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.

I don't think invulnerable saves are out of control, I think it's more that RE ROLLABLE Invulnerable saves break the game and always have. They need to seriously take a huge Nerf Bat to that. It should straight up only be on Armour Saves or you have to Reroll wounds.

Prescience
Fortune


etc.. etc.. should all be changed to reroll to wound against NOT reroll invuln. It'd pretty much fix the entire game. It'd still give those units huge boosts in saving against things, but it'd not allow them to be literally unkillable. Seerstar and it's ilk is fundamentally broken and ruins the game.

Like just look at the fact that almost a full 25 percent of all armies at Tournaments sometimes more is a variation of that.

Hollismason wrote:
I don't think invulnerable saves are out of control, I think it's more that RE ROLLABLE Invulnerable saves break the game and always have. They need to seriously take a huge Nerf Bat to that. It should straight up only be on Armour Saves or you have to Reroll wounds.

I'm with you. IMO, the game would be a whole lot better if you only ever rolled one save...your best save available save, but only once. No rerolls, no FNP.

I don't mind feel no pain, and I think the reduction to 5+ helped a lot, but I think a more reasonable solution is just not allowing Rerollable invulnerables or forcing a re-roll of wounds against.

Right now though it is broken.

Any model though that has a 2+ invulnerable then a re-roll is broken. I mean just look at all the "serious" tourney lists they all revolve around re rolling invulnerable saves.

 jasper76 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
I don't think invulnerable saves are out of control, I think it's more that RE ROLLABLE Invulnerable saves break the game and always have. They need to seriously take a huge Nerf Bat to that. It should straight up only be on Armour Saves or you have to Reroll wounds.

I'm with you. IMO, the game would be a whole lot better if you only ever rolled one save...your best save available save, but only once. No rerolls, no FNP.

And thus nobody used plague marines, apothecaries, ork doks, daemons of nurgle, catalyst, endurance, Iron Hands builds are far less useful, the Icon of Slaanesh is now a useless flag, the Phoenix lord Feugan loses much of his durability, Old One Eye's warlord trait is now entirely useless, the Blood Angels suck even harder without FNP,

tl;dr getting rid of FNP is idiotic and breaks a massive number of units and sometimes entire armies. It's also been a rule for a very, very long time.

Also, Fortune is an integral and iconic Eldar power; and Tzeentch, as a deity of chance, has always been associated with rerolls, getting rid of all rerolls for saves ever means you've gutted the identities of two major parts of the game.

Straight out removing things is a lazy man's way of balancing a game. Rather, you look at the strongest thing; and you balance everything to that level. Make everyone equally strong and overpowered, not weak and boring.

 Kain wrote:
getting rid of FNP is idiotic and breaks a massive number of units and sometimes entire armies. It's also been a rule for a very, very long time.

Idiotic is a strong word to use. A 1 wound model, who dies due to any unsaved 40k wound received, can just not feel it, and continue to rumble with half a body left?

I can understand it would be bad news for anyone used to rolling FNP on everything.

 jasper76 wrote:

 Kain wrote:
getting rid of FNP is idiotic and breaks a massive number of units and sometimes entire armies. It's also been a rule for a very, very long time.

Idiotic is a strong word to use. A 1 wound model, who dies due to any unsaved 40k wound received, can just not feel it, and continue to rumble with half a body left?

I can understand it would be bad news for anyone used to rolling FNP on everything.

That's kind of what feel no pain entails. It means injuries quite simply don't bother you unless they literally make it physically impossible to keep on fighting.

Blowing off a plague marine's entire lower body only slows him down even if it would make others quickly die from blood loss or shock.

OK, so how is the Plague Marine exactly slowed down in the rules after a successful FNP save?

Is his movement cut by half? Initiative reduced?

 Kain wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
I don't think invulnerable saves are out of control, I think it's more that RE ROLLABLE Invulnerable saves break the game and always have. They need to seriously take a huge Nerf Bat to that. It should straight up only be on Armour Saves or you have to Reroll wounds.

I'm with you. IMO, the game would be a whole lot better if you only ever rolled one save...your best save available save, but only once. No rerolls, no FNP.

