Switch Theme:

Number of game breaking semantic errors in the new 1kSons/GK codexes (Poll)  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
How many game breaking errors in the upcomming GK/1Ksons Release?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ZERO - PERFECT RELEASE

View results
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
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers




I would define "game breaking" as anything that violates common understanding of the game, or basic principals or obviously dumb mistakes;

Bragg's Infinite grenades
240 Point models
-1 damage as RAW making D1 Weapons pointless
Vehicles with Fly are unable to be charged on top of buildings
Tank Hammers getting Multiple MWs on a single hit
Usual mistakes with keywords
Mistakes with Battlefield roles
Helbrutes getting more than +1A for dual fists
What counts for Psyker powers

Etc.

We all know GW routinely messes up their writing in new releases. In the spirit of BCB, who wants to hazard a guess on how many mistakes will be found in both the codexes combined, that in some way break the game?


   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






As ever, I'm sure they'll be totally fine as long as you don't play games with the sort of melts who are determined to wilfully misinterpret things and look for loopholes in a way that allows them to cheese the game to their advantage.
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch





It's missing the correct number, 9

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/05 08:53:39


"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED." 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Well the books are shorter with fewer data sheets, so the number of errors should be lower then with bigger content books. Of course a lot depends on the how updated and changed the new stuff is. The GK book looks rather clean of erros, but it is in english, so what do I know.

The lack of new models also goes in favour of the books, as the chance of copy paste errors durning creation of the print version of the books are smaller. Maybe those are going to be the cleanest of books GW made since 8th ed.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

Honestly, very few, if not none of those examples can't be resolved with a bit of common sense, or failing that, a roll-off. Wouldn't call any of them "game-breaking".

Not expecting much from either book, probably just updated stats and a new character model. Probably one or two errors that undoubtedly this site will argue and moan over as if they're going over a legal contract.
   
Made in es
Dakka Veteran




If something seem broken in a GW product its your perception which is broken.

The rules like the lore are selfsustaning and by definition are always correct no matter how much they should be faqed or retconned.

Dont be a party popeer and enjoy GW premium products... They have never been so good.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/05 10:27:49


 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

 Nazrak wrote:
As ever, I'm sure they'll be totally fine as long as you don't play games with the sort of melts who are determined to wilfully misinterpret things and look for loopholes in a way that allows them to cheese the game to their advantage.


Impossible to exalt this enough.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




If that was a thing then all we would ever get is just FAQ and never errata. Errata means that something very much did work the way it was put down in writing. Liquifires worked exactly the way people used them etc.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






I feel like the average will be fairly low since these are marine releases and mostly what gw has to do is copy/paste a few statline changes, slap it on the butt and shove it out the door.

"heres your extra wound, heres your extra attack, here's the extremely obvious updates to slightly variated versions of weapons we've already updated in other codexes, that'll be fifty dollars please and thank you because we've successfully kept your community dumb and needlessly competitive enough that you couldn't figure out how to just give your opponent's this stuff back when we first showed you the new marine datasheets several months ago."


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Valkyrie wrote:
Honestly, very few, if not none of those examples can't be resolved with a bit of common sense, or failing that, a roll-off. Wouldn't call any of them "game-breaking".

Not expecting much from either book, probably just updated stats and a new character model. Probably one or two errors that undoubtedly this site will argue and moan over as if they're going over a legal contract.


Any time I play a historical game with my friends, I always end up wondering about how the poor delicate 40k players ever survived wargame rules before the 'whinge about it online and shamelessly interpret every single thing to be to your maximum advantage' era.

"oh, this game has every unit act as a single squad, but there's a unit right here that's one squad that technically embarks on two motorcycles, what do?"

"Well, obviously the designers probably didnt intend for the squad to be able to split in half, so we'll treat those two motorcycles as a single unit that has to stay in coherency, and any order or action they take, they take together."

"Weird, this gun has a strength value of 8 at long range, 10 at medium range, and...2 at short range?"

