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.

Suggestion:

Change gravity to include "Invulnerable saves may not be taken against this weapon" and then adjust points as needed.

Looking at Grav from this perspective makes a lot of sense. Your're using a basic universal force to crush your opponent, power fields mean nothing when compared to that.

But not being there when you get shot DOES.

Edit: To clarify, Harlequin and some Dark Eldar Invulns are about dodging or having an illusion get shot instead of the real thing. It doesn't matter how powerful or universal the weapon is, if it misses.

Daemons, likewise, might simply not be in reality. They don't care about the weapon whether it's a Volcano Cannon, a Lasgun, a Grav Gun... They're just not present in reality at that moment.

 JNAProductions wrote:
But not being there when you get shot DOES.

Edit: To clarify, Harlequin and some Dark Eldar Invulns are about dodging or having an illusion get shot instead of the real thing. It doesn't matter how powerful or universal the weapon is, if it misses.

Plus some Craftsworlds units (Nightwing, Skyrunner, Amathlyn, etc), and Dark Angel jinking.

And Deathskulls Orks, who are just lucky. And Sororitas, who have divine protection. Almost all Necron invulnerable saves stem from being immaterial rather than a force field.

And Adeptus Mechanicus get an invulnerable save just for being mostly robots, which high gravity won't change.

If you want to make Grav an actual choice instead of just being a weaker version of plasma without overheating, it needs to have an effect that isn't just more damage.

The obvious solution is to add a slowdown effect

If a unit looses a wound to a grav weapon, it's movement, advance rolls and charge rolls are reduced by 2 inches untill the end of it's next turn.

Ice_can wrote:
If you want to make Grav an actual choice instead of just being a weaker version of plasma without overheating, it needs to have an effect that isn't just more damage.

The obvious solution is to add a slowdown effect

If a unit looses a wound to a grav weapon, it's movement, advance rolls and charge rolls are reduced by 2 inches untill the end of it's next turn.

That's a neat idea. Not sure on the exact numbers, but the concept is good.

Edit: It used to have Concussive, which dropped your Initiative to 1. Maybe if you're wounded by a Grav Weapon, you fight last, unless you charged, in which case you fight as if you didn't? It'd be a nice addition to any melee unit that has Grav, as well as Grav Pistols.

Ice_can wrote:
If you want to make Grav an actual choice instead of just being a weaker version of plasma without overheating, it needs to have an effect that isn't just more damage.

The obvious solution is to add a slowdown effect

If a unit looses a wound to a grav weapon, it's movement, advance rolls and charge rolls are reduced by 2 inches untill the end of it's next turn.

Hence why I suggested ignoring Invulns. It would make the weapon a powerful choice against armies like Custodes, Harlies and the like.

 Togusa wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
If you want to make Grav an actual choice instead of just being a weaker version of plasma without overheating, it needs to have an effect that isn't just more damage.

The obvious solution is to add a slowdown effect

If a unit looses a wound to a grav weapon, it's movement, advance rolls and charge rolls are reduced by 2 inches untill the end of it's next turn.

Hence why I suggested ignoring Invulns. It would make the weapon a powerful choice against armies like Custodes, Harlies and the like.

It's practically useless against Terminators (AP-3 on a 2+ is the same as a 5++), useful a little against Custodes (drops them to a 5+ instead of a 4++... Unless they're in cover) and is far too good against Harlequins and Daemons (who have 6+ saves, pretty much).

 JNAProductions wrote:
But not being there when you get shot DOES.

Edit: To clarify, Harlequin and some Dark Eldar Invulns are about dodging or having an illusion get shot instead of the real thing. It doesn't matter how powerful or universal the weapon is, if it misses.

Daemons, likewise, might simply not be in reality. They don't care about the weapon whether it's a Volcano Cannon, a Lasgun, a Grav Gun... They're just not present in reality at that moment.

Yeah but some other things already ignore invulns that don't really account for dodging and stuff either

I quite like this idea

Cynista wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
But not being there when you get shot DOES.

Edit: To clarify, Harlequin and some Dark Eldar Invulns are about dodging or having an illusion get shot instead of the real thing. It doesn't matter how powerful or universal the weapon is, if it misses.

Daemons, likewise, might simply not be in reality. They don't care about the weapon whether it's a Volcano Cannon, a Lasgun, a Grav Gun... They're just not present in reality at that moment.

Yeah but some other things already ignore invulns that don't really account for dodging and stuff either

I quite like this idea

What ignores Invulns?

