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.

MarkyMark wrote:
So taking Tzeentch casters for example, I am assuming that they will peril on any double on say divination/telepathy/biomancy (and the other BRB tables) but only peril on dbl 6 on malefic and tzeentch tables?.

Not quite.

Everyone perils on double 6s on all disciplines.

Everyone except daemons perils on all doubles in Daemonology.

 Vector Strike wrote:

mercury14 wrote:

 Redsox84 wrote:
*Sorry if this has been Covered, 193 pages is a lot to skim through....*

Is it confirmed that to successfully cast a Psychic Power, you have to roll a 4+ on a d6 per mastery level of the attempted power? For example, in order to cast a level 2 psychic power, I must roll two or more 4+ (avoiding perils on double 6's?) on the number of dice of my choosing?

Is there a limit to how many dice a certain level psyker can use to cast?

Nope, feel free to throw down ten dice with your lv 4 Eldrad.

Have fun not rolling two 6s in there though.

There is a limit. The casting Psyker's ML+1. So Eldrad can use at most 5 dice..

Source for that limit?

 Vaktathi wrote:
A single S: D weapon is only going to delete a unit a turn if it's a tank or a small sized unit that's clumped up and your shot doesn't scatter. Either way, no need for D weapons to remove a Shadowsword. Other than the postulation that it'll be able to see, hit, and destroy everything that's going to be a threat to it before they can do anything back (which is silly assuming one pieplate a turn that needs LoS), you haven't shown that it's harder to kill than the Russ tanks. In fact, it's probably easier since you can cascade explodes results better and concentrate your firepower easier.

You keep assuming Imperial armies with Lascannons or similar weapons. So those armies without those are just SOL? Because the best way for me to deal with 3 Russes (Or a shadowsword) is to punch them to death.

Yes, it's firepower is disgusting, but again, the thing itself doesn't require more firepower than say, an equivalent points investment in Holofield tanks. Lets say we're looking at a 150-165pt holofield tank, (lets assume wave serpents so we can largely ignore pens, unlikes on say if it were a Fire Prism or Falcon), AV12 3HP and a 4+ cover save in the open. At ~150pts each we can get 5 to a Revenant. That's 15 AV12 HP's with 4+ cover saves as long as they move. That'd require 180 BS3 autocannons, assuming no explodes results, and all separate targets that can't cascade Explodes results the way SH's do. I don't see people saying you need D weapons to take down 5 Holofield tanks.

Nope, because those 5 tanks together don't do the same damage a single Revenant does. I can ignore a couple of those tanks to no real detriment to my army.

Go ahead - try and ignore a Revenant.

Not really, only if you assume that the D units will wipe out anything that can hurt them before they can engage, which is realistically only a possibility with the Revenant (which I'd agree is disgusting, but even compared to a Shadowsword it's painfully overpowered on a relative points basis)

It's not just the D weapon deleting threats - it's the rest of the army deleting threats as well. One individual Shadowsword? Meh, I can handle it with near equivalent points. Shadowsword plus support with a decent commander? Unlikely.

 Yodhrin wrote:
You lose absolutely no "tactical flexibility" by taking a sD weapon, because a sD weapon can successfully engage any target bar flyers

For the cost of one D-throwing Shadowsword, I could instead bring 100 conscripts, 40 guardsmen and 30 autocannons.

The shadowsword can die to two lascannon shots on a bad day, can't score, can't contest, and can only shoot one target a turn.

Yes. Yes you do lose flexibility.

 azreal13 wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
So taking Tzeentch casters for example, I am assuming that they will peril on any double on say divination/telepathy/biomancy (and the other BRB tables) but only peril on dbl 6 on malefic and tzeentch tables?.

Not quite.

Everyone perils on double 6s on all disciplines.

Everyone except daemons perils on all doubles in Daemonology.

ah right, I did remember something about psykers with a affinity to that psyhic table have less chances of perils, just assumed it would extend to their own psyhic tables!.

It does seem to be making daemons that bit more powerful, what with the grounding tests, ability to summon new stuff, being able to spam psyhic levels etc. Not that we needed it but looking forward to it now!.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Source for that limit?

I edited my post; such limitation has been hinted in this thread before

 Vector Strike wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Source for that limit?

I edited my post; such limitation has been hinted in this thread before

Was just wondering, I've been following the thread pretty closely and this is the first I've heard of a limit on dice you can roll to pass a power test.

Is there any word or confirmation on how D weapons will impact vehicles?

If everything can score...what's the point in taking 3 imperil knights or more?

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
You lose absolutely no "tactical flexibility" by taking a sD weapon, because a sD weapon can successfully engage any target bar flyers

For the cost of one D-throwing Shadowsword, I could instead bring 100 conscripts, 40 guardsmen and 30 autocannons.

The shadowsword can die to two lascannon shots on a bad day, can't score, can't contest, and can only shoot one target a turn.

Yes. Yes you do lose flexibility.

A screamerstar can die to a couple of squad's worth of lasgun or bolter fire on a bad day, so if we use the logic that the worst and most statistically unlikely scenario that could kill a unit is a significant factor in determining how powerful the unit is, deathstars of all kinds are just as weak as superheavies and so don't require special superguns that wipe out everything else too.

I'd be interested to see the math on exactly what the likelyhood is that your 100 bs2 lasguns, 40 bs3 lasguns, and 30 bs3 autocannons could pick out any unit of mine on the board each and every turn including the first and delete it from existence without any possible response. You can't score, contest, or shoot back if you're dead.

Kal-El wrote:
If everything can score...what's the point in taking 3 imperil knights or more?

You forge a narrative.

Doesn't the WD mention 6 dice being thrown to get off a Warp Charge 3 power? There are no level 5's.... I'm guessing they used Ezekiel in that example?

I don't know that Wave Serpents would be the unit you would want to use as a measuring stick..... Most people agree that they are broke as well

 Sihdhartha wrote:
I don't know that Wave Serpents would be the unit you would want to use as a measuring stick..... Most people agree that they are broke as well

He was only talking about their survivability really, and that's not the stupidly powerful part.
It's the survivability plus the amazing guns that makes them stupidly powerful.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Sihdhartha wrote:
I don't know that Wave Serpents would be the unit you would want to use as a measuring stick..... Most people agree that they are broke as well

He was only talking about their survivability really, and that's not the stupidly powerful part.
It's the survivability plus the amazing guns that makes them stupidly powerful.

Ahhh ok, yea, as a Tau player I can admit the Riptide is broke, some Eldar players need to realize the Wave Serpent is broke. (unrelated rant)

Everyone is focusing on how D weapons impact things with wounds... But what about how they impact vehicles? Any word on whether we're past the era of insta-explode on a 2+?

I'm reeeeally looking for a reason not to eBay all of my 40k stuff. But so far, I see more flailing stop-gap measures being bandaged over an already over-complicated, bloated, and tired rules set where the creators have made it abundantly clear they have no interest in attempting anything resembling game balance. Lets face it, this corporation will never offer up its rules to an open beta and actually take into account what the great passionate community feels would make it a truly exceptional game....or at least one that is tactically challenging and rewarding to play. I have been a fan, a player and a collector of all things 40k since 1989....and the state of the game today makes me sad. I will try to stay optimistic and see what 7th has to offer. But from what I am seeing, its more of the same...watering down the game with more random ways to completely negate good generalship.

Looking back at this post, it kinda looks like a troll...but really, I'm just saying how I feel about the situation. I want to be excited about a new edition of 40k...but I'm realizing now, I just might be over it.

rigeld2 wrote:

You keep assuming Imperial armies with Lascannons or similar weapons. So those armies without those are just SOL? Because the best way for me to deal with 3 Russes (Or a shadowsword) is to punch them to death.

Where did I say that? Where did I mention lascannons at all?

That said, most armies have lascannons or equivalents (lances, railguns, etc), and melta weapons or other heavy AT guns. That said, if your best option for dealing with such a unit is punching it do death, having to engage only one target is probably a whole lot better than having to engage up to three.

Nope, because those 5 tanks together don't do the same damage a single Revenant does. I can ignore a couple of those tanks to no real detriment to my army.

We're talking about something entirely different. You said you needed D weapons to kill D weapon toting units, which is false. You're now taking that down an entirely different route if we're talking about it's firepower. Yes the Reventant throws out a disgusting amount of firepower (quadruple that of a Shadowsword). What will matter more than anything else is who goes first

It's not just the D weapon deleting threats - it's the rest of the army deleting threats as well. One individual Shadowsword? Meh, I can handle it with near equivalent points. Shadowsword plus support with a decent commander? Unlikely.

And you're moving the goalpost here.

No, I wouldn't expect a Shadowswords worth of points of anti-tank stuff to take on a Shadowsword *AND* support elements, that would be an uneven fight of course. That's a stupid comparison and I'm not sure why we're making it. Obviously we must assume that you'll have equivalent points of support units as well, and your own command abilities, in which case the Shadowsword should prove no more a problem than three Russ tanks would.

The Shadowsword will be scarier against tanks and superheavy infantry, the Russ tanks scarier against most infantry as well as squadrons of light vehicles in most cases, and be way less prone to whiffing entirely.

 Fango wrote:
I'm reeeeally looking for a reason not to eBay all of my 40k stuff. But so far, I see more flailing stop-gap measures being bandaged over an already over-complicated, bloated, and tired rules set where the creators have made it abundantly clear they have no interest in attempting anything resembling game balance. Lets face it, this corporation will never offer up its rules to an open beta and actually take into account what the great passionate community feels would make it a truly exceptional game....or at least one that is tactically challenging and rewarding to play. I have been a fan, a player and a collector of all things 40k since 1989....and the state of the game today makes me sad. I will try to stay optimistic and see what 7th has to offer. But from what I am seeing, its more of the same...watering down the game with more random ways to completely negate good generalship.

Looking back at this post, it kinda looks like a troll...but really, I'm just saying how I feel about the situation. I want to be excited about a new edition of 40k...but I'm realizing now, I just might be over it.

This is all rumours, pretty much (being the stuff we have seen in the WD screen shots and youtube vids). But until we get the book and see how everything interacts and how it all meshes together we wont know what the new edition is like at all, we wont even know it till at least a few weeks after and even then it will be different for a lot of people as they expect different things from their 40k hobby.

 Fango wrote:
I'm reeeeally looking for a reason not to eBay all of my 40k stuff. But so far, I see more flailing stop-gap measures being bandaged over an already over-complicated, bloated, and tired rules set where the creators have made it abundantly clear they have no interest in attempting anything resembling game balance. Lets face it, this corporation will never offer up its rules to an open beta and actually take into account what the great passionate community feels would make it a truly exceptional game....or at least one that is tactically challenging and rewarding to play. I have been a fan, a player and a collector of all things 40k since 1989....and the state of the game today makes me sad. I will try to stay optimistic and see what 7th has to offer. But from what I am seeing, its more of the same...watering down the game with more random ways to completely negate good generalship.

Looking back at this post, it kinda looks like a troll...but really, I'm just saying how I feel about the situation. I want to be excited about a new edition of 40k...but I'm realizing now, I just might be over it.

Sell your stuff on Ebay. You will be just making GW more money when in a year or so, you will get the itch and regret selling everything and then will have to re-buy everything that you want again.

Don't sell. Take a break. It happens a lot. I am glad I never sold any of my GW stuff when I took a break and then came back years later. Trust me, you will regret selling your GW stuff.

Kal-El wrote:
If everything can score...what's the point in taking 3 imperil knights or more?

So you can get a knight as your warlord, which gives you a free upgrade to the knight.

 Vaktathi wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

You keep assuming Imperial armies with Lascannons or similar weapons. So those armies without those are just SOL? Because the best way for me to deal with 3 Russes (Or a shadowsword) is to punch them to death.

Where did I say that? Where did I mention lascannons at all?

When you talked about cascading explodes results against AV14.

That said, most armies have lascannons or equivalents (lances, railguns, etc), and melta weapons or other heavy AT guns. That said, if your best option for dealing with such a unit is punching it do death, having to engage only one target is probably a whole lot better than having to engage up to three.

One is far easier to bubble wrap.

Nope, because those 5 tanks together don't do the same damage a single Revenant does. I can ignore a couple of those tanks to no real detriment to my army.

We're talking about something entirely different. You said you needed D weapons to kill D weapon toting units, which is false. You're now taking that down an entirely different route if we're talking about it's firepower. Yes the Reventant throws out a disgusting amount of firepower (quadruple that of a Shadowsword). What will matter more than anything else is who goes first

I'd like to throw in my 2c here as well. I don't think a single army in the game right is sweating for more anti-infantry. They're all gunning for efficient heavy guns for taking out MCs/vehicles/elite units. D weapon carriers being bad at taking them out is like saying "well riptides aren't so hot in close combat!"

TheRedDevil wrote:
I'd like to throw in my 2c here as well. I don't think a single army in the game right is sweating for more anti-infantry. They're all gunning for efficient heavy guns for taking out MCs/vehicles/elite units. D weapon carriers being bad at taking them out is like saying "well riptides aren't so hot in close combat!"

Titan killers is the new Paradigm, That and the anti aircraft artillery.


Rule the high ground, rule the table.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
You lose absolutely no "tactical flexibility" by taking a sD weapon, because a sD weapon can successfully engage any target bar flyers

For the cost of one D-throwing Shadowsword, I could instead bring 100 conscripts, 40 guardsmen and 30 autocannons.

The shadowsword can die to two lascannon shots on a bad day, can't score, can't contest, and can only shoot one target a turn.

Yes. Yes you do lose flexibility.

A screamerstar can die to a couple of squad's worth of lasgun or bolter fire on a bad day, so if we use the logic that the worst and most statistically unlikely scenario that could kill a unit is a significant factor in determining how powerful the unit is, deathstars of all kinds are just as weak as superheavies and so don't require special superguns that wipe out everything else too.

I'd be interested to see the math on exactly what the likelyhood is that your 100 bs2 lasguns, 40 bs3 lasguns, and 30 bs3 autocannons could pick out any unit of mine on the board each and every turn including the first and delete it from existence without any possible response. You can't score, contest, or shoot back if you're dead.

I wouldn't. His math is off by a few hundred points as it is. 100 conscripts, 40 guardsmen and 30 autocannons comes out to 1250 points. Also, unless I am missing something critical the shadowsword would need at least three las cannon punches to kill it on a very bad day.

hahahahaha come the apocalypse guys can ally now?

well, there goes that last bit of sanity GW had left

7th edition is the worst edition to grace this game so far

 Sir Arun wrote:
hahahahaha come the apocalypse guys can ally now?

Why shouldn't they have been able to before?

Seriously. It was a silly restriction.

From the Blog for the Blood God Facebook page (rehosted to make life easier when it comes to embedding these pics):

There are new pictures of the new WD in naftka. There's a small red box confirming that even vehicles do score now (Land Raider)

edit: ninja'ed by zion

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Sell your 40k for Warmachine and hordes. The only part of this thread worth reading at this point is the first post.

Yes, indeed! Better get you models up for sale on e-bay ASAP, before everyone else realises that the end of WH40k is upon them!

You might have to offer lower prices, but it's better to get something for them now than nothing at all in a few weeks.

Especially if you happen to play orks and live in the UK!