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.

 455_PWR wrote:
Everything looks good so far, except for no codex books. Codex books are great for old and new fluff, art, paint scheme ideas, and of course rules. They have been a staple of 40k since... practically forever. I like aos rules being free in an app, and would only like the 40k codex-less rules if they follow suit in a free app and printable formats.

I can see this as what aos has become, where the app is becoming a money drain if you want multiple armies.

New AoS Battletomes are codexes in everything but name, so I wouldn't worry about that. Most likely the initial rules will be free as a get-you-by method, then new codexes will come out over time to flesh out factions.

 Kanluwen wrote:

How many times do you need to check wargear to see what it is?

You don't "memorize" these things anyways. Or I guess I should say most people don't.

Almost never, I have my codices memorized. I only check for my opponent's sake, or if it's a new book.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Except what you posted really had nothing to do with templates. You just used the templates being moved to random as an excuse to springboard into a complaint about the CRS.

The shift from templates->"randumb" as you call it in AoS is actually a bit better.
You pick a point either on the board or in an enemy unit or an enemy unit itself. You then roll to see what gets Hit/Wounded. Some of these have chain attacks, essentially, where it expands outward.

As someone said, no need for finger-twister. No arguments about "Oh the template wasn't really touching him" or "He's on a different level!" or any of that crap.

The "different level" thing is addressed in the rulebook, no? I can have legitimate complaints about random shot counts, and still talk about templates being replaced with more random shot counts.
A relatively stable system with simple methods of calculation, which also provides flavor for the game, being replaced with a system based on arbitrary randomness = bad, regardless of how fast the system with more random works. Replacing a stock, simple template with a system that requires measuring outward consumes more time measuring the circle radius around the point, and also allows "fudging" the measurement just as bad as partial template coverage does.

Another consequence of removing templates and going with a random shot number is that certain weapons will suddenly become much better against tough single-model units like vehicles and monstrous creatures unless they make some sort of ruling that the weapon only does multiple hits if there are multiple models in the target unit or something inane like that.

For example, a demolisher template hitting a vehicle has a respectable chance of taking it out if it doesn't scatter, but holy heck, if you get d6 S10 AP 2 Ordinance shots against even a landraider, you're in a completely different postal code of destructive capability. . .

I'll miss my templates, I really will. Especially my flamer template. (Heavy Flamer templates are, in my opinion, so much fun.)

That said, I won't mourn their removal long if they are removed in lieu of a faster and better method of determining wounds.

Also, the templates will still see use in Necro... I mean, Shadow War Armageddon.

I do hope to see a small buff to the Hand Flamers ability to hurt more targets as well (speaking as a Blood Angels player here), as the weapon is a really cool/fluffy piece of kit, but is nigh useless against anything but GEQ/Xenos.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 Red__Thirst wrote:
I'll miss my templates, I really will. Especially my flamer template. (Heavy Flamer templates are, in my opinion, so much fun.)

That said, I won't mourn their removal long if they are removed in lieu of a faster and better method of determining wounds.

Also, the templates will still see use in Necro... I mean, Shadow War Armageddon.

I do hope to see a small buff to the Hand Flamers ability to hurt more targets as well (speaking as a Blood Angels player here), as the weapon is a really cool/fluffy piece of kit, but is nigh useless against anything but GEQ/Xenos.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

It would be fun if you could charge, shoot your hand flamer and then start hacking away. It's not like a marine would fear that thing.

 Verviedi wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

How many times do you need to check wargear to see what it is?

You don't "memorize" these things anyways. Or I guess I should say most people don't.

Almost never, I have my codices memorized. I only check for my opponent's sake, or if it's a new book.

So what does a Recon Drone have on it?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Except what you posted really had nothing to do with templates. You just used the templates being moved to random as an excuse to springboard into a complaint about the CRS.

The shift from templates->"randumb" as you call it in AoS is actually a bit better.
You pick a point either on the board or in an enemy unit or an enemy unit itself. You then roll to see what gets Hit/Wounded. Some of these have chain attacks, essentially, where it expands outward.

As someone said, no need for finger-twister. No arguments about "Oh the template wasn't really touching him" or "He's on a different level!" or any of that crap.

The "different level" thing is addressed in the rulebook, no? I can have legitimate complaints about random shot counts, and still talk about templates being replaced with more random shot counts.

Random shot counts != "templates being replaced".

A relatively stable system with simple methods of calculation, which also provides flavor for the game, being replaced with a system based on arbitrary randomness = bad, regardless of how fast the system with more random works. Replacing a stock, simple template with a system that requires measuring outward consumes more time measuring the circle radius around the point, and also allows "fudging" the measurement just as bad as partial template coverage does.

How in the world are templates "a relatively stable system"?

You place them, then you roll for Scatter in most cases.

Also, it's a lot harder to "fudge" the measurement whenthe rules for the attack say something to the effect of:

Units(or in some cases, units) within 12 inches of the designated point suffer X amount of wounds.

Is a unit or model within 12 inches of the designated point?
Yes?
They suffer X amount of Wounds.
No?
Nothing happens.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

How many times do you need to check wargear to see what it is?

You don't "memorize" these things anyways. Or I guess I should say most people don't.

Almost never, I have my codices memorized. I only check for my opponent's sake, or if it's a new book.

So what does a Recon Drone have on it?

Homing beacon, burstcannon, positional relay, notable for having two wounds, Pathfinder only. And IIRC it can become a turret on a Devilfish, although I've never and most like will never use the model so I don't know exactly how it works.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except what you posted really had nothing to do with templates. You just used the templates being moved to random as an excuse to springboard into a complaint about the CRS.

The shift from templates->"randumb" as you call it in AoS is actually a bit better.
You pick a point either on the board or in an enemy unit or an enemy unit itself. You then roll to see what gets Hit/Wounded. Some of these have chain attacks, essentially, where it expands outward.

As someone said, no need for finger-twister. No arguments about "Oh the template wasn't really touching him" or "He's on a different level!" or any of that crap.

The "different level" thing is addressed in the rulebook, no? I can have legitimate complaints about random shot counts, and still talk about templates being replaced with more random shot counts.

Random shot counts != "templates being replaced".

Again, it's an illustration of how randomness for the sake of randomness harms the game, not a direct comparison.


Addendum

A relatively stable system with simple methods of calculation, which also provides flavor for the game, being replaced with a system based on arbitrary randomness = bad, regardless of how fast the system with more random works. Replacing a stock, simple template with a system that requires measuring outward consumes more time measuring the circle radius around the point, and also allows "fudging" the measurement just as bad as partial template coverage does.

How in the world are templates "a relatively stable system"?

You place them, then you roll for Scatter in most cases.

Also, it's a lot harder to "fudge" the measurement whenthe rules for the attack say something to the effect of:

Units(or in some cases, units) within 12 inches of the designated point suffer X amount of wounds.

Templates are a stable system because they follow a simple formula. They are a set width, with a clearly defined central point, and a tool to help them scatter properly. Additionally, scatter allows them to hit units other than the ones intended, which is flavorful.

Is a unit or model within 12 inches of the designated point?
Yes?
They suffer X amount of Wounds.
No?
Nothing happens.

 NivlacSupreme wrote:


It would be fun if you could charge, shoot your hand flamer and then start hacking away. It's not like a marine would fear that thing.

Being able to use it in conjunction with assault would be thematically epic, I do agree. I have one on my Blood Angels captain model and did it mostly for the rule of cool (I love the look of flamer weapons, personally) and always lamented the rules for them were less than impressive.

Always felt like the hand flamer should have been ST:4, AP:6 or ST:4: AP:-. That makes it hit like a bolt pistol vs. most targets. If a model has two of them (paired hand flamers) then they would get to re-roll their to-wound roll or, if they do away with templates as it seems they are, re-roll the to-hit the D6 or increase it to 2D6 instead.

Lots of options, and I'm looking forward to seeing where they go with it.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I'm not sure if I can buy templates being removed just yet. People say when WHFB switched to AoS it had no effect on gameplay, but lets be honest here, there wasn't a whole lot of template weapons in that game compared to 40k, not even close. And people saying 'well just remove superheavies hurr hurr hurr' yea that's not happening either. I like to think GW knows how fun templates are.

A bunch of podcasts saying the same thing doesn't mean confirmed. You could make a pretty safe 'rumor' just by using any AoS rule because everyone is drinking the age of emperor kool-aid anyways.

There's a stormcast ability (I think it's for dracoths) that lets you nominate a point on the board and roll a d6 for all units within 2" of that point, and on a 4+ they suffer mortal wounds. It works really well, and is quick and easy to perform too. It's a great stand in for a template ability.

I'll say this too. One of the advantages of warscrolls is that you can have different answers to the same question. A shield carried by one faction will not do the same things as a shield carried by another faction. It really makes units feel unique.

 455_PWR wrote:


Everything looks good so far, except for no codex books. Codex books are great for old and new fluff, art, paint scheme ideas, and of course rules. They have been a staple of 40k since... practically forever. I like aos rules being free in an app, and would only like the 40k codex-less rules if they follow suit in a free app and printable formats.

I can see this as what aos has become, where the app is becoming a money drain if you want multiple armies.

Actually if they do it like AoS it's like the best of both worlds, all the basic rules you need are free to download/in the app and if you want the fluff and pretty pictures you can buy the book (when they get around to it of course, but lately they've been grinding out Battletome like crazy).

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 NivlacSupreme wrote:


It would be fun if you could charge, shoot your hand flamer and then start hacking away. It's not like a marine would fear that thing.

Being able to use it in conjunction with assault would be thematically epic, I do agree. I have one on my Blood Angels captain model and did it mostly for the rule of cool (I love the look of flamer weapons, personally) and always lamented the rules for them were less than impressive.

Always felt like the hand flamer should have been ST:4, AP:6 or ST:4: AP:-. That makes it hit like a bolt pistol vs. most targets. If a model has two of them (paired hand flamers) then they would get to re-roll their to-wound roll or, if they do away with templates as it seems they are, re-roll the to-hit the D6 or increase it to 2D6 instead.

Lots of options, and I'm looking forward to seeing where they go with it.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I have one on my assault captain because I love the thought of him descending from the sky in a hail of flames. After the 5 scouts I have and the 10 from SW my next project is painting up his base and getting 10 sanguinary guard to roll with him. Total overkill and very expensive but really darn cool.

 Verviedi wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

How many times do you need to check wargear to see what it is?

You don't "memorize" these things anyways. Or I guess I should say most people don't.

Almost never, I have my codices memorized. I only check for my opponent's sake, or if it's a new book.

So what does a Recon Drone have on it?

Homing beacon, burstcannon, positional relay, notable for having two wounds, Pathfinder only. And IIRC it can become a turret on a Devilfish, although I've never and most like will never use the model so I don't know exactly how it works.

I have a very distinct feeling you were checking the book.

Fudging measurements is quite easy. I can easily see someone subtly moving the tape to cover more area, or "misjudging" where the point actually is.

: Sorry about the quote failure, it's annoying to do on mobile. I'll edit in quotes as I go.

Quick note...
What you described?
That's not "fudging the measurements".
That's cheating.

"Fudging the measurements" would be something like if you have a weird shaped model that you need to find a good point of reference for.

 NivlacSupreme wrote:


I have one on my assault captain because I love the thought of him descending from the sky in a hail of flames. After the 5 scouts I have and the 10 from SW my next project is painting up his base and getting 10 sanguinary guard to roll with him. Total overkill and very expensive but really darn cool.

Agreed, mine is an assault oriented captain too, typically flanked by an Honor Guard sporting several Storm Shields.

I do want to paint up some Sanguinary Guard in the near future to field with my Captain. They're not the most optimal but they look so damn cool.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

If you play a game against someone who cheats, the game is not at fault, and you need to play different opponents.

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 NivlacSupreme wrote:


I have one on my assault captain because I love the thought of him descending from the sky in a hail of flames. After the 5 scouts I have and the 10 from SW my next project is painting up his base and getting 10 sanguinary guard to roll with him. Total overkill and very expensive but really darn cool.

Agreed, mine is an assault oriented captain too, typically flanked by an Honor Guard sporting several Storm Shields.

I do want to paint up some Sanguinary Guard in the near future to field with my Captain. They're not the most optimal but they look so damn cool.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Thinking about it, we should have been able to bring some of our cool unique stuff in Shadow War. For specialists it could have been Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, Veteran and Terminator. No Sanguinary Priest because they're actually leaders for BA.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

How many times do you need to check wargear to see what it is?

You don't "memorize" these things anyways. Or I guess I should say most people don't.

Almost never, I have my codices memorized. I only check for my opponent's sake, or if it's a new book.

So what does a Recon Drone have on it?

Homing beacon, burstcannon, positional relay, notable for having two wounds, Pathfinder only. And IIRC it can become a turret on a Devilfish, although I've never and most like will never use the model so I don't know exactly how it works.

I have a very distinct feeling you were checking the book.

Fudging measurements is quite easy. I can easily see someone subtly moving the tape to cover more area, or "misjudging" where the point actually is.

: Sorry about the quote failure, it's annoying to do on mobile. I'll edit in quotes as I go.

Quick note...
What you described?
That's not "fudging the measurements".
That's cheating.

"Fudging the measurements" would be something like if you have a weird shaped model that you need to find a good point of reference for.

I know it's cheating. My concern was related to people who would abuse the uncertainty of what model is where to cheat, something that can't be done with the template system (which, granted, has issues, but none too terrible)

Given that 100% of what GW has sad about new40k lines up with Age of Sigmar, it's fairly easy to extrapolate possibilities that would fit in that framework. So we're probably going to see tons and tons of made up rumours, some of which may be right despite being fake.

I don't think anything in that picture sounds crazy, but if I spent ten minutes thinking about how I might represent a given 40k thing in Age of Sigmar terms, I'd probably come up with something​ that sounds really reasonable.

In a lot of areas, the local community needs a purge. The local 40k scene is made up of waac "that guys" who get off crushing new players so they never come back (they actually boisterously brag about beating someone so bad they never come back). So if a mass army invalidation causes them to all rage quit, then the Age of the Emperor can't come soon enough.

With every new edition of 40k, I give the game an honest look and consider getting back in. I'm an AoS fan, but dig the 40k setting way more, so I've never gotten into AoS.

zerosignal wrote:
This sounds rubbish :(
I don't want to see any major changes to the game mechanics, they are fine. Just a little tidying up, and rebalancing, and some better allies/detachments restrictions.

I can't really imagine GW bringing 2nd edition rules back from the dead in Shadow War: Armageddon without them heralding changes for 8th edition.
Going to have to take a look at those 40K 2.5 Edition rules we were working on when 3rd edition came out (which caused our group to quit playing 40K).

 flakpanzer wrote:
I was really hoping for the vehicles to have some combination of the wounds system from AoS, and armor. The rumour means there is no point in trying to maneuver to get a rear shot. I am all for speeding up play, I just really dislike when a lot of the tactical elements of a game are stripped out completely.

Armor Values were just an extension of the Strength vs Toughness wound system without actually saying the were toughnesses higher than 10, so there is no reason why vehicles can't just have toughness and wounds like regular figs and MCs. To explore this, just extend the 3rd edition Strength vs Toughness table past 10 and look at the rolls needed to wound and then compare them to the rolls needed to glance/penetrate armor values. Glance was a new mechanic, but otherwise the rolls needed to wound or glance/penetrate are the same.

T

I could easily see templates being replaced by a mixture of "roll xd6 wounds vs. a unit" and "pick a point on the board, every units (friend or foe) within 2 inches suffers xd6 wounds".

Let's be honest here, the flame and blast templates were not the problem. The problem was with scatter die. It cause a lot of problems in games, especially ones with strangers. I do feel sad that the Flame Template is going to be culled in the move to eliminate scattering blast templates.

If it's even true.

And that's a damned big 'if'....

Also, point to note here: the rumor says that it works like how flamers work in overwatch.

So that would mean that blast weapons hit automatically, a random number of times. They would not be changed to firing a random number of shots.

That would indeed be pretty similar to how they work now. I agree, having them firing a random number of shots would be very strange, but I could probably be OK with auto-hit and then a random number of hits as a streamline/workaround.

I can totally understand the complaint that it reduces the tactics from minute model placement/micromanagement as well as positioning the model firing to get the right number of targets, and at the end of the day I would proooobably miss flamer templates, but scatter dice are incredibly awkward as stated. and slow down the game to a huge degree, as well as making bases matter... after playing AOS I gotta say, not having to think about my models in terms of the bases is fairly refreshing.

The change would basically make blast/template weapons impossible to avoid, but variable in terms of damage, and it would go a long way towards fixing a few old classics like battlecannons and basilisks whose preferred targets tend to be high value units, who subsequently have smaller unit sizes.

the_scotsman wrote:
Also, point to note here: the rumor says that it works like how flamers work in overwatch.

So that would mean that blast weapons hit automatically, a random number of times. They would not be changed to firing a random number of shots.

That would indeed be pretty similar to how they work now. I agree, having them firing a random number of shots would be very strange, but I could probably be OK with auto-hit and then a random number of hits as a streamline/workaround.

I can totally understand the complaint that it reduces the tactics from minute model placement/micromanagement as well as positioning the model firing to get the right number of targets, and at the end of the day I would proooobably miss flamer templates, but scatter dice are incredibly awkward as stated. and slow down the game to a huge degree, as well as making bases matter... after playing AOS I gotta say, not having to think about my models in terms of the bases is fairly refreshing.

The change would basically make blast/template weapons impossible to avoid, but variable in terms of damage, and it would go a long way towards fixing a few old classics like battlecannons and basilisks whose preferred targets tend to be high value units, who subsequently have smaller unit sizes.

We are probably going to have weapons that have a variable amount of attacks and/or damage. They do it in AoS.

 Verviedi wrote:

Spoiler:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Random rolling to know how many dice you need to roll is far more devilish. We're supposed to be getting rid of that, not encouraging it.

I'm not being contrarian here, genuinely asking: why is the random roll of a D6 worse than the random rolling of a scattering template?

A scatter template makes sense, representing a shell possibly missing and hitting something else, in true "This is a giant explosive" fashion. If a Basilisk shell misses, it doesn't just disappear. Random rolls remove the interesting element from this, as the giant shell apparently just vanishes into the aether if it misses, rather than potentially hitting something else.

Now this I understand. I can also appreciate the added flavour and immersion in having a shot scatter onto another unit, but it gets pretty weird with non-barrage blasts that make casualties from different units still be taken from who is closest to the firing unit. I guess it just comes down to personal preference as to which abstractions you're fine with.

I'm for increasing depth, and removing randomness. In my eyes, scattering blasts does a good job of this. Random shots don't. Random shots make me think "GW, are you really telling me that my Stormsurge, connected to dozens of high-tech sensors, doesn't know how many cluster rockets it's firing per turn?"

Ok there I have to ask again, sorry if I'm getting hung up on semantics, but you say "removing randomness" but isn't it basically the exact same amount of randomness, one of them just has an extra die? (Now I'm not asking about 'depth', or the possibility of hitting other units).

Scattering blasts is a situation where removing randomness really can't be done without compromising the system. I can cut out random warlord traits, psychic powers, random stormsurge rockets, the Chaos Boon Table, etc, and replace them with fixed values, true player tactical choice, or in the case of the Chaos Boon Table, an actual useful rule.
Scattering blasts makes sense, as that Basilisk does not have the systems necessary to pinpoint a shell at a rapidly moving target. It is a case where randomness is good, in a sea of terrible randomness.

This whole line of reasoning is terrible.

In AOS you don't roll random hits then roll again to hit. You pick a unit in range or say a warp fire thrower for example, you roll d6 and that is the number of HITS. Your making huge assumptions when you assume that blasts will determin the number then roll to hit, your also assuming how many hits they can generate. For all you know a Basilisk could generate 2d3 auto hits. Either way, this is WAY more efficient then the mess with templates. I am also calling BS on using that Basilisk as an example, I play guard and I can tell you that tank is lucky as all hell if it can find a space with 3 dudes under the template before scattering, slowed. The push for bigger bases and the edition flip flop between placing the blast anywhere to centered over a models base has made a 5 inch diameter blast only capable of fitting 2 guys under the template if they are maxed spaced. Currently the small blast can get 1 guy. The old system has sucked for years, it's more random, time consuming and generates more arguing then nearly any other system. Where was the template originally as you hover it over ambiguously? Are you following the arrow? Are you moving the template only or are you shifting the template in the opposite direction you move the template (I see this in 9/10 games it's not malicious it's a hand eye thing)? Then who is under the template?

Your also ignoring the major fix this has on solo models. Now a flamer toting joe can hose the same idiot captain down with multiple hits, or that vindicator that can only fit a single tervigon under the blast can now blast massive damage out of it.

TLDR; it's not more random it's just not the same. Play with it first.

Well said, Red Corsair. Exalted.

I'm willing to give the new edition of 40k a fair and honest shake over the course of several months, hopefully playing weekly.

I like the concept, and the rumors fix the vast majority of my personal gripes with 40k at present. I'm very much looking forward to seeing the actual rules coming soon.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Awesome, well reasoned and well written post.

Also, I agree. Well said Red Corsair. Well said.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

Spoiler:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Random rolling to know how many dice you need to roll is far more devilish. We're supposed to be getting rid of that, not encouraging it.

I'm not being contrarian here, genuinely asking: why is the random roll of a D6 worse than the random rolling of a scattering template?

A scatter template makes sense, representing a shell possibly missing and hitting something else, in true "This is a giant explosive" fashion. If a Basilisk shell misses, it doesn't just disappear. Random rolls remove the interesting element from this, as the giant shell apparently just vanishes into the aether if it misses, rather than potentially hitting something else.

Now this I understand. I can also appreciate the added flavour and immersion in having a shot scatter onto another unit, but it gets pretty weird with non-barrage blasts that make casualties from different units still be taken from who is closest to the firing unit. I guess it just comes down to personal preference as to which abstractions you're fine with.

I'm for increasing depth, and removing randomness. In my eyes, scattering blasts does a good job of this. Random shots don't. Random shots make me think "GW, are you really telling me that my Stormsurge, connected to dozens of high-tech sensors, doesn't know how many cluster rockets it's firing per turn?"

Ok there I have to ask again, sorry if I'm getting hung up on semantics, but you say "removing randomness" but isn't it basically the exact same amount of randomness, one of them just has an extra die? (Now I'm not asking about 'depth', or the possibility of hitting other units).

Scattering blasts is a situation where removing randomness really can't be done without compromising the system. I can cut out random warlord traits, psychic powers, random stormsurge rockets, the Chaos Boon Table, etc, and replace them with fixed values, true player tactical choice, or in the case of the Chaos Boon Table, an actual useful rule.
Scattering blasts makes sense, as that Basilisk does not have the systems necessary to pinpoint a shell at a rapidly moving target. It is a case where randomness is good, in a sea of terrible randomness.

This whole line of reasoning is terrible.

In AOS you don't roll random hits then roll again to hit. You pick a unit in range or say a warp fire thrower for example, you roll d6 and that is the number of HITS. Your making huge assumptions when you assume that blasts will determin the number then roll to hit, your also assuming how many hits they can generate. For all you know a Basilisk could generate 2d3 auto hits. Either way, this is WAY more efficient then the mess with templates. I am also calling BS on using that Basilisk as an example, I play guard and I can tell you that tank is lucky as all hell if it can find a space with 3 dudes under the template before scattering, slowed. The push for bigger bases and the edition flip flop between placing the blast anywhere to centered over a models base has made a 5 inch diameter blast only capable of fitting 2 guys under the template if they are maxed spaced. Currently the small blast can get 1 guy. The old system has sucked for years, it's more random, time consuming and generates more arguing then nearly any other system. Where was the template originally as you hover it over ambiguously? Are you following the arrow? Are you moving the template only or are you shifting the template in the opposite direction you move the template (I see this in 9/10 games it's not malicious it's a hand eye thing)? Then who is under the template?

Your also ignoring the major fix this has on solo models. Now a flamer toting joe can hose the same idiot captain down with multiple hits, or that vindicator that can only fit a single tervigon under the blast can now blast massive damage out of it.

TLDR; it's not more random it's just not the same. Play with it first.

Great post, and I think you touched on something that bugs me with 40k currently. Vindicators are better at hunting large groups instead of big single creatures. A change like this would make them viable at both, and much deadlier to MCs.

Hence many wounds, I think some models in AoS have like 15?

also d6 only averages to 3.5 and it's a massive nerf for a demolischer who can hit up to 9-10 models a shot with a large blast.

Agreed with the praise for Red Corsair's points.

Not to mention that with the warscroll system it's very easy to simulate the inaccurate randomness of say, an Earthshaker shell, in a way that doesn't constrain other types of blasts. Say:

incoming!
On a To Hit roll of 1, the shell has scattered from it's intended target and now threatens friend and foe alike. Choose a random unit, friendly or enemy, within 6" of the target. That unit suffers D3 wounds.

Adjust wording and numbers to taste.

What if the "Codices still valid" thing just meant that the fluff will still be valid?