There's a Tyranid Relic, the C'Tan Phase Blade, and Mortal Wounds. Note how none of those are an entire CLASS of weapons.

Reducing movement speed is probably a good option perhaps only on a hit rather than unsaved wound. would be interesting to see tactical with one or two of them just slowing down a moving hoard.

alternatively what about removing the fly keyword for a full turn.
it might give an interesting option for controlling fly (though actual flyers might need an extra page of rules for it such as ether being forced to go to hovering or something)

 Desubot wrote:
Reducing movement speed is probably a good option perhaps only on a hit rather than unsaved wound. would be interesting to see tactical with one or two of them just slowing down a moving hoard.

alternatively what about removing the fly keyword for a full turn.
it might give an interesting option for controlling fly (though actual flyers might need an extra page of rules for it such as ether being forced to go to hovering or something)

Not all flyers have Hover.

Perhaps it can remove Fly, but not from Aircraft? (That new Keyword GW added.)

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Reducing movement speed is probably a good option perhaps only on a hit rather than unsaved wound. would be interesting to see tactical with one or two of them just slowing down a moving hoard.

alternatively what about removing the fly keyword for a full turn.
it might give an interesting option for controlling fly (though actual flyers might need an extra page of rules for it such as ether being forced to go to hovering or something)

Not all flyers have Hover.

Perhaps it can remove Fly, but not from Aircraft? (That new Keyword GW added.)

Yeah probably. its just a spit ball. but i like the concept of grounding units and slowing them down as an effect for allowing counter movement, or just murderizing something that normally would just jump away with no penalty.

Grav weapons are supposed to 'pulse' their damage, starting off with a kind of 'tether' beam and a quick pulse.

I'd do something like this, reworking the whole setup:
Add "Sniper" to the profile
Add a bit that each shot gets resolved in sequence, and if all the shots are resolved against the same target then there's +1 to the next pulse's damage.
Add in a caveat that if the target isn't slain by the grav weapons that it has reduced Movement and can't Overwatch until its next turn.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Cynista wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
But not being there when you get shot DOES.

Edit: To clarify, Harlequin and some Dark Eldar Invulns are about dodging or having an illusion get shot instead of the real thing. It doesn't matter how powerful or universal the weapon is, if it misses.

Daemons, likewise, might simply not be in reality. They don't care about the weapon whether it's a Volcano Cannon, a Lasgun, a Grav Gun... They're just not present in reality at that moment.

Yeah but some other things already ignore invulns that don't really account for dodging and stuff either

I quite like this idea

What ignores Invulns?

There's a Tyranid Relic, the C'Tan Phase Blade, and Mortal Wounds. Note how none of those are an entire CLASS of weapons.

The phase blades and the Vindicare Assassin's guns are what I was thinking of. It doesn't really matter if they are a class of weapons or not, that wasn't your original point. You were basically saying it wouldn't make sense thematically right? Because things could dodge or dematerialise. Well, I'm just saying other weapons already ignore invulns, so.....

 Togusa wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
If you want to make Grav an actual choice instead of just being a weaker version of plasma without overheating, it needs to have an effect that isn't just more damage.

The obvious solution is to add a slowdown effect

If a unit looses a wound to a grav weapon, it's movement, advance rolls and charge rolls are reduced by 2 inches untill the end of it's next turn.

Hence why I suggested ignoring Invulns. It would make the weapon a powerful choice against armies like Custodes, Harlies and the like.

Except ignoring invulnerable saves is following GW's bad example of roll a save unless you hit by x or y or z and then as 20 letters out of the alphabet ignore saves you have to introduce invulnerable saves, so you start ignoring them via MW and 4-5 weapon types then it just becomes everything without a FNP save is out of the meta. Ignoring saves is a very bad road learn from GW's mistakes people.

Also it would make grave terrible against Guardsmen, orks etc and it's not exactly like Custodes, terminators and stormshield marines are dominating the meta.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Reducing movement speed is probably a good option perhaps only on a hit rather than unsaved wound. would be interesting to see tactical with one or two of them just slowing down a moving hoard.

alternatively what about removing the fly keyword for a full turn.
it might give an interesting option for controlling fly (though actual flyers might need an extra page of rules for it such as ether being forced to go to hovering or something)

Not all flyers have Hover.

Perhaps it can remove Fly, but not from Aircraft? (That new Keyword GW added.)

On hit makes it automatically applied to any target that can't hid behind stacked minus to hit AKA Eldar (they deffinatly dont need buffs no matter how indirect). Needing a successful wound gives it a bonus but not just automatically applied.

