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 would say just get rid of instant death by double str entirely. Not just for special character/ HQ models, but also units like footslogging nobs and tyranid warriors are just considered completely useless compared to an equal points in one wound models from the same armies. Ultimately people ARE going to take str 8+, vs people MIGHT take dedicated anti-infantry weapon, and those units that don't have the benefit of 5+ toughness and/or +2 or better saves are just naturally cost ineffective. It's even encouraged with Slay the Warlord, it's more to your benefit to go out of the way to kill your enemy's leader over anything else, even if killing him doesn't actually do anything else. So you have this situation where people are hiding their warlords in the back, when in the setting these characters are meant to be leading from the front with their royal guard, not cowering behind a wall of expendibles.

I'm not against weapons with Instant death, like force weapons or the hex rifle. These have actual drawbacks, since they're rarer, more expensive, and require more thought that "I shoved a melta squad in a drop pod and now your HQ is dead". D weapons shouldn't change, but they also shouldn't be in standard 40k.

I know some people want to keep that stuff around because it's more realistic, but I'm not sure if realism really helps in this instance

EW is one thing keeping assault based armies in the game. It's really not that hard to kill a T4-5 model with up to four wounds. I'd love for synapse to provide an EW bubble like it used to do.

Loathe it, hate it, can't stand, its almost on par with anything related to Orks.

Get rid of EW entirely. I don't care how heroic you are, if you take a direct hit from a tank's main gun you're dead. In fact, I'd even change the instant death rules to ignore toughness. Any weapon with STR 8 or higher is instant death to all infantry, period. Riding a bike shouldn't change the fact that you're dead in one hit.

This would require a massive change in point cost for so many units and further push the game to favor MC/GMCs. Not to mention steal one more aspect of fluff from the table top. The background makes it clear that some warriors are that tough and stubborn to keep going through pain and loss. EW to is something that can't be separated from the universe.

Stubborness won't help you when you've repainted the battlefield with well, you.

The way I have interpreted EW was as an indicator of toughness/elusiveness that doesn't compromise basic stat rules to accommodate. As an example, look at the Eldar Phoenix Lords. All of them are the epitome of their respective aspects who spiritually subsume the spirit of whatever Exarch found their armor to become reborn. In this instance, EW represents the undying spirit refusing to give in. Should such a spirit be snuffed by one shot that happens to be S8+? That doesn't represent a very impressive legendary character. You could improve the T value of the model to 6+ in order to avoid the most popular means of IDing a character (S6, S8 or S10), but then that deviates from the racial background of Eldar. Another approach could be granting more Wounds to the model, but that gets out of hand, as well, since a player can just tank up front, make most of the saves and take names rather than strategically advancing up the field as a spirit of a particular Aspect shrine would've done before becoming a Phoenix Lord. In the end, EW keeps everything balanced: you have a character with reasonable Toughness consistent with the racial profile it represents without too many Wounds to make it imbalanced.

The Solitaire was mentioned earlier as another example of "Why that?". In the Solitaire's case it's a matter of elusiveness. The low T is consistent with the racial profile. The inordinately high Initiative, Attacks, WS and BS represent the favored touch of the only surviving Eldar god still out and about in return for sacrificing his (or her) life to Slaanesh when s/he passes on. As a devout follower of the Laughing God, he's given a 3++ save w/ a low T giving it a fighting chance to dodge all those Bolter shots, but not too great to make it unfair. But to have one stray Scatter Laser shot take him out all at once? Not very impressive. So the Solitaire is given EW to represent his elusive nature, but he has only W3 to keep it within reason.

I like the amount of EW in the game right now. It used to be worse (remember old Synapse and Daemon rules?). The only characters who have it are those who have the fluff to back it up without breaking the game. The fact Gargantuans can lose up to 3 Wounds vs ID causing strikes is a balancing mechanism that plays into the blatant benefit those models have: inordinately high Wound counts. Give them no other effect from ID causing weapons and you wouldn't see many Gargantuans die at all, not to mention they have inordinately high Toughness to make small arms fire not matter at all. There's a lot of real estate to strike when shooting ID weaponry, so you're going to see meat fall in massive chunks. Elusiveness and small stature makes it harder to get off such a massive strike on a smaller target, but small arms fire shot in volume should and does hit and cause damage to them. Not so the Big Guys.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
The background makes it clear that some warriors are that tough and stubborn to keep going through pain and loss.

Which is stupid background. No amount of toughness and stubbornness will keep you alive if a melta shot vaporizes your body.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tropic Thunder wrote:
Should such a spirit be snuffed by one shot that happens to be S8+?

Of course it should. One of the best parts of the tabletop game is heroic characters dying to random tank shots from across the table. In the grim darkness of the future there is no heroic survival against all odds, there is only anonymous death in the brutal meat grinder of attrition warfare.

Let's play "spot the imperial guard players". I imagine it's a lot easier to want the ability to kill tough enemies with ease when you pay little for your own HQs, and can take the highest quantity of high strength weapons.

While 40k is GRIM and DARK (which is two big reasons why most of us are here), It's also a character driven story. This is particularly true with armies like Chaos and Orks, whom entire structure is based around these powerful personalities, holding them together long enough to get something done. And while the idea "You will not be remembered in this time of untold war" is extremely important to the setting, it can be really contrived when you get down to specifics. How, exactly, did your guardsman with a meltagun saunter up to my guy and not die a million times before then? Or, why are you throwing all your artillery at one person and not at the army that's about to tear you to shreds?

Of course I care more about ID and how poorly it works mechanically. As I mentioned some units rely on more wounds to be tough against anti-infantry but no one bothers with anti-infantry anyway. All models should be viable and not the wargame equivalent of the "giant glowly 'feth me' sign" that special characters would be if they die to anything stronger than a hard breeze, And I'm particularly against Peregrine's idea of making high strength weapon able to kill anything they hit because that makes anti tank weapon the even more "anti-everything" weapon than they already are.

I think maybe eternal warrior might work better if it only came into play during 1 vs 1 challenges to cater for their exceptional skill in combat, e.g. Commander Dante's years of experience enabling him to just avoid the killing blow. Those EW characters are still susceptible to instant death firepower during the shooting phase etc.

What do you think?


Oh and I agree that the likes of Kharn and Typhus etc should have EW. The fact that they are alive after all those years of constant battle shows they are very tough to kill.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
I imagine it's a lot easier to want the ability to kill tough enemies with ease when you pay little for your own HQs, and can take the highest quantity of high strength weapons.

So don't over-pay for your HQs. Nobody is forcing you to take a 250+ point HQ.

How, exactly, did your guardsman with a meltagun saunter up to my guy and not die a million times before then?

Because a million other guardsmen died attempting the shot, and there are a million more in reserve in case that one fails.

Or, why are you throwing all your artillery at one person and not at the army that's about to tear you to shreds?

I'm not throwing all of my artillery at them. I'm throwing some at them, some at the rest of their army, some more at the army, a random shot at the character, etc. There's plenty of artillery for everyone.

 Peregrine wrote:
Get rid of EW entirely. I don't care how heroic you are, if you take a direct hit from a tank's main gun you're dead. In fact, I'd even change the instant death rules to ignore toughness. Any weapon with STR 8 or higher is instant death to all infantry, period. Riding a bike shouldn't change the fact that you're dead in one hit.

At the very least, I agree that bikes shouldn't improve a model's toughness vs ID. Honestly, I'm not sure they should improve a model's toughness at all.

 Peregrine wrote:
I'm not throwing all of my artillery at them. I'm throwing some at them, some at the rest of their army, some more at the army, a random shot at the character, etc. There's plenty of artillery for everyone.

EDIT: One thing I keep hearing is that Eternal Warrior represents a model's spirit or will to keep going or somesuch. But, to me, Eternal Warrior doesn't fit this at all. It seems an enduring spirit/will should be represented by FNP or an extra wound - something that will let the model keep going even after others have collapsed in exhaustion/pain or died of their wounds. What it shouldn't do is let the model keep going after being scattered over a wide area.

I'd have also thought that would suit 40k's Grimdark feel a lot more - an enduring spirit can only get you so far.

Agree with the obvious point that a man-size model should never be able to survive several lascannon/battlecannon/eaten by monster attacks and keep going. However this would need addressing by lower points for these characters, more for big guns, and maybe hqs being focused for support more than their combat ability.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
I imagine it's a lot easier to want the ability to kill tough enemies with ease when you pay little for your own HQs, and can take the highest quantity of high strength weapons.

So don't over-pay for your HQs. Nobody is forcing you to take a 250+ point HQ.

I guess that would depend on how you define "forced". There are HQs that cost 250 points or more, so if I wanted to use those models, I don't have a cheaper option (I COULD call my generic warboss "ghazghkull thraka" but he'll never really be Ghazghkull Mag Uruk Thraka).

More importantly, for a lot of armies a barebones HQ model is also a useless one. For around 60 (usually more) points the only thing they bring to the table normally is a better leadership score and a better WS/BS, but they would only have a knife and a pistol which is not doing anything (particularly if he's hiding in the back to avoid giving Slay the Warlord). So I want to get him a better gun and a power weapon so he's not just trying to punch guys to death, some added toughness so he doesn't just fall over to bolters, something that makes him fast enough that he won't just die on the way to the party and perhaps something that makes him more than just a beat stick. So terminator armor + a vehicle or a bike and a power weapon will set me back +75 point and then something like a chaos mark or a boss pole or if you're willing to shell out for a chapter master for the orbital bombardment. And even that is based on taking cheap stuff and emperor forbid I take a better melee weapon or a better vehicle or a relic that'll make the model actually useful at the job it's suppose to do but now costs 150-200 points. And that's before considering what squad I would want to put them in to get the most out of their abilities.

And this is all very different from a company command squad or a tau ethereal, who cost 60 and 50 points respectively, and is useful without any further investment. Maybe this is a problem more specificly with how GW treats beatstick HQ units, but right now it's basicly a choice between a kinda expensive guy who might be good at what he's suppose to do vs a cheap one who definitely isn't. (or the third choice, taking something that's BS like Chapter Master Smashfether or Flyrants or psykers with Invisibility, which everyone agrees is cheese but you take them away what exactly do we have left?)

And I know you understand this, since CCS do get expensive and you've probably used Tau commanders before which have to buy their weapons as well, but the difference is that you can just hide the CCS or a buff-mander in the back of an army without any loss of effectiveness to your army. And not everyone can, or wants to, play that way.

How, exactly, did your guardsman with a meltagun saunter up to my guy and not die a million times before then?

Because a million other guardsmen died attempting the shot, and there are a million more in reserve in case that one fails.

And they're all armed with meltaguns?

Here's thing: If you did have to throw a million guardsman to kill my guy, I would be fine with that. My character dying is not what I have a problem with. That's just part of the game. As long as I feel like it's a good death, being forgotten in the time of untold billions is okay because at least it's my story to tell. It's dying like a chump that I have a problem. it's being the gag kill in someone else story I don't like. And then that makes me the chump. And you can say be smart about it, but in reality there's no way to stop it. If you want to kill my HQ, there's no way to stop it. Maybe I can make them a less appealing target by putting him in a large squad of chaff, but if all you need is that 1/3 chance of a hit on the scatter die and I'm dead then it's very hard to believe you'll ever pay more that the cost of the special character

(although I think you've said you're against 6th/7th edition style wound allocation, so I'm not sure if you include that with barrage blasts, so *shrug*)

Or, why are you throwing all your artillery at one person and not at the army that's about to tear you to shreds?

I'm not throwing all of my artillery at them. I'm throwing some at them, some at the rest of their army, some more at the army, a random shot at the character, etc. There's plenty of artillery for everyone.

Cute. And again, if this was represented on the table, I wouldn't have a problem. When all you need is a lucky hit with a demolisher cannon, or a single squad of melta vets, that's not really what you're describing

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
. And not everyone can, or wants to, play that way.

So don't. Man up and take a risk.

Sorry but as a DE player I have no sympathy whatsoever. You think you have it rough? I'm paying barely less points than you for a T3 "beatstick" HQ with crap weapons, useless armour and an invulnerable save that's lost the first time it's failed (assuming the HQ isn't paste anyway). Other HQ options include a T3 Succubus who doesn't even get a save outside of combat, or a T4 Haemonculus with only FNP to protect him. And you're complaining that your T4 2+/3+ character still isn't durable enough?

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

Cute. And again, if this was represented on the table, I wouldn't have a problem. When all you need is a lucky hit with a demolisher cannon, or a single squad of melta vets, that's not really what you're describing

Those melta vets or demolisher cannon still has to get through both the rest of your squad and your invulnerable save.

And, again, see above. At least it takes a meltagun or demolisher cannon to ID your guy - mine can be insta-killed my a Multilaser or Thunderfire Cannon.

Well

1: I don't play space marines, I play orks, so the best invulv save I get is +5 (or +2 for one phase with Thraka). And before you say "but warbosses are T5!", that post is based off of Peregrine's idea of making 8+ str weapons ID everyone regardless of toughness. I know full well that I don't give two gak about instant death due to that t5 and I would like to keep it that way.

2:I completely agree that DE have it bad, and if anything what I want (removing ID from double str) benefits you more so than anyone else. I DON'T like the situation now where people feel like they NEED to have 2+/3++ or better or their character isn't worth it, I would prefer that isn't the case

At this point I just want to taunt the DEldar player with three words. "Mantle of Ophelia".

Because... yes. I don't object to Eternal Warrior inherently. I just think that it should be the preserve of relics, magic items and supernatural effects.

A Daemon should have Eternal Warrior because it can just rebuild its body from the mist you just turned it into. The Mantle of Ophelia should grant Eternal Warrior because it carries with it the spirit of a saint who survived Chaos Champions, artillery barrages, heavy weapons fire, and then was killed by a lasgun.

Marneus Calgar should not have Eternal Warrior, because he's just a bionic Space Marine. If anything, he should be vulnerable to Melta because of all the metal.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
1: I don't play space marines, I play orks, so the best invulv save I get is +5 (or +2 for one phase with Thraka).

Sorry. Although, your talk of taking terminator armour in the post above did rather imply marines.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
At this point I just want to taunt the DEldar player with three words. "Mantle of Ophelia".

If you really want to taunt me with something, try the Living Saint. It's one more Jump HQ than we get...

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Marneus Calgar should not have Eternal Warrior, because he's just a bionic Space Marine. If anything, he should be vulnerable to Melta because of all the metal.

 vipoid wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
1: I don't play space marines, I play orks, so the best invulv save I get is +5 (or +2 for one phase with Thraka).

Sorry. Although, your talk of taking terminator armour in the post above did rather imply marines.

No worries I originally had "Terminator armor/megaarmor," but when I rewrote the sentence I forgot the second part. And I think it's fair to say most people just assume other people play space marines, since most people do play space marines to some degree.

I did also miss one of your points, so:

. And not everyone can, or wants to, play that way.

So don't. Man up and take a risk.

I do take the risk, because at the end of the day I usually do like to play a foot slogging mega warboss or SAG big mek, but at the end of the day I still feel like i'm paying more for a risky unit vs someone who's playing less without that risk

HoundsofDemos wrote:
This would require a massive change in point cost for so many units and further push the game to favor MC/GMCs. Not to mention steal one more aspect of fluff from the table top. The background makes it clear that some warriors are that tough and stubborn to keep going through pain and loss. EW to is something that can't be separated from the universe.

Considering MC/GMC cost more than most units price wise, I can get behind GW doing this.

EW still has a use in today's meta, albeit a slim one. I blame the insertion of Apocalypse into standard games and devolving all responsibilities of rules to the players. You could probably make EW have an effect on the tabletop, if you leave all your Destroyer weapons and spam lists at home.

Luke, you can have a 4++ or 3++, but the former is a relic KFF, the other is a 6 on a Perils chart. I wish Cybork Bodies were what they were before 7th.

The new IA:11 taunts me as a DE player tbf..£50 to play good DE? Uhhh, it's bad enough paying £30 for a Codex that rapidly aged.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

I do take the risk, because at the end of the day I usually do like to play a foot slogging mega warboss or SAG big mek, but at the end of the day I still feel like i'm paying more for a risky unit vs someone who's playing less without that risk

A few points on this note:

I think some cheap support HQs (CCS, Ethereal) aren't too bad, because they're at least fragile and useless in combat. I mean, even at the back of the field, a CCS is still a unit of 5 T3 models - one barrage weapon or a few Scatter Laser shots and the squad is gone.

However, then you have stuff like Jetbike Farseers and Tau Commanders. The former is an absurdly cheap and mobile Lv3 psyker, with built-in protection from Perils, an optional reroll, and access to the best psychic lores in the game (including the obscene Eldar one). The Tau Commander is stupidly durable for his cost and can either buff his unit with rerolls to-hit and Ignore Cover, or just shoot units to death himself.

If anything EW should be beefed up due to the uber shooty nature of the game now. I'd love to see some form of protection from SD.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If anything EW should be beefed up due to the uber shooty nature of the game now. I'd love to see some form of protection from SD.

I agree with this. Maybe imposing a -1 penalty to the Strength D or Stomp roll. Maybe even changed to:

"Whether by alien technology, being insubstantial, hyper-regeneration, or just plain old luck, this model is able to turn even the most grievous injuries into glancing blows. No weapon may ever cause more than 1 wound to a model with Eternal Warrior, regardless of how many additional wounds that weapon can cause, or whether it has the Instant Death special rule (such as a Strength D weapon, or Rad Ammo)."

 Yarium wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If anything EW should be beefed up due to the uber shooty nature of the game now. I'd love to see some form of protection from SD.

