Switch Theme:

Thought Experiment: How Would We Ditch Stratagems?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





This is a call for discussion rather than a fleshed out proposal. This section seemed the most appropriate one for it though as Proposed Rules generally deals with design discussions.

So I've seen the odd person calling for the removal of stratagems since the day they were introduced. These generally struck me as a grognardly reluctance to embrace change. However, having played all of 8th and now part of 9th, I'm not sure stratagems have really proven to be worth the added complexity, bookkeeping, and balance challenges they bring. And now that 9th edition has new 'dexes adding on additional layers of complexity (sacred rites, litanies, whatever the necron army-wide buffs are called, all that nonsense in the mechanicus book), it feels like piloting an army has become more complicated than I personally like.

So maybe it's time to consider what the game would look like without stratagems and what would need to be done to remove stratagems without breaking units that rely on them to function and without losing some of the iconic abilities that have been rolled into stratagems over time. What would removing stratagems from the game look like?

Off the top of my head...
* CP wouldn't have much value and would probably be removed from the game meaning we'd need a new way to incentivize people against taking allies. Maybe army-wide mechanics that go away when you take allies like Doctrines and Power From Pain already accomplish that?

* We might want to introduce a new way to take multiple warlord traits/relics as stratagems are currently the way you do that. Maybe just get rid of "free" traits/relics and make them a piece of wargear you can spend points on? Or maybe turn some warlord traits into alternatives to characters' default buff powers? (So an archon could either take his re-rolls aura OR he could take Hatred Eternal.

* Some wargear options that were turned into stratagems could just become wargear options again. I'm thinking soul traps, crucibles of malediction, haywire grenades, etc.

* I'm probably okay with ditching Flakk Missiles and their xenos equivalents. How about you? Flakk missiles were sort of a patch to the imbalance issues caused by introducing flyers into the game. Now, they don't seem especially needed.

* Some stratagems allow for cool abilities that I'd probably prefer to see remain in the game. Things like the ability to pick a jump pack unit and re-deepstrike it anywhere on the table, the ability to fall back and shoot/charge with one unit, etc. I think the game is probably better off for having those tactical options. Maybe we could give guard style orders to more characters and roll those stratagem effects into their list of orders? So an autarch or captain might give rerolls on to-hit rolls OR they could allow a unit to fall back and shoot. A character with a jump pack might allow another (CORE?) jump unit to re-enter reserves and arrive at the end of the movement phase. This would simultaneously INCREASE access to interesting tactical maneuvers while DECREASING the abundance of lethality-boosting auras, etc. Sure, you can have your captain and lieutenant buffing your dakka in the backfield, but then you're not getting any dakka out of those intercessors that fell back this turn.

Thoughts?


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





IMO they should be broken up into things that are actually strategems or tactics, and things that are really wargear.

Wargear should be purchasable upgrades (whether one off relics only usable by a single unit in the army, or something else).

Actual tactics and strategies should either be chosen at the beginning of the game or bought.

Bascially you have Xpts of strategy and you can purchase up to that many strategems.

You can then use them however you want, but they are the only ones you have access to and they are a finite resource.

I'm not a fan of being able to maximise your attacks through strategems - it's like being able to turn your heavy bolter into a lascannon when facing a tank...

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Hellebore wrote:
IMO they should be broken up into things that are actually strategems or tactics, and things that are really wargear.

Wargear should be purchasable upgrades (whether one off relics only usable by a single unit in the army, or something else).

Actual tactics and strategies should either be chosen at the beginning of the game or bought.

Bascially you have Xpts of strategy and you can purchase up to that many strategems.

You can then use them however you want, but they are the only ones you have access to and they are a finite resource.

I'm not a fan of being able to maximise your attacks through strategems - it's like being able to turn your heavy bolter into a lascannon when facing a tank...


I largely agree with the above. My only hesitation with replacing relics with wargear purchasable with points is, as a fan of WYSIWYG, it would mean modelling the upgrades etc. Perhaps a wargear card system costing points like in 2nd edition would get around this.

Most unit upgrade starts that buff stats ( like veteran Intercessors) or that give a special rule to a specific unit should just be included on the unit’s data sheet and points adjusted accordingly.

To discourage soup allies from getting out of hand, 9th edition is double dipping unnecessarily. Monofaction bonuses like Doctrines for SM ( as much as I dislike doctrines) accomplished this in late 8th edition before there were CP costs to additional detachments in 9th, so if this is the direction the game goes in, I don’t see a need CPs to be used to discourage allies.