Trying to remove keywords at random would require that you check all the interactions with strategums, how would it effect weapos with +1 to hit fly keyword.
Reducing movement was my suggestion as I can't see anything else it interacts with that leads to well how does X work now questions.

Ice_can wrote:

Except ignoring invulnerable saves is following GW's bad example of roll a save unless you hit by x or y or z and then as 20 letters out of the alphabet ignore saves you have to introduce invulnerable saves, so you start ignoring them via MW and 4-5 weapon types then it just becomes everything without a FNP save is out of the meta. Ignoring saves is a very bad road learn from GW's mistakes people.

Also it would make grave terrible against Guardsmen, orks etc and it's not exactly like Custodes, terminators and stormshield marines are dominating the meta.

Grav has never been good against Guardsmen, Orks, etc. Since its inception it was clear that it was made to deal with vehicles, monsters, and units with difficult to bypass saves.

There's also nothing wrong with "removing" keywords. It just requires a token/marker--which apparently for some people is THE DEVILS!!!1!

I like the idea of removing the "Fly" keyword if hit by grav. I think there need to be more weapons which have utilities instead of just damage output!

As for Aircraft, simply restrict them to their minimum movement if hit by grav, and have a special caveat if the model goes into hover mode (EG cannot move, or removes "Fly").

 Kanluwen wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Except ignoring invulnerable saves is following GW's bad example of roll a save unless you hit by x or y or z and then as 20 letters out of the alphabet ignore saves you have to introduce invulnerable saves, so you start ignoring them via MW and 4-5 weapon types then it just becomes everything without a FNP save is out of the meta. Ignoring saves is a very bad road learn from GW's mistakes people.

Also it would make grave terrible against Guardsmen, orks etc and it's not exactly like Custodes, terminators and stormshield marines are dominating the meta.

Grav has never been good against Guardsmen, Orks, etc. Since its inception it was clear that it was made to deal with vehicles, monsters, and units with difficult to bypass saves.

There's also nothing wrong with "removing" keywords. It just requires a token/marker--which apparently for some people is THE DEVILS!!!1!

Your massively understating the issue, can I use a strategum to get +1 to hit unita with the fly keyword if I target a unit hit by a grav weapon?
If a flyer doesn't have the fly keyword is it then unable to fallback and hence auto destroyed if in CC?

I get that grav wasn't good against unarmoured units in 7th but conversly plasma was the go to anti armour qeapon either yet people seem to be happy with that change.
The things grav was designed to be good against plasma kills better in 8th so grav needs a new unique reason and marines the mane grav users are currently sucking in comparison to lightly armoured cheap infantry not so much medium/heavy infantry and light Vehicals.

Hence the suggestion for moment debuffs, to allow them to do concentration of force and not be permanently out manovered.

Ice_can wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Except ignoring invulnerable saves is following GW's bad example of roll a save unless you hit by x or y or z and then as 20 letters out of the alphabet ignore saves you have to introduce invulnerable saves, so you start ignoring them via MW and 4-5 weapon types then it just becomes everything without a FNP save is out of the meta. Ignoring saves is a very bad road learn from GW's mistakes people.

Also it would make grave terrible against Guardsmen, orks etc and it's not exactly like Custodes, terminators and stormshield marines are dominating the meta.

Grav has never been good against Guardsmen, Orks, etc. Since its inception it was clear that it was made to deal with vehicles, monsters, and units with difficult to bypass saves.

There's also nothing wrong with "removing" keywords. It just requires a token/marker--which apparently for some people is THE DEVILS!!!1!

Your massively understating the issue, can I use a strategum to get +1 to hit unita with the fly keyword if I target a unit hit by a grav weapon?
If a flyer doesn't have the fly keyword is it then unable to fallback and hence auto destroyed if in CC?

I get that grav wasn't good against unarmoured units in 7th but conversly plasma was the go to anti armour qeapon either yet people seem to be happy with that change.
The things grav was designed to be good against plasma kills better in 8th so grav needs a new unique reason and marines the mane grav users are currently sucking in comparison to lightly armoured cheap infantry not so much medium/heavy infantry and light Vehicals.

Hence the suggestion for moment debuffs, to allow them to do concentration of force and not be permanently out manovered.

Grav should be a multi-wound killer, hence my suggestion at ignoring invulns. It's a simple solution.

Weapon as normal, Add Ignores Invulns, Adjust points accordingly, DONE.

Why make this so convoluted?

