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.

Nah Man Pichu wrote:My friend just made a good point.

What about situations where you want your character to charge in with a squad, but he rolls badly on the charge?

Is that just a part of the game now? Where your character's support in a fight isn't guaranteed.

I know they have their Heroic Intervention, but I imagine it can only go so far.

Can any AoS players weigh in here? What's your experience in this regards?

It't not uncommon in AoS to have a unit and a hero charge, and only one making it there,

Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

Ruin wrote:
Well that's interesting. Elephant in the room is still the fate of stuff like Tyrant Guard etc.

Can be easily represented with extra synergies. E.g. extra buffs given to the "bodyguard unit" by the character and vice versa, to adding extra bonuses or even absorbing wounds directed at the character if the bodyguard is in the same combat. Same with every other bodyguard/retinue style unit.

They will be "If an hive tyrant within 3" of this unit suffers a wound, you can roll a dice. On a result of 4+ the hive tyrant does not suffert that wound, instead this unit suffers a mortal wound"

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Why does a character need to be in a unit. Let's start there.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Kroot Shaper is confirmed to be a character.

Intriguing.

Did you expect them not to be?

They're characters now. Purchased as part of a unit, but still a character unit type.

I suppose I meant as a model independent of the unit (though rereading it, i suppose that isn't actually confirmed).

I mean, I think it's pretty definitive that they namedropped him in the "Characters" article and goes on to talk about how Characters can't join units.

It's not a bad thing. If nothing else, it makes me excited to see if they have more stuff planned for Kroot seeing as how the Shaper is mentioned as buffing Kroot units within a certain range.

Oh, I'm not suggesting it would be a bad thing (I did describe it as intriguing, not generally a negative connotation to that), and I agree that this suggests interesting things happening for the lesser-loved Xenos subfactions.

So you guys haven't found it to be particularly negative?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Or get rid of the known and constantly heralded problems by using stuff we think works and we have had people test - you can view it either way and we won't know if it is better or worse or even just different for some time yet.

Isn't this how WarMachine Hordes handles characters? I can't recall its been years since I played.

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

Ruin wrote:
Well that's interesting. Elephant in the room is still the fate of stuff like Tyrant Guard etc.

Can be easily represented with extra synergies. E.g. extra buffs given to the "bodyguard unit" by the character and vice versa, to adding extra bonuses or even absorbing wounds directed at the character if the bodyguard is in the same combat. Same with every other bodyguard/retinue style unit.

Hopefully also eliminates non-independent characters that are part of a unit and the constant imbalance we had between them and independent characters (e.g. non-IC characters like Mordrak or Arjac having been way better than ICs in 5th edition [cough, wound allocation shenigans, cough], then the exact opposite being the case in the 6th and AFAIR 7th).

In the old days of "shoot the big ones" (i forget what edition) the hive guard had special rules to intercept wounds, I bet that'll come back , or there will be some kind of 'character unit'

Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Why does a character need to be in a unit. Let's start there.

Bodyguards.

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:
So you guys haven't found it to be particularly negative?

Not really - there are lots of rerolls and abilities to get them stuck in.

This will probably work fine. The problem with AOS is that the characters can be freely sniped, but that has been solved here, so not every character needs to be a ridiculously tough monster in order to survive.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Why does a character need to be in a unit. Let's start there.

Bodyguards.

As was mentioned above: stuff like this covers that:

"If an hive tyrant within 3" of this unit suffers a wound, you can roll a dice. On a result of 4+ the hive tyrant does not suffer that wound, instead this unit suffers a mortal wound"

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

It's not as if deathstars are the only problem it solves. 8th is clearly not set up for mixed units. Not mixing and matching profiles provides a much more streamlined game.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Kroot Shaper is confirmed to be a character.

Intriguing.

The age of the Kroot as begun.

...probably not.

Then again, let's wait to see their rules. I'd be happy if they got S4 back again, what with going first on the charge, and maybe they'll have a nice save in woods.

At first glance I am liking the new character rules. This does a lot to mitigate some of the other changes.

While I am not a fan of the shift from AV to T I think that hopefully the new emphasis on melee (and these new characters rules really do a lot of help improve melee) will mean that target priority plays a bigger role and even units that are made weaker overall will likely still survive because there area more urgent targets available.

Well played GW...

As an afterthought, I think that having multiple overwatches in a single turn works counter to this change. I hope that doesn't stick around.

 Jambles wrote:
How the heck is Robby G. hiding in the middle of a Space Marine army? The dude is twice as tall as the rest of them, with a giant flaming sword!

"I can't get a clean shot at his legs!"

Pfft. Everyone knows RG break dances while fighting. He was blessed by the Emprah with a sick sword windmill move.

wait, arent some dreads characters?

 obsidianaura wrote:

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

Ruin wrote:
Well that's interesting. Elephant in the room is still the fate of stuff like Tyrant Guard etc.

Can be easily represented with extra synergies. E.g. extra buffs given to the "bodyguard unit" by the character and vice versa, to adding extra bonuses or even absorbing wounds directed at the character if the bodyguard is in the same combat. Same with every other bodyguard/retinue style unit.

Hopefully also eliminates non-independent characters that are part of a unit and the constant imbalance we had between them and independent characters (e.g. non-IC characters like Mordrak or Arjac having been way better than ICs in 5th edition [cough, wound allocation shenigans, cough], then the exact opposite being the case in the 6th and AFAIR 7th).

In the old days of "shoot the big ones" (i forget what edition) the hive guard had special rules to intercept wounds, I bet that'll come back , or there will be some kind of 'character unit'

4th ed, I think. There were some interesting target priority rules that died out in 5th ed.

Magnus has over a dozen wounds. Well sign me up.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Good grief, give HBMC $100 and he'll complain he's not got $1000, a basket of puppies and a bottle of champagne.

You know what's a good way to solve the deathstar problem? Not allowing deathstars to form! This method is literally 90% the same as it used to be, other than not getting unitwide buffs which were the entire problem to begin with. You still get units as ablative wounds. You still pass on effects, sometimes, now, in a more logical aura too, as opposed to only buffing 1 unit. The only real change is that this prevents deathstars and makes positioning more important.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Why does a character need to be in a unit. Let's start there.

Bodyguards.

Bodyguards literally prevent anyone from shooting the character if they are between him/her/it and the shooter (or even just closer).
Try again.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Why does a character need to be in a unit. Let's start there.

Bodyguards.

But you still have body guards now.
Place the character behind the squad. Done, instant bodyguards.

 davou wrote:
wait, arent some dreads characters?

Yuppers.

Well, this will allow fast moving units and deep strikers to try to get past the protecting unit so that they're nearest to the character. To properly protect an IC, you now need to place it between two units, so that it can not be targeted from any angle.

Eyjio wrote:

Good grief, give HBMC $100 and he'll complain he's not got $1000, a basket of puppies and a bottle of champagne.

You know what's a good way to solve the deathstar problem? Not allowing deathstars to form! This method is literally 90% the same as it used to be, other than not getting unitwide buffs which were the entire problem to begin with. You still get units as ablative wounds. You still pass on effects, sometimes, now, in a more logical aura too, as opposed to only buffing 1 unit. The only real change is that this prevents deathstars and makes positioning more important.

GW: Vehicles don't have facings any more.
Dakka: But that takes away positional play, which is important and tactical!

GW: Characters can't be shot if you position them well.
Dakka: But they should be able to join units and be safe!

*giggle giggle*

(obviously generalizing)

Eyjio wrote:
Good grief, give HBMC $100 and he'll complain he's not got $1000, a basket of puppies and a bottle of champagne.

I don't like champagne.

Eyjio wrote:
You know what's a good way to solve the deathstar problem? Not allowing deathstars to form!

"A unit can only be joined by one character at a time."

Boom. Problems with multiple character Deathstars solved. No need to deny characters the opportunity lead units. Did it in one sentence.

You people are acting like every time GW reveals something new with their rules that it's the One True Path™ without even considering that there might be simpler or more elegant solutions to the things they're trying to solve. If Deathstars are a problem, then resolve that in a way that isn't throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

"Characters joining units is creating situations where you have hard-as-nails super squads filled with characters!"
"What if we limit the amount of..."
"Ban characters form joining units!"
"Bravo! Three hour lunches for everyone! And after lunch we'll ignore the fact that we're reintroducing movement values and make charge distances random! Then we'll make sure that every single big creature in the game has its own unique chart for damage rather than a central one that will speed up play!"

At this point whether the rule works or not isn't the issue. It's the lengths GW seem to be going to ignore the problems with the game by sweeping it under the rug and pretending it's not there, all whilst introducing entirely new systems that don't address the old problems, just ignore them. If anything this will just create all new problems.

And you people are just lapping it up. Like any sense of critical thought went out the fething window after you got so suck of 7th Ed's unplayableness that you'll now readily accept anything as long as it's not 7th.

Crazy...

 davou wrote:
wait, arent some dreads characters?

Bjorn no longer easily killed cannonfodder that can handicap your entire game if he dies, yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!*

*Assuming he doesn't have more than 10 wounds **

** At which point I wouldn't care about him being directly targetable anymore assuming he has higher toughness and save than a standard Dread or is priced accordingly

 Crimson wrote:
Well, this will allow fast moving units and deep strikers to try to get past the protecting unit so that they're nearest to the character. To properly protect an IC, you now need to place it between two units, so that it can not be targeted from any angle.

It'll be napoleonic tactics - have a big squad form square, put the characters in the middle.

I can't wait to get a squadron of landspeeders with multimeltas - the character assassination force

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:
My friend just made a good point.

What about situations where you want your character to charge in with a squad, but he rolls badly on the charge?

Is that just a part of the game now? Where your character's support in a fight isn't guaranteed.

I know they have their Heroic Intervention, but I imagine it can only go so far.

Can any AoS players weigh in here? What's your experience in this regards?

Well, when that happens... you kind of just have to deal with it, sadly. But that's more just a problem with random charge distance being a terrible idea in general.

That said, in AoS, you roll a unit's charge distance before selecting its target. So if it rolls poorly, then you can elect to stay home, which can help things a bit.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

I mean, they've been flirting with the "character who can't join a unit" idea since (at least as early as I can remember) 5th ed GK. I guess there were Marbo and I think DE had a guy before the Purifier dude as well.

I'm okay with most of the changes, but I liked 5th edition.

Characters joining units is a long time mainstay of the rules that I am glad is gone. It's not like it made that much sense anyway, having my characters move about the battlefield giving orders to different units when needed sounds great.

How do characters work in AoS? Since they are not 'in' the unit now and you charge say a unit and a nearby char you:

- have to roll a charge for both
- make sure the char can make b2b (or 1")
- the enemy unit can specifically target him/her/it alone
- you kinda have to charge the char last in case of overwatch.. which leads to the second point being an issue