If strategems are dropped, I wouldn’t necessarily drop CPs entirely, a more limited number could be used to allow for reserves and possibly other pregame mechanics.
   
Made in jp
Crushing Black Templar Crusader Pilot





Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan

Keep one takesy-backsey roll per game, and that's it.
   
Made in gb
Battleship Captain





Bristol (UK)

TBH I'd like to remove relics and warlord traits, thus circumventing that issue.

Thematically I think it's a hard miss. Why is my Captain, only one of 10 in the Chapter, bringing the ancient blade of their Primarch to a minor ~platoon level skirmish in which 90% casualties are expected?
This doesn't really apply to Warlord traits, granted. But the next bit does.

The special abilities always seem silly over the top. When I watched a generic Captain beating up Abbadon in combat due to the number of relics and traits he had, I just felt sick and disgusted. Just, wtf.

I quite like strategems at the start of 8th. They were far more limited, with reroll any single dice being the most useful one.
This was quite nice, the limited approach was still easy enough to get your head around, they felt impactful without feeling over the top.

So heavily reducing the strategems would be fine imo.
Keep a few army specific ones, but ditch any unit specific ones.
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Storm Trooper with Maglight





Leicester, UK

This is one way to do it, and actually to simplify the whole game while not throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and it's based on a official version of the game too(open play).



My painting and modeling blog:

PaddyMick's Chopshop: Converted 40K Vehicles 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Paying points for strategems, just like you'd pay for models, seems the easiest way to do it. Also, pay for detachments the same way. Makes it a handy way to balance out armies, as one army might be 1000pts and another 1200pts, but the first has 200pts worth of strategems so they're not at a disadvantage.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






I'd look to roll this up into the same bundle as bringing tactics back to 40k - IE, making choices!

Any stratagem unique to a unit is incorporated into the unit. These become "Actions", which 40k should take and run with (they have them for odd things like objectives). Stratagems no tied to units are instead tied to commanders, so your HQ can issue commands for nearby units to perform actions.

So any "Shoot Twice" stratagem is replaced with an action that says "You can use this action at the start of the units movement phase, before they move. The unit may not move or assault this turn. The unit can fire twice in the shooting phase, and both times at the same unit".

So instantly, the decision has to be made earlier - this unit won't move and will instead shoot twice later - and has compromise. Is shooting twice worth not moving or assaulting?

Depending on the cost of the stratagem depends on the action cost for doing it - some actions use your whole turn, others use specific phases. This is used to balance them.

And half of them are ditched entirely. There's too many of them right now, and a lot of them should just be part of the units profile.

12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

I'm Selling Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based!

I also make designs for t-shirts and mugs and such on Redbubble! 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 some bloke wrote:

So any "Shoot Twice" stratagem is replaced with an action that says "You can use this action at the start of the units movement phase, before they move. The unit may not move or assault this turn. The unit can fire twice in the shooting phase, and both times at the same unit".
.


OK, so it looks like im going first with my Tau army, and I'm just gonna do this action here on all my units....

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




If you were to remove Stratagems, I'd want Command Abilities to be imported from AoS. Not a 1:1 copy-paste, but certainly an analogous resource-based ability to trigger special effects or re-rolls. It wouldn't be very hard; if you break down, say, the ADEPTA SORORITAS Stratagems, you've got:
  • 3x Mustering Stratagems, which are really just part of the army-building rules for that Faction.
  • 19x Datasheet Stratagems, tied to a specific weapon or unit (or pair of units), which could be moved directly onto the datasheet like an AoS Command ability.
  • 7x Special Rule Stratagems, which rely directly on army-wide abilities like Miracle Dice, Sacred Rites, Shield of Faith, etc, and could theoretically be included in those abilities to begin with.
  • 6x Subfaction Stratagems, which are tied to a subfaction as an ability, rather than the overall faction.

  • This leaves Suffer Not The Witch, Judgement of the Faithful, and Holy Trinity as the only Sororitas Stratagems that couldn't theoretically be folded into an existing datasheet, weapon profile, ability, or subfaction.