And thus nobody used plague marines, apothecaries, ork doks, daemons of nurgle, catalyst, endurance, Iron Hands builds are far less useful, the Icon of Slaanesh is now a useless flag, the Phoenix lord Feugan loses much of his durability, Old One Eye's warlord trait is now entirely useless, the Blood Angels suck even harder without FNP,

tl;dr getting rid of FNP is idiotic and breaks a massive number of units and sometimes entire armies. It's also been a rule for a very, very long time.

Also, Fortune is an integral and iconic Eldar power; and Tzeentch, as a deity of chance, has always been associated with rerolls, getting rid of all rerolls for saves ever means you've gutted the identities of two major parts of the game.

Straight out removing things is a lazy man's way of balancing a game. Rather, you look at the strongest thing; and you balance everything to that level. Make everyone equally strong and overpowered, not weak and boring.

I don't have a problem with Feel no Pain, I think it's balanced now that it's a 5+. Although it used to not be able to be used against things that caused instant death I believe.

Fortune has always been a part of the Eldar army that is absolutely true all the way back to 2nd edition. However it only worked on armour saves, not invulnerable saves. So yeah your wrong on that. It's not getting rid of a power it's changing the way it works, it's still a buff and a really great one. However being able to re roll cover saves ( basically invulnerables) and invulnerable is broken. Also, Tzeentch reroll isn't true Fateweaver did that not Tzeentch, Tzeentch had always been associated with giving better Invulns. So yeah no. Actually I don't think you could reroll invulnerables in 2nd edition at all I think either that or Ruin Armour was 5+ or something like that.


On the last point I disagree completely and utterly and here's why. There's first no way to balance everything to that level unless you create weapons that ignore all saves. So that's a huge deal, escalation to overcome is the path to power creep and the worst thing that could happen. Your escalation will damage the game just like the escalation of that power.

Also I am more of fan of modifiers to hit than I am of cover saves. I prefer the negative to hits. It's just better and makes more sense in my opinion and they should remove it.

 Kain wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
I don't think invulnerable saves are out of control, I think it's more that RE ROLLABLE Invulnerable saves break the game and always have. They need to seriously take a huge Nerf Bat to that. It should straight up only be on Armour Saves or you have to Reroll wounds.

I'm with you. IMO, the game would be a whole lot better if you only ever rolled one save...your best save available save, but only once. No rerolls, no FNP.

And thus nobody used plague marines, apothecaries, ork doks, daemons of nurgle, catalyst, endurance, Iron Hands builds are far less useful, the Icon of Slaanesh is now a useless flag, the Phoenix lord Feugan loses much of his durability, Old One Eye's warlord trait is now entirely useless, the Blood Angels suck even harder without FNP,

tl;dr getting rid of FNP is idiotic and breaks a massive number of units and sometimes entire armies. It's also been a rule for a very, very long time.

Also, Fortune is an integral and iconic Eldar power; and Tzeentch, as a deity of chance, has always been associated with rerolls, getting rid of all rerolls for saves ever means you've gutted the identities of two major parts of the game.

Straight out removing things is a lazy man's way of balancing a game. Rather, you look at the strongest thing; and you balance everything to that level. Make everyone equally strong and overpowered, not weak and boring.

(Only replying again because you've basically called me an idiot).

The arguments you have here are [a] FNP is good because lots of units have it, [b] FNP is good because its been there for a long time. Well, lots of people have herpes, and its been here for a long time as well, but neither of those facts make it a good thing.

 jasper76 wrote:
OK, so how is the Plague Marine exactly slowed down in the rules after a successful FNP save?

Is his movement cut by half? Initiative reduced?

Representing this would slow down the game so it's simply represented as a small chance to ignore a wound.

I mean, even in one on one role playing games damage to the body is usually abstracted for the sake of keeping things going.

Hollismason wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
I don't think invulnerable saves are out of control, I think it's more that RE ROLLABLE Invulnerable saves break the game and always have. They need to seriously take a huge Nerf Bat to that. It should straight up only be on Armour Saves or you have to Reroll wounds.

I'm with you. IMO, the game would be a whole lot better if you only ever rolled one save...your best save available save, but only once. No rerolls, no FNP.

And thus nobody used plague marines, apothecaries, ork doks, daemons of nurgle, catalyst, endurance, Iron Hands builds are far less useful, the Icon of Slaanesh is now a useless flag, the Phoenix lord Feugan loses much of his durability, Old One Eye's warlord trait is now entirely useless, the Blood Angels suck even harder without FNP,

tl;dr getting rid of FNP is idiotic and breaks a massive number of units and sometimes entire armies. It's also been a rule for a very, very long time.

Also, Fortune is an integral and iconic Eldar power; and Tzeentch, as a deity of chance, has always been associated with rerolls, getting rid of all rerolls for saves ever means you've gutted the identities of two major parts of the game.

Straight out removing things is a lazy man's way of balancing a game. Rather, you look at the strongest thing; and you balance everything to that level. Make everyone equally strong and overpowered, not weak and boring.

I don't have a problem with Feel no Pain, I think it's balanced now that it's a 5+. Although it used to not be able to be used against things that caused instant death I believe.

Fortune has always been a part of the Eldar army that is absolutely true all the way back to 2nd edition. However it only worked on armour saves, not invulnerable saves. So yeah your wrong on that. It's not getting rid of a power it's changing the way it works, it's still a buff and a really great one. However being able to re roll cover saves ( basically invulnerables) and invulnerable is broken. Also, Tzeentch reroll isn't true Fateweaver did that not Tzeentch, Tzeentch had always been associated with giving better Invulns. So yeah no.


On the last point I disagree completely and utterly and here's why. There's first no way to balance everything to that level unless you create weapons that ignore all saves. So that's a huge deal, escalation to overcome is the path to power creep and the worst thing that could happen. Your escalation will damage the game just like the escalation of that power.

Also I am more of fan of modifiers to hit than I am of cover saves. I prefer the negative to hits. It's just better and makes more sense in my opinion and they should remove it.

FNP used to be ignored by power weapons, AP2, and instant death. The new FNP being universal against anything that didn't cause ID is balanced out by the worsening of how often it occurs.

4+ FNP wasn't really terrible on plague marines, but that may be born out of how the usual response was to dump an S8 AP3+ pieplate on them and watch them explode.

I'm guessing you missed things like warp time? And Fateweaver is the tzeentchiest unit who ever tzeentched. Lots of psychic shenanigans, messes with chance and probability, screws you over big time if the dice don't like you (i.e, a grot getting a wound on him and him promptly noping off the board). And even on the Eldar units with the best native invulnerable saves fortune hasn't really overpowered things, but that may be because my group's Homebrew and Houserules brought back a lot of the old forces you to reroll passed invulnerable saves things or outright ignores them (Warscythes, C'tan, Callidus assassins).

And we have done my system of balance; affectionately named Gurren Laggan 40k because we included fluff bits like that one necron warscythe that could carve apart a planet in one blow for apocalypse games.

It works fine.

I've even heard there's one army where pretty much every unit has an invulnerable save. Madness, I tell you.

The game really needs a blanket rule that 2+ saves of any kind can never be rerollable. If a rule were to give that a reroll then it should be resolved on a 3 or even 4+

This is pretty much my only significant gripe with 6th.

 Troike wrote:
I've even heard there's one army where pretty much every unit has an invulnerable save. Madness, I tell you.

Hahaha.

Idk, that tickled me for some reason.

 Troike wrote:
I've even heard there's one army where pretty much every unit has an invulnerable save. Madness, I tell you.

Two armies. Sisters and Daemons. And both are generally not that impressive on most units.

Not sure if they are out of control, but i really hate fighting against it. Specialy when some armies have them in huge quantitie or get really strong ones.
Demons having a 6+ invuln, that's cute and fluffy. They always have a t-shirt save no matter what.
Zoanthropes having 3+, while very strong is okay, because they are only elites (3 max) and pretty weak. T4 2W and good targets (they are synapse, support and anti-tank)

( I might be wrong) Marines all having the options to get invuln, and not just 6+, that's extremely annoying and somewhat OP. =(

Addaran wrote:
Not sure if they are out of control, but i really hate fighting against it. Specialy when some armies have them in huge quantitie or get really strong ones.
Demons having a 6+ invuln, that's cute and fluffy. They always have a t-shirt save no matter what.
Zoanthropes having 3+, while very strong is okay, because they are only elites (3 max) and pretty weak. T4 2W and good targets (they are synapse, support and anti-tank)

( I might be wrong) Marines all having the options to get invuln, and not just 6+, that's extremely annoying and somewhat OP. =(

The standard save for daemons is a 5++, they get downgraded to a 6++ if they get a certain and particularly awful warp storm roll (many daemon players outright concede if they roll that)

I don't know of any marine armies where every unit can all get invulnerables.

The Dark Angels maybe?

That PFG mostly applies for shooting; get into assault and both you and the angels will have invulnerable saves.

Dark Angels where you can run pure Deathwing and bring a whole 23 models at 2k (Belial, 4x 5 squads of Deathwing Terminators, 2 Crusaders and some small upgrades (autocannons in the squads, multimeltas on the Land Raiders) and you're out of point and are so heavily outgunned it's not a great idea to actually play it.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Dark Angels where you can run pure Deathwing and bring a whole 23 models at 2k (Belial, 4x 5 squads of Deathwing Terminators, 2 Crusaders and some small upgrades (autocannons in the squads, multimeltas on the Land Raiders) and you're out of point and are so heavily outgunned it's not a great idea to actually play it.

Deathwing is so incredibly awful for such a cool concept.

It's like Synapseless and Formationless Tyranids level bad.

Terminator armour stopped being scary when they left behind 2D6 armour saves. You can't be outnumbered 6 to 1 when every 1 in 6 shots kills you.

 xttz wrote:
Terminator armour stopped being scary when they left behind 2D6 armour saves. You can't be outnumbered 6 to 1 when every 1 in 6 shots kills you.

Pretty much. TDA needs to be cheaper or give a re-rollable 2+ to be scary again.

The problem is the enormous increase in shooting power in late 5th and then into 6th edition, which then necessitates a huge increase in survivability. Not only are the actual unit and weapon profiles getting stronger, but the core rules those units/weapons use is making them more powerful as well. On top of all this the point cost for such power is continuously decreasing.

A classic example of power creep, which is now magnified even more so by the inclusion of allies, formations, and non-FOC allies which takes GW's usually bad balance and game design, and creates combinations that were unintended (no matter how obvious they are).


Even now we are seeing GW move shooting profiles to much higher rates of fire to counteract the better invun and cover saves they are giving units.

I think the best way to bring a bit more balance to the game would be to say that, just like for shooting, it becomes capped at a certain point and everything beyond becomes a re-roll with a higher score required. For example, if the cap was 3+, and a 2+ would become a 3+/6+ instead, the survivability would be drastically lowered while still making re-rolls useful.

 jasper76 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
I don't think invulnerable saves are out of control, I think it's more that RE ROLLABLE Invulnerable saves break the game and always have. They need to seriously take a huge Nerf Bat to that. It should straight up only be on Armour Saves or you have to Reroll wounds.

I'm with you. IMO, the game would be a whole lot better if you only ever rolled one save...your best save available save, but only once. No rerolls, no FNP.

The the re-rolls are what kind of set me off originally. Farseer with fortune for re-rolls on his squad's 3+ armor save. Because it's OP (triples the armor save), and because it adds so much rolling to the game (I'm in favor of eliminating rolls where possible).

3+ with re-roll is better than 2+. 3+ with re-roll is successful 8/9 times. And the farseer will successfully issue the spell 33/36 times. Even if I had AP 3 weapons, he gets re-rollable 4+ jink saves (better than 3+ equivalent). There's no way to put enough AP3 shots on them, I'd have to shoot the same biker with four different leman russ tank shots just to kill it. What are you supposed to hit them with? It's useless shooting with anything that isn't AP 3 (it would take 54 lasgun shots to take out one biker), but even an AP 3 weapon is only going to break the re-roll jink save 25% of the time. I would need to shoot ten rocket launchers shots to kill just one biker. Can't keep them in combat with their I5 hit-n-run. And nothing can catch them. I really don't understand what is supposed to be able to counter that. The biker's armor save with fortune is much better than terminator armor!