"there's obviously a 1 missing there, it's supposed to be 12."

done, easy, five seconds, basically every time.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/08/05 12:02:07


"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 fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





 the_scotsman wrote:
I feel like the average will be fairly low since these are marine releases and mostly what gw has to do is copy/paste a few statline changes, slap it on the butt and shove it out the door..


They might not have to do more...but they can't help themselves and keep adding bloat for the bloat god.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in es
Dakka Veteran




To be fair that sort of attitude happens also in historical wargames... but 40K players put in on the 11, perhaps some of them believe they are Primarisue Marines and being so tall the air they breath is a bit thin and that makes them sort of dizzy.

"Play by the Errata" is one the most childish attitude one can find in the gamming community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
I feel like the average will be fairly low since these are marine releases and mostly what gw has to do is copy/paste a few statline changes, slap it on the butt and shove it out the door..


They might not have to do more...but they can't help themselves and keep adding bloat for the bloat god.


The fith and most powerfull of the Chaos Goods.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/05 12:15:30


 
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

 the_scotsman wrote:
I feel like the average will be fairly low since these are marine releases and mostly what gw has to do is copy/paste a few statline changes, slap it on the butt and shove it out the door.

"heres your extra wound, heres your extra attack, here's the extremely obvious updates to slightly variated versions of weapons we've already updated in other codexes, that'll be fifty dollars please and thank you because we've successfully kept your community dumb and needlessly competitive enough that you couldn't figure out how to just give your opponent's this stuff back when we first showed you the new marine datasheets several months ago."


GW just showed some GK rules, and you're right, just cut and paste strats with different names. Fury of the First has been reworded, and Purgators can now pay 2CP to shoot as if they've stood still...which is ok I guess.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Valkyrie wrote:
Honestly, very few, if not none of those examples can't be resolved with a bit of common sense, or failing that, a roll-off. Wouldn't call any of them "game-breaking".

Not expecting much from either book, probably just updated stats and a new character model. Probably one or two errors that undoubtedly this site will argue and moan over as if they're going over a legal contract.


Any time I play a historical game with my friends, I always end up wondering about how the poor delicate 40k players ever survived wargame rules before the 'whinge about it online and shamelessly interpret every single thing to be to your maximum advantage' era.

"oh, this game has every unit act as a single squad, but there's a unit right here that's one squad that technically embarks on two motorcycles, what do?"

"Well, obviously the designers probably didnt intend for the squad to be able to split in half, so we'll treat those two motorcycles as a single unit that has to stay in coherency, and any order or action they take, they take together."

"Weird, this gun has a strength value of 8 at long range, 10 at medium range, and...2 at short range?"

"there's obviously a 1 missing there, it's supposed to be 12."

done, easy, five seconds, basically every time.


Exactly. We've had a 5-page thread on if a Helbrute gets an extra attack. If someone was being that anal about it to me I'd just go "sod it, have your extra attack if it means we can actually play the game".
   
Made in gb
Battleship Captain





Bristol (UK)

It certainly doesn't help that anyone who doesn't agree with your interpretation is immediately condemned as TFG cheaty rules lawyer.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





So correct me if I'm wrong, but these are 9th edition screw ups. I added one - there are more minor ones that happened.


Bragg's Infinite grenades
240 Point models
-1 damage as RAW making D1 Weapons pointless
Super friends LOS


And these are prior.

Vehicles with Fly are unable to be charged on top of buildings
Tank Hammers getting Multiple MWs on a single hit
Usual mistakes with keywords
Mistakes with Battlefield roles
Helbrutes getting more than +1A for dual fists
What counts for Psyker powers


There were, of course, way more issues prior. Now absolutely all of the current ones have been addressed, right? And I think it's easy enough to see that the quantity of screw ups has reduced significantly. We've had what...16 books?

So I'll ask what's the purpose of this thread?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/05 14:44:25


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Daedalus81 wrote:

So I'll ask what's the purpose of this thread?

Clogging up the forum with pissing and moaning, as usual.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

It's just Frezzik trying to be funny again, Daed.
   
Made in us
Implacable Skitarii




 Daedalus81 wrote:
So correct me if I'm wrong, but these are 9th edition screw ups. I added one - there are more minor ones that happened.


Bragg's Infinite grenades
240 Point models
-1 damage as RAW making D1 Weapons pointless
Super friends LOS


And these are prior.

Vehicles with Fly are unable to be charged on top of buildings
Tank Hammers getting Multiple MWs on a single hit
Usual mistakes with keywords
Mistakes with Battlefield roles
Helbrutes getting more than +1A for dual fists
What counts for Psyker powers


There were, of course, way more issues prior. Now absolutely all of the current ones have been addressed, right? And I think it's easy enough to see that the quantity of screw ups has reduced significantly. We've had what...16 books?

So I'll ask what's the purpose of this thread?


Wouldn't "Usual mistakes with Keywords" include things like Trukk boys unable to embark on Trukks, or AdMech transports able to carry a dozen Assault Centurions? and "mistakes with Battlefield Roles" would include changing Kataphrons to bikers then giving them a special rule to ignore the penalty for shooting heavy weapons as infantry. These are clearly 9th edition examples. I'm not so sure its as obvious as you claim that the quantity of screw ups has reduced significantly.

That being said, I expect few errors in these codexes, as it looks like a lot more copy/pasting from PA books than new content.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/05 15:24:32


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Fair enough. All but one of those is presently fixed and the last will be in a month's time.

I can absolutely claim the quantity is reduced. All I'd have to do is pull up an old BCB thread.
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

 Daedalus81 wrote:
All I'd have to do is pull up an old BCB thread.


Oh please no.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I would define "game breaking" as anything that violates common understanding of the game, or basic principals or obviously dumb mistakes;


Weren't you literally just decrying a bunch of people in YMDC for not agreeing with your own interpretation of a contentious rule, saying we should all use common sense to figure it out? Your entire tone in that thread was derogatory to anyone trying to actually work through GW's dodgy writing. Yet now here we are with you starting a thread to highlight exactly that?
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran



Dudley, UK

 Valkyrie wrote:
Exactly. We've had a 5-page thread on if a Helbrute gets an extra attack. If someone was being that anal about it to me I'd just go "sod it, have your extra attack if it means we can actually play the game".

Look thee not upon YMDC. It is a dreadful place full of bad faith arguments and *exactly the same* three to five posters having *exactly the same* argument until time immemorial. It's worthless for its stated purpose, but it at least acts as a wankery containment zone.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

Catulle wrote:
 Valkyrie wrote:
Exactly. We've had a 5-page thread on if a Helbrute gets an extra attack. If someone was being that anal about it to me I'd just go "sod it, have your extra attack if it means we can actually play the game".

Look thee not upon YMDC. It is a dreadful place full of bad faith arguments and *exactly the same* three to five posters having *exactly the same* argument until time immemorial. It's worthless for its stated purpose, but it at least acts as a wankery containment zone.


Impossible to exalt this enough, too.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in se
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator






Whilst not game breaking I am bothered that the starting box includes a special character. That’s never been done before right? GW couldn’t say “your dudes don’t matter” any louder if they tried.

His pattern of returning alive after being declared dead occurred often enough during Cain's career that the Munitorum made a special ruling that Ciaphas Cain is to never be considered dead, despite evidence to the contrary. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







 Nerak wrote:
Whilst not game breaking I am bothered that the starting box includes a special character. That’s never been done before right? GW couldn’t say “your dudes don’t matter” any louder if they tried.