    Similarly, for ADEPTUS MECHANICUS, you've got:
  • 4x Mustering Stratagems, which are really just part of the army-building rules for that Faction.
  • 21x Datasheet Stratagems, tied to a specific weapon or unit (or pair of units), which could be moved directly onto the datasheet like an AoS Command ability.
  • 1x Special Rule Stratagems, which rely directly on army-wide abilities like Canticles, etc, and could theoretically be included in those abilities to begin with.
  • 6x Subfaction Stratagems, which are tied to a subfaction as an ability, rather than the overall faction.

  • This leaves only 7 Stratagems that couldn't theoretically be folded into an existing datasheet, weapon profile, ability, or subfaction.

    This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/06/29 23:11:28


     
       
    Made in ca
    Steadfast Ultramarine Sergeant






    All stratagems should be pregame or orbital bombardment type stuff. There's so much "I'm gonna do this" "hold on I think I have a thing" and then they look through the deck for it just for it to not function exactly how they wanted
       
    Made in gb
    Longtime Dakkanaut




     the_scotsman wrote:
     some bloke wrote:

    So any "Shoot Twice" stratagem is replaced with an action that says "You can use this action at the start of the units movement phase, before they move. The unit may not move or assault this turn. The unit can fire twice in the shooting phase, and both times at the same unit".
    .


    OK, so it looks like im going first with my Tau army, and I'm just gonna do this action here on all my units....


    I think the idea was still to limit the units that can do this, much like the removal of generic "fights twice" stratagems from SM, with that now being solely an Assault Intercessor thing.

    If we were to remove or modify stratagems one option would be to restrict them to one use only for the game and possibly incorporate a pre-built deck of cards to introduce a little randomness, much like Apocalypse did (IIRC). So you build your deck of strats prior to the game but you only have a hand of X cards available at any one time. I think Apocalypse even let you discard any stratagem card to use the regular CP re-roll strat. By doing this you force players to make choices prior to the game, linked to their army construction, you force players to choose when the best time to use a strat is, rather than just popping "shoots twice" every turn and you limit the possibilities for ridiculous multi-strat combos that turn a moderately powerful unit into a game-winning powerhouse. Any pre-game strats like extra relics or warlord traits, or unit upgrades should just cost points.
       
    Made in gb
    Longtime Dakkanaut






    I'd definitely not have every unit able t odo everything, and I would probably have a caveat that you can't do it for 2 turns in a row either, so decisions need to be made - hold on for a better target and risk losing the unit, or use it early and risk missing that perfect shot?

    12,300 points of Orks
    9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
    I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

    I'm Selling Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based!

    I also make designs for t-shirts and mugs and such on Redbubble! 
       
    Made in us
    Longtime Dakkanaut







    One of my main issues with stratagems was how they combined with 'rule of one'. The fact that each stratagem could only be used once per phase meant it emphasized 'multiple single blobs', rather than the MSU-style of older editions. Yes, you couldn't directly do stuff like the Barkbarkstar anymore, but you could take your combined guardsman squad, stack a bunch of stratagems on top..
    (Incidentally, I find it amusing that AOS 3 added a rule that a unit can only have one active stratagem on it at a time).

    Rather than the giant superlist of assorted +1 buffs, "stratagems" should have been a general framework to explain how army-specific "abilities" work. By this, Stratagems should have simply been a way to streamline Space Marine Doctrines, Necron Imperatives, Guard Orders, Admech Canticles, etc. Optionally, you would divide the 'macro/armywide' stuff into one pool, and more localized effects into a seperate pool; one could even fool around with a variant of the Middle-Earth system where each Character has their "Hero Point" pool, so that you can pretend that there is some relevance to positioning. The difference between "Grants a nearby unit within 3" +1 to wound", versus 'a unit gains +1 to-wound", or so.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/29 14:38:51


     
       
    Made in ca
    Longtime Dakkanaut





    I don't think you could go back to points, since then you run into all the old issues of never using some wargear or paid for abilities. Here's what stratagems do;

    Stratagems are faction-unique abilities to consume a limited resource for either a game-long improvement to one unit, temporary improvement to one unit, guaranteed success for one specific roll, or creating a potent and temporary battlefield event.


    If we get rid of stratagems, some part of this needs to change. I personally believe that game-long improvements should be points, not command points. Also, not a terrible fan of guaranteed success either, and would be fine to just drop those. Creating potent and temporary battlefield events? That's something that stratagems are amazing for.


