Well trained humans. Imperial Guard Balistic Skill
4+ Exceptional Human / Super Human. Imperial Veterans [truly more incredible than it sounds] or Space Marine Ballistic Skill. Eldar Accuracy.
3+ Super Human / Exceptional Super Humans. Space Marine characters that have distinguished themselves such as Lieutenants or Captain Ballistic Skill. Exarch Accuracy.
2+ Extraordinary Super Humans / Near Godlike Entities / Godlike Entities. Chapter Masters, Avatars, Greater Daemons. Phoenix Lord Accuracy.

If you want to have more gradients above "standard human capability" on a d6, you need to make standard humans succeed on less than 4+. Shift it to 5, and you get more gradients above them to recognize their capability. Sure, that is just making Humans suck so you can feel better about your super-characters, but that's the name of the game right? And then this fixes a whole plethora of problems with not being able to represent the awesomeness of Titan level durability. The capacity of Nurgleized things to be tougher. For snipers to be more snipey. In fact, make all armour 1 point worse so Terminator armour can finally shine like it's supposed to, right? Humans should only have a 6+ save anyhow.

Yup, fixes the whole thing. Makes humans gakky, and super humans more awesome. Perfect!

More importantly 8th did a good job making melee function the same as shooting so we could reduce the number of resolution methods and make the game work faster and smoother.

Why would anyone want to separate it out again and create a mess of different mechanics all over?

 greatbigtree wrote:
Close combat represents more than just punches and kicks, you know? Like...

Pistol Shots - Tough do dodge
Grenades - Tough to dodge
Mines and traps - Tough to dodge
10 guys at once, all trying to poke a bayonet into you. - Reasonably easy to dodge

It's not all one-on-one. Sometimes, you're knee deep in alien goo. Your mobility is much less significant at that point. Or maybe, your opponents all have their backs to a wall, and start firing a wall of bullets / las blasts at you. And you're like, "Glad my non-lethal training in gladiator style combat prepared me for a wall of ammunition flying towards me at the speed of light. I'm just... yup... gonna dodge that... because Hummies is chumps yo."

Do you have any idea why things like D-Day were not one-sided punch outs? Because the defenders had machine gun nests. And the attackers had all kinds of hand-to-hand combat training, I'm sure. And it meant just about feth-all because they were all busy being shot, by near-solid lines of hollow points, strafing back and forth. At some point, you've got to concede that trying to stab something to death when the other something has a gun is just fantasy, and you're using a d6 to attempt to portray that interaction. Don't take a chain-axe to a gun fight, I always say.

The only way 40k could start to represent "fantastic capability" as being better than "incredible capability" as being better than "Super Human" capability as being better than "well trained human" is to make a Well trained human succeed on a 5+. Anything worse than "Well trained human" succeeds on a 6+. You would have to prohibit negative modifiers, or have a 6 is always successful rule.

6+ Worse than well trained human. Orkish Ballistic Skill
5+ Equal to Well trained humans. Imperial Guard Balistic Skill
4+ Exceptional Human / Super Human. Imperial Veterans [truly more incredible than it sounds] or Space Marine Ballistic Skill. Eldar Accuracy.
3+ Super Human / Exceptional Super Humans. Space Marine characters that have distinguished themselves such as Lieutenants or Captain Ballistic Skill. Exarch Accuracy.
2+ Extraordinary Super Humans / Near Godlike Entities / Godlike Entities. Chapter Masters, Avatars, Greater Daemons. Phoenix Lord Accuracy.

If you want to have more gradients above "standard human capability" on a d6, you need to make standard humans succeed on less than 4+. Shift it to 5, and you get more gradients above them to recognize their capability. Sure, that is just making Humans suck so you can feel better about your super-characters, but that's the name of the game right? And then this fixes a whole plethora of problems with not being able to represent the awesomeness of Titan level durability. The capacity of Nurgleized things to be tougher. For snipers to be more snipey. In fact, make all armour 1 point worse so Terminator armour can finally shine like it's supposed to, right? Humans should only have a 6+ save anyhow.

Yup, fixes the whole thing. Makes humans gakky, and super humans more awesome. Perfect!

Or, you know, you can do what I suggested and move to 1+ and 0+ WS (and BS, if you like).

Still fails on a 1, but lets you ignore initial penalties. And doesn't require rewriting anything.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Or, you know, you can do what I suggested and move to 1+ and 0+ WS (and BS, if you like).

Still fails on a 1, but lets you ignore initial penalties. And doesn't require rewriting anything.

So... its effectively a 2+?

Wargames are fancier, nerdier, epic-er version of chess... Pawns do kill the king here and there once in a while... Just play smart and don't let the -hit unit do so much work. If it bothers you that much, deep strike it and kill it, kite it, kill things that dont have -hit modifier, play objectives, etc.

I'm sorry but this is major wish list and not one of balancing issue.

 skchsan wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Or, you know, you can do what I suggested and move to 1+ and 0+ WS (and BS, if you like).

Still fails on a 1, but lets you ignore initial penalties. And doesn't require rewriting anything.

So... its effectively a 2+?

Wargames are fancier, nerdier, epic-er version of chess... Pawns do kill the king here and there once in a while... Just play smart and don't let the -hit unit do so much work. If it bothers you that much, deep strike it and kill it, kite it, kill things that dont have -hit modifier, play objectives, etc.

I'm sorry but this is major wish list and not one of balancing issue.

It's slightly better than a 2+ because you'll ignore the first -1 penalty (1+) or the first two (0+).

It'd be nice to have a more granular system, but this is a way to make some things better without rewriting the whole thing. And it's not necessarily a balance thing-some things, like Daemon Princes, are fairly costed right now, so under the proposed system they should DEFINITELY go up in points. It's more of a flavor thing-I understand a Tau hitting, say, a Marine just as well as a Guardsman, but to hit a Daemon Prince just as well as they hit another Tau? Feels a little off to me.

What about a special rule for save modifier like what harlequins have, instead of a hit modifier?

Certain units have 'parry' of 'dodge' abilities to reflect their performance in melee - perhaps monstrous creatures hit like a truck but are not very finesse-y.

 skchsan wrote:
What about a special rule for save modifier like what harlequins have, instead of a hit modifier?

Certain units have 'parry' of 'dodge' abilities to reflect their performance in melee - perhaps monstrous creatures hit like a truck but are not very finesse-y.

Harlequins don't have that.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
What about a special rule for save modifier like what harlequins have, instead of a hit modifier?

Certain units have 'parry' of 'dodge' abilities to reflect their performance in melee - perhaps monstrous creatures hit like a truck but are not very finesse-y.

Harlequins don't have that.

What about a special rule for save modifier instead of a hit modifier?

Certain units have 'parry' of 'dodge' abilities to reflect their performance in melee - perhaps monstrous creatures hit like a truck but are not very finesse-y.

 greatbigtree wrote:
Close combat represents more than just punches and kicks, you know? Like...

Pistol Shots - Tough do dodge
Grenades - Tough to dodge
Mines and traps - Tough to dodge
10 guys at once, all trying to poke a bayonet into you. - Reasonably easy to dodge

Pistols and grenades are represented by shooting attacks that do not occur in the fight phase when JNA's proposed rules would be relevant. Being outnumbered is a thing, but the rules for it haven't existed since... 3rd edition? Benefits for outnumbering your opponent might warrant their own discussion though.

 greatbigtree wrote:

It's not all one-on-one. Sometimes, you're knee deep in alien goo. Your mobility is much less significant at that point. Or maybe, your opponents all have their backs to a wall, and start firing a wall of bullets / las blasts at you. And you're like, "Glad my non-lethal training in gladiator style combat prepared me for a wall of ammunition flying towards me at the speed of light. I'm just... yup... gonna dodge that... because Hummies is chumps yo."

I genuinely believe that a solitaire fighting in alien goo (assuming he bothers touching the floor) should still be more difficult for a guardsman to hit than a fire warrior in that same goo. My opponents are not, in fact, firing at me due to the confined spaces because their plasma gun rules are not being used. Something like that is more what overwatch represents. By the time we've reached the fight phase, my wyches or phoenix lord or whatever are close enough to you to make firing your weapon impractical. Being allowed to fire ranged weapons in melee is an entirely different discussion that has come up before, but I still feel it isn't really relevant here. Also, you might want to guy buy a ticket for the arenas in Commorragh. I think you'll find that "non-lethal" a poor description of the combat they do there.

 greatbigtree wrote:

Do you have any idea why things like D-Day were not one-sided punch outs? Because the defenders had machine gun nests. And the attackers had all kinds of hand-to-hand combat training, I'm sure. And it meant just about feth-all because they were all busy being shot, by near-solid lines of hollow points, strafing back and forth. At some point, you've got to concede that trying to stab something to death when the other something has a gun is just fantasy, and you're using a d6 to attempt to portray that interaction. Don't take a chain-axe to a gun fight, I always say.

Yes. I will fully admit that the game with space fungus fighting space elves and robot zombies falls into the realm of "fantasy." Because 40k is space fantasy. This is a setting where stabbing people to death is established to be a viable tactic for some people. I imagine lines of machine guns are great in WW2 games where you reenact D-Day. This is a game with demons and space marines.

 greatbigtree wrote:

The only way 40k could start to represent "fantastic capability" as being better than "incredible capability" as being better than "Super Human" capability as being better than "well trained human" is to make a Well trained human succeed on a 5+. Anything worse than "Well trained human" succeeds on a 6+. You would have to prohibit negative modifiers, or have a 6 is always successful rule.

