Switch Theme:

Adding some bread to the wound chart sandwich, so that impertinent mooks don't forget their place  [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 au
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!




Western Australia

- Attacker's strength at least 3x target's toughness = automatic wound (counts as a die roll of 6).
- Target's toughness at least 3x attacker's strength = automatic fail (counts as a die roll of 1).

(Not that I expect this to come up all too often, but it seems like a sensible addition to moi.) EDIT: Especially if unit statlines are allowed to spread out better in future, given that they're not locked into a 10-point system anymore.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/04/21 18:24:39




"Authoritarian dogmata are the means by which one breeds a submissive slave, not a thinking, fighting soldier of humanity."
- Field-Major Decker, 14th Desert Rifles

 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I like the idea of sufficiently high strength auto-wounding. At that point, we're basically just cutting out dice rolling and saving ourselves the heartache of a lascannon failing to kill a guardsman. I'd maybe even be okay with making it kick in for S > 2X T instead of S=>3XT.

Not as big a fan of sufficiently low strength being unable to wound sufficiently high toughness. If you're in a position where you have to use lasguns or splinter rifles to kill something T9, you're already in a bad spot. No need to rub salt in the wound and make skew more of an issue.


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
Stabbin' Skarboy





The only thing that I can really see happening is a lascannon instantly popping a guardsman, or maybe a warboss power klaw krumping the odd marine. In terms of never wounding I guess lasguns wouldn’t normally be able to wound a warlord titan (actually nullified now a bit by hote) and I think grots couldn’t punch things.

"Us Blood Axes hav lernt' a lot from da humies. How best ta kill 'em, fer example."
— Korporal Snagbrat of the Dreadblade Kommandos 
   
Made in au
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!




Western Australia

Wyldhunt wrote:
Not as big a fan of sufficiently low strength being unable to wound sufficiently high toughness. If you're in a position where you have to use lasguns or splinter rifles to kill something T9, you're already in a bad spot. No need to rub salt in the wound and make skew more of an issue.

Personally, I'd find it ultra-empowering to kick a tank to death... but not sure that's feasible. If you're in that position as AM or DE, and have nothing in play that can even scratch T9, then methinks you may have bigger issues.

I see this being especially relevant if unit statlines are allowed to spread out a bit in future, given that they're not locked into a 10-point system anymore.



"Authoritarian dogmata are the means by which one breeds a submissive slave, not a thinking, fighting soldier of humanity."
- Field-Major Decker, 14th Desert Rifles

 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

Wyldhunt wrote:
I like the idea of sufficiently high strength auto-wounding. At that point, we're basically just cutting out dice rolling and saving ourselves the heartache of a lascannon failing to kill a guardsman. I'd maybe even be okay with making it kick in for S > 2X T instead of S=>3XT.

Not as big a fan of sufficiently low strength being unable to wound sufficiently high toughness. If you're in a position where you have to use lasguns or splinter rifles to kill something T9, you're already in a bad spot. No need to rub salt in the wound and make skew more of an issue.
Eh. Outside of some massive Titans (and maybe some fortifications?) no army hits T9, outside of Chaos Knights who have to take d3 mortals to turn T9. And that rule is probably going away with the new Dex.

Moreover, every army has ample access to S3+ weapons. The only thing this would REALLY affect is S2 models in melee-which are Ratlings, Grots, and Nurglings (including accompanying Nurglings, like on GUOs and Epidemius) as far as I know.
And honestly? As a Nurgle Daemon player, I'm okay if my Nurglings can't hurt a tank. Like... That's not an issue. It already took 8 bases of Nurglings to average a single wound to a Rhino in a single phase. Changing that to nothing... Isn't a big deal.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/04/21 21:23:31


Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Admittedly, I'm opposed to it more in principle than because it would actually come up or matter very often. Although I've definitely found myself fishing for sixes with splinter weapons (strength 1) when my drukhari faced imperial knight lists.


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
Been Around the Block




Auto wound on triple strength? No, auto double wounds.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: