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.

The pistol rules changes the dynamic of assaults.

You'll always shoot with pistols before assaulting. You'll want to, and give you reason to try and assault without using Advance.

You'll lose the bonus attack EVERY assault phase, including the enemy's.

You get to shoot the pistol during the assault in your own shooting phase - pistol weapons for non Independent Characters are usually as good as their melee attacks (but not always). You may cause morale to trigger in that shooting phase, leading to extra casualties (?) before the assault phase rolls around.

Some weapons might be considered Pistols for certain units.
This would be huge for Terminators if Storm Bolters were considered pistols for them.

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone else notice that your average Space Marine will not be able to use Cover against Lascannons?

How do you figure? If we assume soft cover (such as wooded terrain) gives +1 to saves for infantry, then a Space Marine in a wood would have a save of (3+ +1 -3) or 5+ save, just like they currently have.

An Ork on the other hand (or Guardsman for that matter) gets screwed with cover.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone else notice that your average Space Marine will not be able to use Cover against Lascannons?

How do you figure? If we assume soft cover (such as wooded terrain) gives +1 to saves for infantry, then a Space Marine in a wood would have a save of (3+ +1 -3) or 5+ save, just like they currently have.

An Ork on the other hand (or Guardsman for that matter) gets screwed with cover.

Well, we still don't have rules for all terrain yet. We may very well see different types of terrain with different cover save mods. And I would imagine Ork and Guard players would be more than happy to eat a lascannon shot at one of their blobs, instead of directed into one of their vehicles, cover or no cover.

 John Prins wrote:

This would be huge for Terminators if Storm Bolters were considered pistols for them.

GREY FREAKING KNIGHTS

My tactical and devastator marines with missile launchers thank GW for both of these changes. They also thank GW for re-doing the weapon profiles.

I love that pistols can be used in prolonged close combats, Gives stuff like my Sicarian Infiltrators Burst Pistols a lil' bit extra power.
Not sure if they stay the same ofcourse, but 5 shots in close combat would be great!

Is this the thread where we pretend that there aren't going to be about a million special rules and upgrades that mitigate or remove the to-hit penalty for moving altogether? Are we really going to pretend that things like relentless/SnP are going to go the way of the dodo? PotMS is going the way of the dodo, all vehicles will function exactly the same way and distinctions like "heavy" or "fast" won't exist in some fashion?

Come on, people. Jesus.

I need to see ALL rules in context of each other to have any idea of what I'm looking at here.

Pistols being able to be fired while locked in combat combined with being able to shoot while within 1" of the enemy is going to make GSC REALLY deadly.

A huge chunk of their guns are pistols.

I think a -1 to heavy weapons is still a pretty large penalty on a d6 roll. The difference between 3+ and 4+ is pretty huge, especially for a team with lascannons who only get a very small number of shots. I think it just makes it more valid than before and makes the game more fluid than before. Reading these new rules makes me realise how static the game was before in terms of rules. Specific cover saves, AP, sticky melee, snap firing on the move with heavy weapons, etc. I think the changes are all combatting these things in a fun way that really adds more dynamics and can probably even add a level of tactics the game didn't have before with tactical retreats and such.

We'll have to see how it actually plays out, but personally, it all sounds like really good stuff

I get the feeling that being able to shoot with your pistol in melee is going to replace the +1 attack for having them rule. So it's a bit of a trade-off I suppose- you can fire your pistol in close-combat, but you aren't getting an extra melee attack. That's nice if you have a good pistol, like a plasma or melta pistol, but it's pretty ass if it's a weak pistol and you're no longer getting an extra attack with your power sword etc.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
I get the feeling that being able to shoot with your pistol in melee is going to replace the +1 attack for having them rule. So it's a bit of a trade-off I suppose- you can fire your pistol in close-combat, but you aren't getting an extra melee attack. That's nice if you have a good pistol, like a plasma or melta pistol, but it's pretty ass if it's a weak pistol and you're no longer getting an extra attack with your power sword etc.

It sort of makes a lot more sense though. Why would having a bolt pistol mean you can swing your powersword again? I'm also assuming this will come across in their rebalance of each unit

Why should you get an extra power weapon attack for caring a blot pistol ? Doesn't the new rule make more sense ?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
I get the feeling that being able to shoot with your pistol in melee is going to replace the +1 attack for having them rule. So it's a bit of a trade-off I suppose- you can fire your pistol in close-combat, but you aren't getting an extra melee attack. That's nice if you have a good pistol, like a plasma or melta pistol, but it's pretty ass if it's a weak pistol and you're no longer getting an extra attack with your power sword etc.

A unit of 20 acolyte hybrids with flamer pistols. d3 (because they are pistols instead of full flamers) or so extra automatic hits is a LOT better than +1a.

Does mean that the Plasma Pistol might finally have an actual point to its ridiculous cost.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
I think a -1 to heavy weapons is still a pretty large penalty on a d6 roll. The difference between 3+ and 4+ is pretty huge, especially for a team with lascannons who only get a very small number of shots. I think it just makes it more valid than before and makes the game more fluid than before. Reading these new rules makes me realise how static the game was before in terms of rules. Specific cover saves, AP, sticky melee, snap firing on the move with heavy weapons, etc. I think the changes are all combatting these things in a fun way that really adds more dynamics and can probably even add a level of tactics the game didn't have before with tactical retreats and such.

We'll have to see how it actually plays out, but personally, it all sounds like really good stuff

Even the new terrain they've released will affect things as it actually blocks LOS a lot better than before meaning moving to get a shot will be more important for more shooty armies

Not loving how the new Cover rules kinda of screws the little guy...

Then again, the little guys now actually have a standard armor save while before seeing 5+ or 6+ Armor save on your sheet might as well have been remembered as "no armor at all"

 Talamare wrote:
Not loving how the new Cover rules kinda of screws the little guy...

Then again, the little guys now actually have a standard armor save while before seeing 5+ or 6+ Armor save on your sheet might as well have been remembered as "no armor at all"

Nope. Look at the bolter. No AP at all. Again, everything has to be looked at together. Lascannons are at =3. So, a terminator with cover is saving on a 4+.

 Tiberius501 wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
I get the feeling that being able to shoot with your pistol in melee is going to replace the +1 attack for having them rule. So it's a bit of a trade-off I suppose- you can fire your pistol in close-combat, but you aren't getting an extra melee attack. That's nice if you have a good pistol, like a plasma or melta pistol, but it's pretty ass if it's a weak pistol and you're no longer getting an extra attack with your power sword etc.

It sort of makes a lot more sense though. Why would having a bolt pistol mean you can swing your powersword again? I'm also assuming this will come across in their rebalance of each unit

Oh, I absolutely agree. Just something that occured to me while I was digesting the new info. It does intuitively make more sense.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Does mean that the Plasma Pistol might finally have an actual point to its ridiculous cost.

Even with these rules plasma pistols still need a points reduction. Single shot ap2 at bs3 or worse is not worth the crazy prices we see for them.

Martel732 wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
Not loving how the new Cover rules kinda of screws the little guy...

Then again, the little guys now actually have a standard armor save while before seeing 5+ or 6+ Armor save on your sheet might as well have been remembered as "no armor at all"

Nope. Look at the bolter. No AP at all. Again, everything has to be looked at together. Lascannons are at =3. So, a terminator with cover is saving on a 4+.

You may want to read that again as that is what he was getting at.
3rd-7th edition 5+/6+ armour saves have been pretty much "you have no save"
While 8th edition seems like they'll actually get to roll them from basic weapons.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
I think a -1 to heavy weapons is still a pretty large penalty on a d6 roll.

For marines, at least, hitting on a 4+ with heavies while moving is FAR better than hitting on a 6+. Even for single shot weapons. This makes heavy weapons something worth taking in Tactical squads (who you expect to move), and allows dedicated heavy weapon teams to move into position first turn but still have effective shooting.

This is a good balance IMO. You WANT a heavy weapons team to stay put, but you're not crippled if they need to move.

Jbz` wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
Not loving how the new Cover rules kinda of screws the little guy...

Then again, the little guys now actually have a standard armor save while before seeing 5+ or 6+ Armor save on your sheet might as well have been remembered as "no armor at all"

Nope. Look at the bolter. No AP at all. Again, everything has to be looked at together. Lascannons are at =3. So, a terminator with cover is saving on a 4+.

You may want to read that again as that is what he was getting at.
3rd-7th edition 5+/6+ armour saves have been pretty much "you have no save"
While 8th edition seems like they'll actually get to roll them from basic weapons.

Yeah, I misread the second part after reading the first part.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Does mean that the Plasma Pistol might finally have an actual point to its ridiculous cost.

It already has a ridiculous cost. My guess is that they become cheaper for most models

 John Prins wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:
I think a -1 to heavy weapons is still a pretty large penalty on a d6 roll.

For marines, at least, hitting on a 4+ with heavies while moving is FAR better than hitting on a 6+. Even for single shot weapons. This makes heavy weapons something worth taking in Tactical squads (who you expect to move), and allows dedicated heavy weapon teams to move into position first turn but still have effective shooting.

This is a good balance IMO. You WANT a heavy weapons team to stay put, but you're not crippled if they need to move.

Oh absolutely. 100% agree

I'll -1 to hit over snap shooting any day of the week. Sounds like tanks get hit, but if they fire ALL at -1, that's better than 1 at full BS and others snap shoot.

So pistol and heavy weapons got much better. If pistols keep their +1 attacks with CC, that's a buff for everyone with a pistol. Which is nice, since pistols were mostly just a nice thing to have if you were an assault unit.

If not, it's pretty much just a buff for imperials (and CSM/GSC to a lesser degree). Inferno/flame/plasma pistols now get their full strength, you can use pistols with your power fists without feeing dumb, and tac marines now have a use for their pistols.

If you play xeno, though? Eh. Straight up slap in the face for orks, Eldar are uneffected, Necron have a handful of units with pistols, nids don't have any, and why would Tau give a flying feth about pistols in melee? Dark Eldar are the only ones who get that nice bonus.

And heavys only having a -1 bs when moving is a slap on the wrist. I remember when your two choices were "shoot, or move" THAT was a tactical choice.

I really hope Assault weapons get something to help them out, because they're really looking like duds.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Why would having a bolt pistol mean you can swing your powersword again?

I swing at you with my sword. You deftly parry the blow, then, out of the corners of your eyes, you see the muzzle of the gun being aimed at your head. In an attempt to stay the freak alive, you bash the gun away, opening yourself up for the next stab of the sword.
It's a narrative thing.


But yes, I agree, if the rules change so that you actually get to use both your weapons, pistols in the shooting phase and melee weapons in the close combat phase (or whatever they will be called), that comes off as more intuitive. Makes me like what I'm seeing now.

 BlaxicanX wrote:


Even with these rules plasma pistols still need a points reduction. Single shot ap2 at bs3 or worse is not worth the crazy prices we see for them.

I might disagree with that, The person you kill doesn't get to attack back, adding defensive utility on top of the otherwise obvious offensive utility. I happily paid for whipcoils on my wraiths despite them doing nothing other than letting me hit first, so I think you're underestimating the utility.

Happyjew wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone else notice that your average Space Marine will not be able to use Cover against Lascannons?

How do you figure? If we assume soft cover (such as wooded terrain) gives +1 to saves for infantry, then a Space Marine in a wood would have a save of (3+ +1 -3) or 5+ save, just like they currently have.

An Ork on the other hand (or Guardsman for that matter) gets screwed with cover.

Because Cover can only be used when you are denied an Armour Save. Lascannons are -3. I can still roll a 6+ against that with a 3+ Armour Save.

Oops, read that wrong. That was talking about the 7th Ed system.

 Charistoph wrote:

Happyjew wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Anyone else notice that your average Space Marine will not be able to use Cover against Lascannons?

How do you figure? If we assume soft cover (such as wooded terrain) gives +1 to saves for infantry, then a Space Marine in a wood would have a save of (3+ +1 -3) or 5+ save, just like they currently have.

An Ork on the other hand (or Guardsman for that matter) gets screwed with cover.

Because Cover can only be used when you are denied an Armour Save. Lascannons are -3. I can still roll a 6+ against that with a 3+ Armour Save.

Oops, read that wrong. That was talking about the 7th Ed system.

You are mistaken. The way that they are treating cover is just a direct port from Age of Sigmar, where cover simply provides a +1 boost to all saves.

The lascannon would reduce power armor to a 6+ save. Cover would then provide at least a +1, which would bump it up to at least a 5+ armor save.