Boxes with a special character in it:
* The Drukari vs. Sisters box.
* The Start Collecting Thousands Sons box.
* The Death Guard Combat Patrol

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






The Deathwatch Start Collecting! box used to have Artemis in it too.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




The book seems devoided of any big errors. But I ain't no prime english speaker, so the chance of me missing something is huge. But at a glance there are no infinite attacks, infinite shotings, no becoming ++2inv or similar stuff.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in se
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator






 solkan wrote:
 Nerak wrote:
Whilst not game breaking I am bothered that the starting box includes a special character. That’s never been done before right? GW couldn’t say “your dudes don’t matter” any louder if they tried.


Boxes with a special character in it:
* The Drukari vs. Sisters box.
* The Start Collecting Thousands Sons box.
* The Death Guard Combat Patrol



Alright, my bad.

His pattern of returning alive after being declared dead occurred often enough during Cain's career that the Munitorum made a special ruling that Ciaphas Cain is to never be considered dead, despite evidence to the contrary. 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Nerak wrote:
Whilst not game breaking I am bothered that the starting box includes a special character. That’s never been done before right? GW couldn’t say “your dudes don’t matter” any louder if they tried.

Because it's literally impossible to swap Crowe's sword and banner to generic ones and just use him as champion, eh?

Ditto with Ahriman (sorc on disc), Artemis (DW captain), Lelith (succubus), Typhus (doubly so because Terminator Lord with scythe model was unavailable for a year), converting any of them to generic character with plentiful spare parts all these armies have takes minutes if you're inclined to do so...
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




There's some weirdness in some of the TSons relics wording:

1. The relic that makes an opposing model only able to allocate half its attacks to the bearer weirdly only applies in Engagement Range, meaning that models that are w/in .5" of a model w/in .5" can allocate all their attacks as long as they aren't w/in Engagement Range themselves. My guess is this is unintended because why would it be the case that the closer model can attack less than the further away one, but who knows?

2. The command trait that lets you make a 6" Normal Move when charged (after being declared, but before the charge roll is made) isn't really clear whether you can do it while you're already engaged by something else - you can't normally make a Normal Move in Engagement Range of course, but then again, you can't normally make a Normal Move in your opponent's combat phase anyway, so if it says you can, does that override the normal restriction on making a Normal Move if in Engagement Range along with overriding the normal restriction on when you can make the Normal Move? My guess is you aren't supposed to be able to make the move if you're already engaged by something, and I think maybe you can even argue this doesn't need a FAQ by saying this only overrides when you can make the move, not whether you can make it if other conditions prevent it, but it seems like at least a grey area that could use a FAQ clearing it up.

Neither of these are really gamebreaking though, they're just weird.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/08 16:37:24


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





yukishiro1 wrote:
There's some weirdness in some of the TSons relics wording:

1. The relic that makes an opposing model only able to allocate half its attacks to the bearer weirdly only applies in Engagement Range, meaning that models that are w/in .5" of a model w/in .5" can allocate all their attacks as long as they aren't w/in Engagement Range themselves. My guess is this is unintended because why would it be the case that the closer model can attack less than the further away one, but who knows?


The fluff makes it sound like looking at the armor confuses you, so, if you're close enough you have a harder time swinging than the guy behind you.

2. The command trait that lets you make a 6" Normal Move when charged (after being declared, but before the charge roll is made) isn't really clear whether you can do it while you're already engaged by something else - you can't normally make a Normal Move in Engagement Range of course, but then again, you can't normally make a Normal Move in your opponent's combat phase anyway, so if it says you can, does that override the normal restriction on making a Normal Move if in Engagement Range along with overriding the normal restriction on when you can make the Normal Move? My guess is you aren't supposed to be able to make the move if you're already engaged by something, and I think maybe you can even argue this doesn't need a FAQ by saying this only overrides when you can make the move, not whether you can make it if other conditions prevent it, but it seems like at least a grey area that could use a FAQ clearing it up.

Neither of these are really gamebreaking though, they're just weird.


This one I think you have it right - if you let one charge go through you can no longer make a normal move so it will only work against the first and won't let you do things like disengage if another unit charges next turn.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: