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.

Hello everyone,

To make a long story short I despise the new Necron codex, despite having over 12k worth of points of necrons, and was thinking about making some changes back to the old codex. Mainly going back to the old, not broken or overpowered, reanimation protocols, and wanted to know if there was any way that it could be thought of as me trying to abuse rules or something. For the record I am not ever going to use the new crypteks, formations, or any kind of res orb, I'm also not concerned with tournament play or the LGS not letting me. Just wanted to know if there is anyway it could be considered abusive or broken.

Thank you very much

Without oldstyle res orbs, RP was kinda naff, to be honest, so...

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Without oldstyle res orbs, RP was kinda naff, to be honest, so...

That sort of is the point, one the major issues I have with the code is that necrons are absurdly tough which is not enjoyable for my opponents. Which to be honest is my primary concern


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I take it then that no one can think of a way for it to be abusive, which is great should make it a lot easier to convince my opponent to play it that way

I haven't gotten many games in against the new 'crons yet, but are you sure you really need to go back to the old rules? I mean, I miss the old rules because being able to deny reanimation by clearing out an entire squad was a neat mechanic, but are the new rules really that scary?

As players we dealt with ye-old 4+ FNP MEQ armies in 5th edition. It was sort of comparable to the new 'cron durability levels. And if you don't use the +1 RP formation(s?), then you basically just have a meq army with 5+ feel no pain (that can't be denied), right?

I don't have enough games unver my belt to say one way or the other whether I feel new RP are over the top, but I do have enough experience with the game to know that people tend to complain about every new book when it first comes out. Except orks. Poor orks.

I've had more than one opponent tell me that while the new RP was more powerful, they prefered it over the old RP.

They didn't like "dead" models popping back up, after they "killed" them, and prefered the new style of simply shrugging off the wounds.

I'd be all for playing a cron player with old RP rules. They were not only fluffy, but opened up the possible tactic of focus firing to deny RP, much how nids give you the possible tactic of focusing on synapse. There was flavor not only in how the army played, but how it felt to play AGAINST.

I think that anyone who prefers old RP instinctively realizes this, and it is a definite sign of a player who values the game experience over winning. Aka the cool guys.