 Togusa wrote:
Grav should be a multi-wound killer, hence my suggestion at ignoring invulns. It's a simple solution.

Weapon as normal, Add Ignores Invulns, Adjust points accordingly, DONE.

Why make this so convoluted?

Because simple=/=better.

You could make Grav better by making it S20, AP-20, D20. Doesn't even need special rules! Would that be better for the game?

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
Grav should be a multi-wound killer, hence my suggestion at ignoring invulns. It's a simple solution.

Weapon as normal, Add Ignores Invulns, Adjust points accordingly, DONE.

Why make this so convoluted?

Because simple=/=better.

You could make Grav better by making it S20, AP-20, D20. Doesn't even need special rules! Would that be better for the game?

Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration though?

Invulnerable saves currently have no way around them outside of very rare and situation dependent mortal wounds. Gravity can do this, it makes sense. If you crush someones own armor or tank around them, they cannot escape that. Speed, energy fields, none of it can impact a basic force in the universe.

 Togusa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
Grav should be a multi-wound killer, hence my suggestion at ignoring invulns. It's a simple solution.

Weapon as normal, Add Ignores Invulns, Adjust points accordingly, DONE.

Why make this so convoluted?

Because simple=/=better.

You could make Grav better by making it S20, AP-20, D20. Doesn't even need special rules! Would that be better for the game?

Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration though?

Invulnerable saves currently have no way around them outside of very rare and situation dependent mortal wounds. Gravity can do this, it makes sense. If you crush someones own armor or tank around them, they cannot escape that. Speed, energy fields, none of it can impact a basic force in the universe.

Why not? Why can't a force field protect you from gravitic waves? Why can't you dodge the blast of a grav weapon? Why can't an illusion be targeted instead of the real deal? Why can't a daemon just be ephemeral and not be affected?

This also disproportionately affects some models over others. A Terminator? He don't care, he gets a 5+ anyway. A Daemon? They get nothing.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
Grav should be a multi-wound killer, hence my suggestion at ignoring invulns. It's a simple solution.

Weapon as normal, Add Ignores Invulns, Adjust points accordingly, DONE.

Why make this so convoluted?

Because simple=/=better.

You could make Grav better by making it S20, AP-20, D20. Doesn't even need special rules! Would that be better for the game?

Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration though?

Invulnerable saves currently have no way around them outside of very rare and situation dependent mortal wounds. Gravity can do this, it makes sense. If you crush someones own armor or tank around them, they cannot escape that. Speed, energy fields, none of it can impact a basic force in the universe.

Why not? Why can't a force field protect you from gravitic waves? Why can't you dodge the blast of a grav weapon? Why can't an illusion be targeted instead of the real deal? Why can't a daemon just be ephemeral and not be affected?

This also disproportionately affects some models over others. A Terminator? He don't care, he gets a 5+ anyway. A Daemon? They get nothing.

You can dodge the shot, that's what -X to hit is for. Most deamons are T3-T4, I think you'll still see people take plasma over this.

This is specifically to deal with units in the Custodes category and light vehicles.

Custodes have a net -1 to their save. Nothing, if in cover.
Light Vehicles generally don't have Invulnerable saves.

Your stated goals are not addressed by your proposal.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Custodes have a net -1 to their save. Nothing, if in cover.
Light Vehicles generally don't have Invulnerable saves.

Your stated goals are not addressed by your proposal.

If we apply grave as I have suggested, a custodian guardian gets a 5+ save, instead of a 3++/4++ depending on the weapon. If he fails, he has a chance to automatically die because of the D3 wounds. In essence, he was helplessly crushed to death in his own armor.

As far as I know, also, there is no mention of any technology which can stop gravity in this games lore, only manipulation of it.

 Togusa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Custodes have a net -1 to their save. Nothing, if in cover.
Light Vehicles generally don't have Invulnerable saves.

Your stated goals are not addressed by your proposal.

If we apply grave as I have suggested, a custodian guardian gets a 5+ save, instead of a 3++/4++ depending on the weapon. If he fails, he has a chance to automatically die because of the D3 wounds. In essence, he was helplessly crushed to death in his own armor.

As far as I know, also, there is no mention of any technology which can stop gravity in this games lore, only manipulation of it.

Very few people bother with Stormshields on Custodes. The only ones who usually have a 3++ are the Captains, and then only two of them, and then they have Character Protection.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Custodes have a net -1 to their save. Nothing, if in cover.
Light Vehicles generally don't have Invulnerable saves.

Your stated goals are not addressed by your proposal.