They pretty much need to either eliminate rerolls with another ability or have it apply to only a specific type of save. If there is something in the game that is "unkillable" then it's broken. To a degree yes Seerstar can be defeated but not by much. Especially if it's a large squad.

I know that a Daemon list won Adepticon but seriously look at the number of Seerstar and Fateweaver lists.

 Toburk wrote:
The problem is the enormous increase in shooting power in late 5th and then into 6th edition, which then necessitates a huge increase in survivability. Not only are the actual unit and weapon profiles getting stronger, but the core rules those units/weapons use is making them more powerful as well. On top of all this the point cost for such power is continuously decreasing.

A classic example of power creep, which is now magnified even more so by the inclusion of allies, formations, and non-FOC allies which takes GW's usually bad balance and game design, and creates combinations that were unintended (no matter how obvious they are).


Even now we are seeing GW move shooting profiles to much higher rates of fire to counteract the better invun and cover saves they are giving units.

This is pretty much my biggest gripe with the game in a nut-shell.

 Toburk wrote:
The problem is the enormous increase in shooting power in late 5th and then into 6th edition, which then necessitates a huge increase in survivability. Not only are the actual unit and weapon profiles getting stronger, but the core rules those units/weapons use is making them more powerful as well. On top of all this the point cost for such power is continuously decreasing.

A classic example of power creep, which is now magnified even more so by the inclusion of allies, formations, and non-FOC allies which takes GW's usually bad balance and game design, and creates combinations that were unintended (no matter how obvious they are).


Even now we are seeing GW move shooting profiles to much higher rates of fire to counteract the better invun and cover saves they are giving units.

This. Power creep in offensive shooting has far outpaced most standard defenses. The only ones that remain noteworthy are 14 armor, and good rerollable invulns.
To bring the game back closer to a balanced state, "defense-minded" models like marines, terminators, dark eldar incubi, etc. need to be paying less for what they get, or it needs to be upgraded to keep pace with the escalating shooting power. (Back in 3rd, I ran 3 carnifex, 2 tyrant, and a red terror, all with very minimal loadouts, in an 1850 list, and 5 of the 6 would frequently live long enough to see combat on my opponent's board-side.)

That, and of course, the ridiculous defense outliers need to be reigned in. The 2+/4+ reroll seems to work well, but even a 2+ invuln without a reroll is pretty boss.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Nope, the Mark of Tzeentch takes them down to 4++, the Grimoir itself however pushes them past it. Not cheating at all.

Yes, yes it is. You are applying an OoO without any allowance to do so. MoT is VERY Clear that you cannot improve an inv save past 3++ with it, and you have just done EXACTLY that.

The exact rule is "Models with the Mark of Tzeentch have +1 to their invulnerable save (to a maximum of 3+)." To me that seems the maximum applies only to the +1 from MoT, not any further boosts.

There are NO "further" boosts. Multiple modifiers tells you to apply them all together, you are creating an Order of Operations when none such order can exist in the rules

It is [(5++ +2 +1) Capped at 3+]

Or 5+1(capped at 3)+2, you get choose the order for modifiers if they're both addition.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Or 5+1(capped at 3)+2, you get choose the order for modifiers if they're both addition.

No, no you do not. There is no order of operations there, and there is no allowance to cap half way through. Or are you saying that S6x2 - 1 is S9 now?
(Resolving multiple modifiers is not a set of actions that happen at the same time that the controlling player can then choose to resolve first, so that rule does not apply. You have no permission to apply a cap half way through a calculation, so you cannot do so)

In short, you CANNOT get to a 2+ with the current cahos codex by using MoT. RAW

I look at it this way, there is clearly a cap, so once it's reached it doesn't matter what you try and add to it, the cap cuts you off of any additional bonuses past that point, so it's locked at a 3++.