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.

So, we all know, he who brings Skyhammer Melta wins, but how about instead of having AP, have Save MODIFIERS, and move Saves to a D10, so MEQ's would have something like a 4+ on a D10.
For instance;
I fire a Meltagun S8 Ap1 (Decrease Armour Save by 6 - weapons original AP , so a decrease of 5 to a maximum of 6, i'm calling this a Armour Rend) at full range at a pathfinder, so one shot on a Pathfinder.
Pathfinder makes one 6+ save - BUT, if what was an AP1 (Now a rending 5) weapon rolls a 10, you move to their invuln on a D10 again.

What do you think? Some weapons would need to be changed to fit, but overall would this work for 'fixing' sheer AP1 and 2?

So, basically similar to the Rend mechanic in Age of Sigmar?

For as much as people do the Q.Q dance about AoS, Rend is a decent mechanic. For one, doing something like that could make things like Flak Armor and Kabalite Armor actually relevant again - not just for AP1/2, but also for lesser AP values - so Marine Power Armour wouldn't be as effective against an autocannon as against a lasgun.

The thought had also occurred to me to have Armor Rating and Armor Penetration as 1-10 stats like Strength and Toughness, and have your final save number based on a chart. I'm not crazy about piles of charts, but I'd be willing to try it. The chart would basically work as follows: equal AR and AP, save is a 4+. For each point by which AP exceeds AR, reduce the save by 1, to a minimum of none, and for each point by which AR exceeds AP, increase the save by 1 to a maximum of 2+/4+. No matter how good your armor, you can never be totally immune (that's what Toughness is about). Really big differences would allow rerolls in much the same way as high Ballistic Skill. We'd probably need a new term other than AP, because "new" AP1 is the worst possible AP, while "current" AP1 is the best possible.

or just stick to the current system and have every codex tone down the massive number of AP weapons we have in the game currently. Its at the point where my Ork 6+ Tshirt save is almost forgotten because I know i'll never use it.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
or just stick to the current system and have every codex tone down the massive number of AP weapons we have in the game currently. Its at the point where my Ork 6+ Tshirt save is almost forgotten because I know i'll never use it.

Its to the point now where I literally forget that orks even HAVE armor saves TBH

 Ghazkuul wrote:
or just stick to the current system and have every codex tone down the massive number of AP weapons we have in the game currently. Its at the point where my Ork 6+ Tshirt save is almost forgotten because I know i'll never use it.

You can still save against Space Marines in close combat. AP- is still not bypassing orc armor. Because apparently only some Space Marines carry Chainswords.

Actually, that does underscore one big complaint: the difference between a 5+ save and a 4+ save. It's not "make the save 33% of the time versus make the save 50% of the time" - it's "make the save 50% of the time versus usually don't even get to attempt it", because most guns have AP5! In fact, if I'm counting right, the only infantry guns that don't are lasguns, devourers, shoota/sluggas and tesla carbines.

Now, should bolters, pulse rifles, shuriken catapults and so forth do a better job of defeating armor than lasguns? Yeah, probably. Should they just ignore infantry armor, up until you get into stuff that's heavy enough, at which point it's just as good at stopping bolters as lasguns? That seems illogical to me. It also seems to have serious balance implications, too - see the recent threads about tweaking cover, likely inspired by similar issues.

Why do I suck for liking a method of negating saves?

Am I not allowed to appreciate the method?

What if I invented a new method? Would I still suck?

I had experimented with something in the past.
-Weapons have save modifiers.
-Some armors have a Reinforce rating, which ignores that many levels of Save Modifier.
-Rending weapons ignore Reinforce on rolls of 6 to-wound.

The idea was to separate armors which are heavy-yet-crude (like Eavy/Mega Armour), versus lightweight but efficient (like Tau nanocrystalline or Eldar mesh). Same way that a Kevlar vest would blunt a pistol round but be useless versus a shiv, etc.

It's cute, but adds more book keeping, and 40k already has a lot of areas where it could be cleaned up first before adding in a resurrection of 2e-esque save modifiers (hit modifiers, etc).

Save modifiers don't work with a D6. You need to be rolling 2D6 or D10s or D20s.

You could roll saves on 2d6 (using the best) and AP could reduce the number of dice you use by 1, if it applies.

It would probably take some calibrating, but could be worth trying.