I agree with this. Maybe imposing a -1 penalty to the Strength D or Stomp roll. Maybe even changed to:

"Whether by alien technology, being insubstantial, hyper-regeneration, or just plain old luck, this model is able to turn even the most grievous injuries into glancing blows. No weapon may ever cause more than 1 wound to a model with Eternal Warrior, regardless of how many additional wounds that weapon can cause, or whether it has the Instant Death special rule (such as a Strength D weapon, or Rad Ammo)."

Actually the spacing and base size for scatbikes is what makes the TFC not so hot against them.

 Frozocrone wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
This would require a massive change in point cost for so many units and further push the game to favor MC/GMCs. Not to mention steal one more aspect of fluff from the table top. The background makes it clear that some warriors are that tough and stubborn to keep going through pain and loss. EW to is something that can't be separated from the universe.

Considering MC/GMC cost more than most units price wise, I can get behind GW doing this.

EW still has a use in today's meta, albeit a slim one. I blame the insertion of Apocalypse into standard games and devolving all responsibilities of rules to the players. You could probably make EW have an effect on the tabletop, if you leave all your Destroyer weapons and spam lists at home.

Luke, you can have a 4++ or 3++, but the former is a relic KFF, the other is a 6 on a Perils chart. I wish Cybork Bodies were what they were before 7th.

The new IA:11 taunts me as a DE player tbf..£50 to play good DE? Uhhh, it's bad enough paying £30 for a Codex that rapidly aged.

The problem is that GMC/MC are often to good for the points you payed for them. wraith knights, broadsides, stormsurges basically have no weakness outside of grav weapons, and if the supremacy armor is a sign of things to come big stompy monsters are only going to get stronger.

Martel732 wrote:
Actually the spacing and base size for scatbikes is what makes the TFC not so hot against them.

Really, honestly not trying to sound mean here; what did what I said have to do with scatbikes and Thunderfire Cannons? I'm not seeing the connection, but maybe I missed something.

I do think the EW should be done away with. Though that is because I feel like instant death should also be done away with. As many have said losing your cool epic hero to one shot to a Demolisher cannot is just not enjoyable. I'd prefer the mechanics be replaced by weapons doing multiple wounds.

So activating a force weapon causes it to do 2 wounds for ever successful to wound roll.

Further for weapon strength once the weapon wounds on 2s for every 2 toughness points lower the defender takes an additional wound.

For example S8 wounds

T 10 6+
T 9 5+
T 8 4+
T 7 3+
T 6 2+
T 5 2+
T 4 2+ (causes 2 wounds)
T 3 2+ (Causes 2 Wounds)
T 2 2 + (causes 3 wounds)
T 1 2 + (causes 3 wounds)

OR something like that.

This would actually make St 10 weapons better against most MCs as they would deal 2 wounds against T6.

Furthermore it means S8 still instant kills most Lower toughness models by doing 2 wounds, but most expensive characters have 3 or more meaning it would take 2 hits to finish them off.

It would also improve durability of T 3 heros as S6 would no longer do double wounds to those models.

So essentially a better way to say this might be

S+2 = wounds on 2s
S + 4 = Double wounds
S + 6 = Tripple wounds
S + 8 = Quadruple wounds

This also makes odd strength weapons better in comparison for doing extra damage (old double out rule meant that S6 and 7 and 8 and 9 were the same for extra damage) Now S7 does 2 wounds to T 3 but S 6 does not, and S9 does double wounds to S5 where before it had no special bonus against those models.

As for S D just make it count as S11 for wounding purposes, and remove the random roll for how many wounds it does, because that is dumb anyway. Meaning it would do 2 wounds to T6-7, 3 to 4 and 5, etc.

In the grim darkness of the future there is no heroic survival against all odds, there is only anonymous death in the brutal meat grinder of attrition warfare.

What a great line

 Furyou Miko wrote:


A Daemon should have Eternal Warrior because it can just rebuild its body from the mist you just turned it into. The Mantle of Ophelia should grant Eternal Warrior because it carries with it the spirit of a saint who survived Chaos Champions, artillery barrages, heavy weapons fire, and then was killed by a lasgun.

So... what you're saying is that models with the mantle of ophelia should suffer Instant Death against any unsaved wounds caused by lasguns?

unless you get rid of instant death, getting rid of EW would require a lot of HQs to have significant price drops. What is the main critique of almost every tooled up HQ or combat beast. It's usually that they are to fragile because they can be doubled out by a powerfist