If we apply grave as I have suggested, a custodian guardian gets a 5+ save, instead of a 3++/4++ depending on the weapon. If he fails, he has a chance to automatically die because of the D3 wounds. In essence, he was helplessly crushed to death in his own armor.

As far as I know, also, there is no mention of any technology which can stop gravity in this games lore, only manipulation of it.

Very few people bother with Stormshields on Custodes. The only ones who usually have a 3++ are the Captains, and then only two of them, and then they have Character Protection.

Not to be too direct, but I doubt this. Neither of us know what any play area is like outside of high level competitive events. I can tell you in my local meta, everyone runs storm shields on their custodes, and very few people run bikes.

Now, that said, what about a special AP that affects Invluns. So add "If the target is using an invulnerably, treat this weapon as Invuln AP-2"?

 Togusa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
Grav should be a multi-wound killer, hence my suggestion at ignoring invulns. It's a simple solution.

Weapon as normal, Add Ignores Invulns, Adjust points accordingly, DONE.

Why make this so convoluted?

Because simple=/=better.

You could make Grav better by making it S20, AP-20, D20. Doesn't even need special rules! Would that be better for the game?

Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration though?

Invulnerable saves currently have no way around them outside of very rare and situation dependent mortal wounds. Gravity can do this, it makes sense. If you crush someones own armor or tank around them, they cannot escape that. Speed, energy fields, none of it can impact a basic force in the universe.

Why not? Why can't a force field protect you from gravitic waves? Why can't you dodge the blast of a grav weapon? Why can't an illusion be targeted instead of the real deal? Why can't a daemon just be ephemeral and not be affected?

This also disproportionately affects some models over others. A Terminator? He don't care, he gets a 5+ anyway. A Daemon? They get nothing.

You can dodge the shot, that's what -X to hit is for. Most deamons are T3-T4, I think you'll still see people take plasma over this.

This is specifically to deal with units in the Custodes category and light vehicles.

Raiders and venoms both have an invulnerable save that represents holographic aim-ruining shenanigans, but only the venom has a -1 to hit modifier. Harlequins are just sparkly displacer beasts; their whole defense boils down to not being hit by your shot. You might not field grav over plasma if you know you're facing my daemons, but it will still be weird that gravity somehow ignores their invulnerable save when you happen to bring grav to the store for a a pick up game. From a fluff perspective, you're creating a bunch of weird head scratchers in an effort to overcome one very specific kind of invulnerable save (force fields). Kind of like how auto-hitting flamers are suddenly great at hitting airplanes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Reducing movement speed is probably a good option perhaps only on a hit rather than unsaved wound. would be interesting to see tactical with one or two of them just slowing down a moving hoard.

alternatively what about removing the fly keyword for a full turn.
it might give an interesting option for controlling fly (though actual flyers might need an extra page of rules for it such as ether being forced to go to hovering or something)

Not all flyers have Hover.

Perhaps it can remove Fly, but not from Aircraft? (That new Keyword GW added.)

Yeah probably. its just a spit ball. but i like the concept of grounding units and slowing them down as an effect for allowing counter movement, or just murderizing something that normally would just jump away with no penalty.

I think you're on the right track. Removing the fly keyword all together could get messy, but simply reducing the movement profile of a vehicle might have merit. There's precedent for it in the form of the eldar psychic power "Restrain." The devil would be in the details. Do you make it a cumulative penalty based on hits/wounds inflicted by grav weapons thus letting a couple of grav units pin a melee unit in place all game? Do you make it a, "Halve your movement if you were wounded by this weapon," effect that potentially lets a handful of split firing grav weapons cut the entire enemy army's speed in half?

what if it went back to the old method of wounding on their save, and ignored invulns? This way daemons and other all-invuln units with 6+ saves will not care, it's only the 2+ or 3+ crowd with powerful invulns who will care, which is the target group you're after.

 some bloke wrote:
what if it went back to the old method of wounding on their save, and ignored invulns? This way daemons and other all-invuln units with 6+ saves will not care, it's only the 2+ or 3+ crowd with powerful invulns who will care, which is the target group you're after.

Why are you so intent on bypassing invulnerable saves?

Realy what problem are you trying to solve?
Custodes etc still die quick enough to volume of dice

Giving more even sudo mortal wound spam into the edition is not good for the game, smite spam hiding behind nugle screens is probably one of the least fun lists to face in 8th after the unhitable flyer spam.

The only defence against MW or sudo MW spam is just mass guardsmen which will be a very boring meta of 400 guardsmen vrs invisible alitoc