... Humans should only have a 6+ save anyhow. ...

Yup, fixes the whole thing. Makes humans gakky, and super humans more awesome. Perfect!

Nope. JNA has presented a perfectly viable suggestion for representing especially talented melee combatants being hard to stab that does not, in fact, make average guardsmen any worse at stabbing the vast majority of targets out there. A guardsman in JNA's proposed system would have the same chance of stabbing a tactical marine that he does now. But if he's trying to stab Lucius the Eternal, his odds go down a bit. Instead of making the majority units terrible at hitting in close combat, you instead just say that a very small minority of units are sufficiently talented in close combat to warrant reflecting their abilities in their rules. Also, I'm not sure why you assume this rule would universally hurt humans. Celestine and assassins seem like perfectly valid units to give a penalty to hit against as do captains/chapter masters if you count them as "human."

It seems to me that you're looking for reasons to get testy over what amounts to a relatively minor change.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:
More importantly 8th did a good job making melee function the same as shooting so we could reduce the number of resolution methods and make the game work faster and smoother.

Why would anyone want to separate it out again and create a mess of different mechanics all over?

Are you referring to the opening post's suggestion? Because it doesn't really introduce a new resolution method. It basically just gives the Banshee exarch's special rule to units that are supposed to be really good in close combat. There's no extra rolling or new mechanics. It just imposes a flat penalty to hit in some cases the same way Raven Guard impose a penalty to hit in the shooting phase. Giving models WS 1+ or 0+ also doesn't introduce any new resolution methods. It just changes where your starting number is at the same way having BS 3+ instead of BS 4+ does.

Personally, I'd probably drop the WS1+ and 0+ part though. I kind of like the idea of two combat experts having trouble landing blows on one another. Very, "And their duel lasted 3 days and 3 nights."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skchsan wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
What about a special rule for save modifier like what harlequins have, instead of a hit modifier?

Certain units have 'parry' of 'dodge' abilities to reflect their performance in melee - perhaps monstrous creatures hit like a truck but are not very finesse-y.

Harlequins don't have that.

What about a special rule for save modifier instead of a hit modifier?

Certain units have 'parry' of 'dodge' abilities to reflect their performance in melee - perhaps monstrous creatures hit like a truck but are not very finesse-y.

Not a bad idea, but gets a little wonky in some cases. A model with terminator armor gains no benefit against weapons with no AP (like a fire warrior gunbutting him), and the Solitaire would only ever be able to improve his save by 1 (he starts at a 3+ invul iirc) when he should arguably get a -2 under JNA's proposed system.

So is this proposing a new gradient for how WS and BS works? Im not quite sure how this works in terms of determining when to apply the -hit modifiers.

Are you proposing we start comparing WS again like the older editions?

I would like to see improvements to assaults as well, but I feel like implementation of super CC unit is going to drive the game more and more to gunline armies.

 skchsan wrote:
So is this proposing a new gradient for how WS and BS works? Im not quite sure how this works in terms of determining when to apply the -hit modifiers.

Are you proposing we start comparing WS again like the older editions?

I would like to see improvements to assaults as well, but I feel like implementation of super CC unit is going to drive the game more and more to gunline armies.

My understanding of JNA's proposal is this:

* Some units have WS 1+ or 0+. You still miss on to-hit rolls of 1, but you'll also probably still be hitting on a 2+ even if someone gives you a -1 to hit.
* Some units (usually the ones with WS 1+ and 0+) impose a -1 penalty on to-hit rolls made against them in the Fight phase.

Howling Banshees basically already have that second part, and no one is talking about winning tournaments by spamming them, so I think we're fine. There's no comparing WS to enemy WS. It's just, "My guy hits on a 2+ even if you give him a -1 penalty, and also you take a -1 when you roll to hit him in the fight phase."

Wyldhunt wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
So is this proposing a new gradient for how WS and BS works? Im not quite sure how this works in terms of determining when to apply the -hit modifiers.

Are you proposing we start comparing WS again like the older editions?

I would like to see improvements to assaults as well, but I feel like implementation of super CC unit is going to drive the game more and more to gunline armies.

My understanding of JNA's proposal is this:

* Some units have WS 1+ or 0+. You still miss on to-hit rolls of 1, but you'll also probably still be hitting on a 2+ even if someone gives you a -1 to hit.
* Some units (usually the ones with WS 1+ and 0+) impose a -1 penalty on to-hit rolls made against them in the Fight phase.

Howling Banshees basically already have that second part, and no one is talking about winning tournaments by spamming them, so I think we're fine. There's no comparing WS to enemy WS. It's just, "My guy hits on a 2+ even if you give him a -1 penalty, and also you take a -1 when you roll to hit him in the fight phase."

Yup. That's pretty much it. The old WS chart is there to show who should get these modifiers.