    After thinking on this, an Apocalypse-lite solution may be best. Have a small deck of cards - maybe just 10 cards total - made from a much larger list of possible cards found in your codex. Every turn you draw 3. Whenever you use a stratagem, you can either shuffle it back into the deck, or discard it permanently. Abilities that refund CP turn instead into the ability to immediately return a card used to your hand (though each such ability could only be successfully used once per game), and abilities that cost your opponent CP turn instead into the ability to force your opponent to permanently discard the card (though each such ability could only be successfully used once per game).

     Galef wrote:
    If you refuse to use rock, you will never beat scissors.
     
       
    Made in us
    Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






    You could go the Age of Sigmar route. I quite like how they handle "comand abilities."

    Very limited number of points, and generally the ability shows up on datasheets, rather than in a big list in the codex, and theyre tied to characters rather than individual units. And for the most part, rather than having aura abilities that affect everyone, heroes generally have Command Abilities that impact individual units.

    And then a lot more units have once-per-game abiliites that function similarly to the 'and then the unit does special stuff' stratagems.

    it's just a lot more accessible and less prone to abuse, IMO.

    Then, individual units will have a lot more in terms of


    "Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

    "So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

    "you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

    "...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
       
    Made in us
    Growlin' Guntrukk Driver with Killacannon





    Italy

     Hellebore wrote:

    Actual tactics and strategies should either be chosen at the beginning of the game or bought.

    Bascially you have Xpts of strategy and you can purchase up to that many strategems.

    You can then use them however you want, but they are the only ones you have access to and they are a finite resource.


    I think this is an excellent idea. Limiting the number of strategems you can use per game is easier on new players and significantly cuts down on all the time wasted with finding the right book with the right strategem that might apply to this situation.

    I'm guessing with your suggestion of X points to spend then strategems would retain their current cost? So if I had 5 strategy points I could get two 1CP strategems and one 3CP strategem? Any limits like only one stratagem per phase or once per turn?
       
    Made in ca
    Regular Dakkanaut





    Strategems are great but the way to fix them is to actually fix the units that they're used as band-aids to fix. Most strategems that are played are ones that buff a specific underperforming unit. Fix the units and then make strategems more "general" command and control abilities, autopass morale etc..
       
    Made in us
    Dakka Veteran





    They ARE just another layer of garbage to deal with. Back in the day it was wargear, relic type items, and then you just had individuals with special gear or abilities that were characters. Far simpler.

    All this crap about strategems is really needless. complexity. Certain units should just have certain abilities or wargear options to choose from.

    Command points are lame as well. Just another thing to keep track of
       
    Made in fr
    Regular Dakkanaut




    0) Command points are not all available from turn 1, they are allocated by 1/3 of the total every turn.

    1) remove unit-related stratagems. only keep generic/all units stratagems.

    2) When a unit is clearly useless without a stratagem, bake the stratagem into the datasheet (in a reduced form if its overpowered)

    3) Player-whose-turn-it-is stratagems can only be allocated during the command phase.

    4) stratagems that were allocated but not spent/triggered are refunded

    This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2021/07/01 12:21:03


     
       
    Made in us
    Ultramarine Terminator with Assault Cannon






    The concept of stratagems has proven to be very popular with players and in typical GW fashion, when something is popular, they'll take it too far and ruin it.

    I like the idea of stratagems, but the implementation has been and continues to be poor. 9th is definitely better (light years better) than 8th in regards to command point generation to use stratagems, but this was only one small step.

    IMO the quantity of stratagems needs to be heavily reduced and faction specific stratagems be one use only. Armies do not need to have 4 full pages of them and some armies certainly do not need to be able to use the same stratagem over and over and over to the point of abuse.

    Not to get too far off topic, but 9th is rapidly shaping up to be a crap edition because of the pointless complexity and sickening level of rules overlap. I feel like I'm back in 5th edition where the core rules were amazing, but the codex's ruined the game.
       
    Made in us
    Growlin' Guntrukk Driver with Killacannon





    Italy

    Completely agreed. People liked Stratagems quite a bit then GW opened the floodgates and now we have deluge of them.

    On one hand it's nice if they throw some fluffy but not that useful strategems in there, on the other hand there are so many out there it really bogs the game down with "hold on, I think I have a strategem that applies to this situation. Now which book was it in..."
       
    Made in us
    Dakka Veteran





    When you get absorbed in the rules, strategem nonsense instead of your actual units and characters as the source of the abilities, then you lose focus on where it should be.

    Back in 2nd edition if you wanted some bonuses, you would bring a standard bearer, he would carry the army standard. HE EXISTED ON THE TABLE TOP.

    It gave a sense of gravity to these important soldiers and characters and the story behind each one of them. It made warhammer what warhammer was all about.

    Now its "Okay spam this unit, drop this strategem in combination with this reroll and WTFBBQPWN my enemy turn 1"

    Its a whole other spirit to the game now....it sucks in comparison to what it used to be. Not trying to bash the game, I want it to be as fun and engaging as possible. But it seems like much of the character of the game is dying out to command point stratagem nonsense. It does interrupt the flow of the game. I have to lay out all my strategem cards on the table to make sure I dont forget. Theres so damn many of them.
       
    Made in us
    Ultramarine Terminator with Assault Cannon






    I think if stratagems were somehow tied to HQ units or the Warlord they could inject the fun and flavor while maintaining the much needed spirit of the game.

    What if...

    At the same time you would select secondary objectives you had to also spend your CP's to select your army specific stratagems for the game?
    -You would pick them based on the game you expect to play, just like the secondary objectives.
    -Your allotment of CP's will still limit what you can 'buy' to use during the game.
    -Army specific stratagems would be one use only.
    -Generic starts from the Core Rules can still be used freely and repeatedly (i.e. do not need to 'buy' them beforehand), so be sure to keep a small pool of CP's available for Command Reroll, etc.
       
    Made in gb
    Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets





    United Kingdom

    Pre-game stratagems and stratagems that effect how you deploy units are fine in my opinion, as they're actually a pre planned operational thing. Like an actual strategy, after which stratagems are actually named, rather than just being "lol shoot twice and win".

    Mid game stratagems can go for the most part, except maybe redeploy ones and other ones that reflect actual tactics and strategy rather than just ramping the killiness of a unit up to 11 for basically no cost.

    You could probably even just bake some stratagems into the base rules for a unit. I don't see why a Burna Bomber using a Flying 'Eadbutt needs to be a strat when it could be a "you can only use this effect of a (unit name) once per game round" rule.

    CP rerolls are fine because it takes the edge off of rolling horrendously knowing that you might pass at least one save or stand a chance of plinking that last wound off something.
       
    Made in us
    Longtime Dakkanaut





    oni wrote:The concept of stratagems has proven to be very popular with players and in typical GW fashion, when something is popular, they'll take it too far and ruin it.

    I like the idea of stratagems, but the implementation has been and continues to be poor. 9th is definitely better (light years better) than 8th in regards to command point generation to use stratagems, but this was only one small step.

    IMO the quantity of stratagems needs to be heavily reduced and faction specific stratagems be one use only. Armies do not need to have 4 full pages of them and some armies certainly do not need to be able to use the same stratagem over and over and over to the point of abuse.

    I agree with most of that. As a concept, I really liked stratagems, and I've generally been onboard with them until recently. But what I pictured when they first started coming out was like, 12 per army with each stratagem being kind of a game changer and CP being limited enough to only let you actually use three of four of them. I also pictured them being more of a pregame sort of thing. Unique deployment methods, minefields, maybe unit upgrades or special ability unlocks. That sort of thing.

    I'm not sure strats need to be one-use only. If you do find yourself using the same strat every single turn, it might be a sign that the strat is too powerful or that the unit you're using it on has a design problem that ought to be solved. Lightning Fast Reactions certainly feels like an unsatisfying replacement for Jink and Skimmers Moving Fast, and I'd probably be happier with something like army-wide Vectored Engines (-1 to hit when you advance). But auto advancing 6" for 1CP multiple times per game probably isn't that big a deal, nor is overwatching multiple times a game or throwing haywire grenades multiple times a game.


    Not to get too far off topic, but 9th is rapidly shaping up to be a crap edition because of the pointless complexity and sickening level of rules overlap. I feel like I'm back in 5th edition where the core rules were amazing, but the codex's ruined the game.

    Yeah. I'm getting kind of 7th edition vibes. The amped up lethality for seemingly no reason (most armies were actually pretty well balanced in 8th right before the marines 2.0 book came out). The bloat of unique mechanics that remind me of formations. The gap between armies that have good 'dexes and those don't (though granted index armies were at a pretty severe disadvantage vs codex armies in 8th too). I like seeing rules change over time, but the increased bookkeeping combined with the increased lethality has me a bit worried. I'm starting to wonder if 10th edition is going to end up being another overhaul edition in reaction to the bloat we eventually end up with. Not to be overly dramatic.

    oni wrote:I think if stratagems were somehow tied to HQ units or the Warlord they could inject the fun and flavor while maintaining the much needed spirit of the game.

    What if...

    At the same time you would select secondary objectives you had to also spend your CP's to select your army specific stratagems for the game?
    -You would pick them based on the game you expect to play, just like the secondary objectives.
    -Your allotment of CP's will still limit what you can 'buy' to use during the game.
    -Army specific stratagems would be one use only.
    -Generic starts from the Core Rules can still be used freely and repeatedly (i.e. do not need to 'buy' them beforehand), so be sure to keep a small pool of CP's available for Command Reroll, etc.

    I could get behind something like that. For the sake of speeding things up, I'd probably make stratagem buying part of list creation instead though. You could add a generic stratagem to swap out one strat with another strat of equal or lower cost before the game to allow for some flexibility, but you probably don't want to sit there listening to your opponent hemming and hawing over options for the first 15 minutes of your tournament game. You could do something like:

    * You start with the generic strats from the main rulebook.
    * You get 3 generic strats from your codex-level faction (necrons, adeptus astartes, asuryani, etc.)
    * Get get 2 strats based on your sub-faction (dynasty, chapter, craftworld, etc.)
    * You get 1 strats based on your warlord choice. Or maybe just based on the HQs in your army.
    * Maaaaybe 1 strat of your choice from any of the above sets; a floating "bonus" one.

    That leaves you with about 10 strats to keep track of (counting the generic ones), but actively choosing them during list creation means you sort of memorize them the same way you memorize special abilities in your datasheets when you create your army. No more pausing to wonder whether a flakk missile might actually be worth it right now or deciding if you want to burn some CP on Auspex Scan or trying to remember if that one weird strat you've never used can finally be activated now that you've killed the enemy warlord in the shooting phase with a pistol while chewing the right brand of bubblegum.



    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     Afrodactyl wrote:
    Pre-game stratagems and stratagems that effect how you deploy units are fine in my opinion, as they're actually a pre planned operational thing. Like an actual strategy, after which stratagems are actually named, rather than just being "lol shoot twice and win".

    Mid game stratagems can go for the most part, except maybe redeploy ones and other ones that reflect actual tactics and strategy rather than just ramping the killiness of a unit up to 11 for basically no cost.

    Yeah. Big thumbs up on this. I kind of like the "epic deed" stratagems (I think that's what they're calling them in the new books). Flavorful things that would be a bit clunky to put on a datasheet sort of make sense as a thing you can spend a resource to do a limited number of times during the game. Deployment-related stuff is basically what I expected strats to be in the first place. Even redeployment stuff like the drukhari one that lets a transport near the board edge go into ongoing reserves sort of fits and (on paper) adds some cool twists to the game. But any strat that boils down to, "Do more betterer," seems hard to balance and kind of boring.

    To a lesser extent, I feel the same way about character auras/buffs like that too. I'd much rather have an archon "order" that lets me pick up a unit and put it in reserves or fall back and shoot than an aura that makes things more killy because "the boss is watching" or whatever. Terminators shooting significantly better because they're "inspired" by the captain being around kind of implies that they're sort of slacking when their big brother isn't breathing down their necks.

    Basically, I like the idea of stratagems either being game-changing maneuvers or characterful, thematic twists.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/02 06:29:43



    ATTENTION
    . Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
     
       
    Made in us
    Confessor Of Sins




     some bloke wrote:
    I'd look to roll this up into the same bundle as bringing tactics back to 40k - IE, making choices!

    Any stratagem unique to a unit is incorporated into the unit. These become "Actions", which 40k should take and run with (they have them for odd things like objectives). Stratagems no tied to units are instead tied to commanders, so your HQ can issue commands for nearby units to perform actions.

    So any "Shoot Twice" stratagem is replaced with an action that says "You can use this action at the start of the units movement phase, before they move. The unit may not move or assault this turn. The unit can fire twice in the shooting phase, and both times at the same unit".

    So instantly, the decision has to be made earlier - this unit won't move and will instead shoot twice later - and has compromise. Is shooting twice worth not moving or assaulting?

    Depending on the cost of the stratagem depends on the action cost for doing it - some actions use your whole turn, others use specific phases. This is used to balance them.

    And half of them are ditched entirely. There's too many of them right now, and a lot of them should just be part of the units profile.


    This just ends up super-powering units. In your 'this unit shoots twice' scenario you're forgetting that A) Dedicated shooting units almost never need to move if deployed correctly and B) that you won't have 1 unit double shooting, you'll have three.

    You're creating a situation where instead of one unit getting one superpowered boost until you run out of CP, 3 units get as many superpowered boosts as their actions allow for the entire duration of the game.




     
       
    Made in gb
    Fresh-Faced New User




     MagicJuggler wrote:
    One of my main issues with stratagems was how they combined with 'rule of one'. The fact that each stratagem could only be used once per phase meant it emphasized 'multiple single blobs', rather than the MSU-style of older editions. Yes, you couldn't directly do stuff like the Barkbarkstar anymore, but you could take your combined guardsman squad, stack a bunch of stratagems on top..
    (Incidentally, I find it amusing that AOS 3 added a rule that a unit can only have one active stratagem on it at a time).

    Rather than the giant superlist of assorted +1 buffs, "stratagems" should have been a general framework to explain how army-specific "abilities" work. By this, Stratagems should have simply been a way to streamline Space Marine Doctrines, Necron Imperatives, Guard Orders, Admech Canticles, etc. Optionally, you would divide the 'macro/armywide' stuff into one pool, and more localized effects into a seperate pool; one could even fool around with a variant of the Middle-Earth system where each Character has their "Hero Point" pool, so that you can pretend that there is some relevance to positioning. The difference between "Grants a nearby unit within 3" +1 to wound", versus 'a unit gains +1 to-wound", or so.


    Maybe its my WFB background but honestly I like that shift, having armies with 1-2 big central units forming the core of someones tactics. I think it tends to mean people commit to a certain gameplan a bit more fully that either stands or falls and makes each game a bit more unique.
       
    Made in gb
    Stalwart Tribune





    ERJAK wrote:
     some bloke wrote:
    I'd look to roll this up into the same bundle as bringing tactics back to 40k - IE, making choices!

    Any stratagem unique to a unit is incorporated into the unit. These become "Actions", which 40k should take and run with (they have them for odd things like objectives). Stratagems no tied to units are instead tied to commanders, so your HQ can issue commands for nearby units to perform actions.

    So any "Shoot Twice" stratagem is replaced with an action that says "You can use this action at the start of the units movement phase, before they move. The unit may not move or assault this turn. The unit can fire twice in the shooting phase, and both times at the same unit".

    So instantly, the decision has to be made earlier - this unit won't move and will instead shoot twice later - and has compromise. Is shooting twice worth not moving or assaulting?

    Depending on the cost of the stratagem depends on the action cost for doing it - some actions use your whole turn, others use specific phases. This is used to balance them.

    And half of them are ditched entirely. There's too many of them right now, and a lot of them should just be part of the units profile.


    This just ends up super-powering units. In your 'this unit shoots twice' scenario you're forgetting that A) Dedicated shooting units almost never need to move if deployed correctly and B) that you won't have 1 unit double shooting, you'll have three.

    You're creating a situation where instead of one unit getting one superpowered boost until you run out of CP, 3 units get as many superpowered boosts as their actions allow for the entire duration of the game.


    you could have it so that the stratagem/abilities that were stratagems but changed to abilities, are once per game per unit. so sure, you could have 3 units firing twice for instance, but that would only happen once, and then your opponent would be able to use their buffs for maybe a more swingy combat/shooting phase that might be more important later in the game.

    Praise the Omnissiah

    About 4k of .

    Imperial Knights (Valiant, Warden & Armigers)

    Some Misc. Imperium units etc. Assassins...

    About 2k of  
       
    Made in gb
    Longtime Dakkanaut






    Actually, having these things as Once Per Turn and Once Per Unit would lead to very diverse and interesting lists.

    By that I mean that the ability is tied to the unit, and the ability is also named, such that you cannot use the same named ability more than once per turn. Each unit can only use their abilities once per game.

    So you could have 3 units of >latest hotness< but you could only use their double-tap stratagem once per game, on different units, once per unit, once per turn.

    So if squad 1 double taps, they can never double-tap again and the other units cannot double-tap either.


    Alternatively you could take 3 different units with their own unique abilities and then you could use each of their abilities in the same turn, once per game, making them a more flexible army.


    12,300 points of Orks
    9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
    I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

    I'm Selling Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based!

    I also make designs for t-shirts and mugs and such on Redbubble! 
       
     
    Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
    Go to: