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.

Probably just the same thing that they ended up doing for factions that don't have mages in AoS. Nothing, really. Mostly just balancing armies around that.

Sigmarines get a fancy form of magic under a different name that essentially bypasses the interference other mages can give. Khorne gets culty-blood-magic effects, often based or boosted by having their not-mages build up a body count, while also being able to run their own interference as part of the package.

While mages in AoS are certainly potent and filled with utility, they're usually not such a dominant force that you'd feel like you'd be marginalized for putting your points elsewhere. You can get by with or without them for a lot of armies.

 Fafnir wrote:
Probably just the same thing that they ended up doing for factions that don't have mages in AoS. Nothing, really. Mostly just balancing armies around that.

Sigmarines get a fancy form of magic under a different name that essentially bypasses the interference other mages can give. Khorne gets culty-blood-magic effects, often based or boosted by having their not-mages build up a body count, while also being able to run their own interference as part of the package.

While mages in AoS are certainly potent and filled with utility, they're usually not such a dominant force that you'd feel like you'd be marginalized for putting your points elsewhere. You can get by with or without them for a lot of armies.

For example the new Kharadron Overlords have no magic or prayer system at all.

Earlier in the thread, I read the theory that you would add your mastery levels to a spells cast dice to see if you would cast it and the opponent would add their mastery level to the decast dice to see if they dispell it.

That is a terrible thing if they implement it.

That means a ML1 psyker would cast a WC8 power 21/36ths of the time (fair enough) but then a ML3 psyker would dispell it 5/6ths of the time (even better for a ML4). Meaning the ML1 psyker will only get a power off 9.7% of the time. A ML3/4 psyker could basically shut down an entire army of ML1/2 psykers.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Earlier in the thread, I read the theory that you would add your mastery levels to a spells cast dice to see if you would cast it and the opponent would add their mastery level to the decast dice to see if they dispell it.

That is a terrible thing if they implement it.

That means a ML1 psyker would cast a WC8 power 21/36ths of the time (fair enough) but then a ML3 psyker would dispell it 5/6ths of the time (even better for a ML4). Meaning the ML1 psyker will only get a power off 9.7% of the time. A ML3/4 psyker could basically shut down an entire army of ML1/2 psykers.

The theory was mine, and here's why you're not looking at this correctly.

A ML1 psyker represents a basically trained field psyker, such as a Codicer Librarian, Santioned Psyker, low level Chaos Sorceror. Such a psyker should be able to handle basic powers like Smite fairly easily but with a little risk, or the more difficult powers with a little difficulty (WC8). A ML3 psyker represents a very powerful psyker who exceeds normal psykers powers by a lot. Examples being Tiguirius, Mephiston, Farseers, top level Grey Knight Librarians, Sorcerors and Daemon Princes. These beings are powerful enough that they should be able to block such basic abilities with ease. It would be like in Attack of the Clones, with Anakin and Obi-Wan representing a ML1 Psyker, Dooku a ML2, and Yoda just shutting him down completely at ML3. ML4 on the other hand is another category altogether, these psykers being rediculously powerful to the point where a ML1 or 2 shouldn't even be able to challenge them.

From a purely game perspective, it is easily balanced as we have confirmation that the Denying psyker must be within 24" of the caster, and you could also see stipulations such as "A psyker may only attempt to deny one Malediction or Witchfre per turn" as well as points balancing. The first codex to introduce Mastery Levels was the GK 5th Ed and had a straight cost of 50pts per Mastery Level, which applied to both the ML1 Grand Master and ML2 Librarian (upgrading to ML2 and 3 respectively). That's a steep cost to pay, and while seemingly cheap in psychic heavy 7th, a more balanced 8th would see such a cost go back to being steep but useful

 Deadshot wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Earlier in the thread, I read the theory that you would add your mastery levels to a spells cast dice to see if you would cast it and the opponent would add their mastery level to the decast dice to see if they dispell it.

That is a terrible thing if they implement it.

That means a ML1 psyker would cast a WC8 power 21/36ths of the time (fair enough) but then a ML3 psyker would dispell it 5/6ths of the time (even better for a ML4). Meaning the ML1 psyker will only get a power off 9.7% of the time. A ML3/4 psyker could basically shut down an entire army of ML1/2 psykers.

The theory was mine, and here's why you're not looking at this correctly.

A ML1 psyker represents a basically trained field psyker, such as a Codicer Librarian, Santioned Psyker, low level Chaos Sorceror. Such a psyker should be able to handle basic powers like Smite fairly easily but with a little risk, or the more difficult powers with a little difficulty (WC8). A ML3 psyker represents a very powerful psyker who exceeds normal psykers powers by a lot. Examples being Tiguirius, Mephiston, Farseers, top level Grey Knight Librarians, Sorcerors and Daemon Princes. These beings are powerful enough that they should be able to block such basic abilities with ease. It would be like in Attack of the Clones, with Anakin and Obi-Wan representing a ML1 Psyker, Dooku a ML2, and Yoda just shutting him down completely at ML3. ML4 on the other hand is another category altogether, these psykers being rediculously powerful to the point where a ML1 or 2 shouldn't even be able to challenge them.

From a purely game perspective, it is easily balanced as we have confirmation that the Denying psyker must be within 24" of the caster, and you could also see stipulations such as "A psyker may only attempt to deny one Malediction or Witchfre per turn" as well as points balancing. The first codex to introduce Mastery Levels was the GK 5th Ed and had a straight cost of 50pts per Mastery Level, which applied to both the ML1 Grand Master and ML2 Librarian (upgrading to ML2 and 3 respectively). That's a steep cost to pay, and while seemingly cheap in psychic heavy 7th, a more balanced 8th would see such a cost go back to being steep but useful

That would be fine if as you say MLs are a steep increase in points and if they could only deny 1 (Or maybe 2 with a special rule) each a turn. Otherwise if your army doesn't have access to a lvl3 or 4 psyker, there would be no point in taking one.
24" is huge though. That's a 49" diameter on a normal base and a 51" on something like a DP.

Davor wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:
And the Psychic Phase works a bit like magic in WHF i like that.

What do you think about the new rules?

How did it work in WHF? I know how it works for AoS but never played WHF. May you please explain. I am liking the new stuff I am reading, not sure how this would work since you compared it to WHF.

Davor

In WHF wizards had a power lvl from 1-4. In the magic phase the player whose turn it is would roll 2d6 to determine how many dice he would have for casting spells. If a wizard wanted to cast a spell the player had to roll 5+ for a Fireball which was a basic spell and a 13+ for Fire Column which was the most difficult one from the lore of fire for example. He could choose how many power dice from his 2d6 he wanted to use. And he would get a bonus to the roll equal to is power lvl. The opponent could then try to dispell the spell by using is his dispell dice which would be equal to the higher dice roll of the 2d6. And he would also get a bonus to the roll equal to is power lvl.

I hope my explanation was good enough. There is a lot more to the magic phase in WHF but these are the basics.

The entry is quite explicit that there is a limit to the number of times a psyker can try to deny another's power:

Enemy psykers will then have a chance to block these powers if they are within 24″, and again, the mastery of the psyker will dictate how often they can block a power each turn.

Given the mastery referred to is itself a reference to that "which would previously be the same as their Mastery Level" in an earlier paragraph, there's good reason to believe that the limit of denial attempts is equal to the number of powers you can manifest per turn, i.e. the Mastery Level.

Do you not all see the massive issue with balance that method would have? A ML4 psyker will be many many times of magnitude more powerful than 4 ML1 psyker s. He will be able to cast the same number of spells as all of them put together but will be able to deny almost all of theirs and have very very few denied in response.
This is fine fluff wise I suppose but balance wise this is horrendous unless the 4 ML1 psykers are significantly cheaper than 1 ML4 psyker.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
The entry is quite explicit that there is a limit to the number of times a psyker can try to deny another's power:

Enemy psykers will then have a chance to block these powers if they are within 24″, and again, the mastery of the psyker will dictate how often they can block a power each turn.

Given the mastery referred to is itself a reference to that "which would previously be the same as their Mastery Level" in an earlier paragraph, there's good reason to believe that the limit of denial attempts is equal to the number of powers you can manifest per turn, i.e. the Mastery Level.

Well, there was suggestion that this new edition would take an alternate activation system rather than a IGO,UGO system. If such a thing were the case, perhaps the number of spells and denials each psyker can make per game turn are linked. So a ML4 psyker could cast 4 powers and deny none, or deny 4 and cast 0, or 3/1 or 1/3 or 2/2, per game turn?

Perhaps it won't be as I originally theorised, and ML wont be a factor in denying.

My original version

To Deny, select a psyker within 24" of the caster. Roll 2D6 and add the Denier's mastery level. If the total is greater than the caster's psychic test (ie, their 2D6+ML), the power is denied

Revised version accounting for relative ML power levels and Alternate Activation

To Deny, select a psyker within 24" of the caster. Roll 2D6 and add 1 if the ML of the Denier is greater than the ML of the caster. If the total is greater than the caster's psychic test (ie, their 2D6+ML), the power is denied

This balances it slightly, and also accounts for the caster rolling a (resulting in a score of 13-16) where a denier can reach a maximum score of 13, thus unable to deny such a power (representing the caster getting his Over 9000!!!!!! power level)

 Deadshot wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
The entry is quite explicit that there is a limit to the number of times a psyker can try to deny another's power:

Enemy psykers will then have a chance to block these powers if they are within 24″, and again, the mastery of the psyker will dictate how often they can block a power each turn.

Given the mastery referred to is itself a reference to that "which would previously be the same as their Mastery Level" in an earlier paragraph, there's good reason to believe that the limit of denial attempts is equal to the number of powers you can manifest per turn, i.e. the Mastery Level.

Well, there was suggestion that this new edition would take an alternate activation system rather than a IGO,UGO system. If such a thing were the case, perhaps the number of spells and denials each psyker can make per game turn are linked. So a ML4 psyker could cast 4 powers and deny none, or deny 4 and cast 0, or 3/1 or 1/3 or 2/2, per game turn?

This would be A LOT more balanced. Meaning that whilst the ML4 psyker will pretty much auto deny, say 2 of the opponents powers and have a very good chance of casting 2 of their own without denial, it means 2 of the ML1 psykers will actually get to cast a power. Still not totally balanced unless the ML4 psyker is pretty darn expensive.

 Brutallica wrote:
Mortal goes through Invul... Stormshields and terminators better be freakin cheap

Terminators have two wounds now, and smite only inflicts D3, D6 if empowered. So smite would only be able to kill 1-3 terminators, 3 being a rarity. Keep in mind that its closest visible unit too, so put fodder in front of the terminators.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Do you not all see the massive issue with balance that method would have? A ML4 psyker will be many many times of magnitude more powerful than 4 ML1 psyker s. He will be able to cast the same number of spells as all of them put together but will be able to deny almost all of theirs and have very very few denied in response.
This is fine fluff wise I suppose but balance wise this is horrendous unless the 4 ML1 psykers are significantly cheaper than 1 ML4 psyker.

Well this is entirely dependant on whether my theory is correct or not. And also on whether this edition will focus on fluff or gameplay. If its fluff this is fine, as a ML4 Psyker is not 4 x ML1, but rather closer to ML1x2^4 in the fluff. A ML4 Psyker is close or representative of an Alpha level psyker (considering that ML3 like Tiguirius is a high Beta and ML5 Magnus is an Alpha+), where a ML1 would be a high Gamma or low Beta at best.


As I also said, most codexes so far, dating right back to 5th Ed Space Marines, psykers could buy a ML for 50pts. So assuming that a ML1 psyker costs, say, 35pts for the model, and then 50 for the ML for a base cost of 85pts, a ML4 psyker would cost 235pts (before factoring in his rules and gear for added costs).

You're also not taking into account that to date ML3 psykers have represented the peak of normal psyker powers. We're talking, on the Imperial side, the likes of Tigurius, Mephiston and GK Librarians, who are some of, if not the most powerful Imperial psykers, and on the Chaos side you have Sorcerors and DPs. Eldar you have Farseers (who devote their whole life to their psychic powers, which are considerable already as an Eldar). They aren't common or cheap.

On the other hand, where have we seen ML4 psykers? Ahriman, Eldrad? Who else? Fateweaver? Some of the literal top dogs of psykers in 40k? Magnus is the first and only Level 5 and said to be the next best thing to the Emperor or Tzeentch himself.

Edit:

I have no problem letting ML 3 and 4 psykers dominate multiple ML 1 and 2 psykers while the ML 3 and 4 psykers remain on the table, particularly given the former tend to have quite high point costs. Feel absolutely free to believe that putting all of your expensive eggs into a single basket is not going to offer an appropriately tempting target, especially with the indications that you can't hide them in units anymore.

At least 4 ML 1 psykers will probably A) have more wounds overall, and so be on the table longer, and B) be capable of spreading across the board (perhaps even beyond/outside that ML 4's 24" bubble).