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.

Quasistellar wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Where else are you going to define rules that are "universal" if not in the main rulebook?

this isnt about adding USR to the rulebook

 Amishprn86 wrote:

6 USR that needs to be added to the BRB or many Datasheets

Yes, i said USR or "Added to datasheets" b.c COVER isnt going to be on datasheets, do you not understand? Not every rule is allowed on datasheets, some do go into the brb.. hmm like cover rules. Thats why i said both, some will be in the brb someone datasheets.

So, if you want to talk about if USR should be a thing again, do it somewhere else.

Lord Clinto wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
One of the most core USR from past editions was Relentless and yet its rarely listed on 8th edition units. Completely ruins things when a big stompy unit has heavy weapons and gets -1 to hit when it moves despite it was originally designed to be able to use heavy weapons without a problem.

Any marine (loyalist or traitor) in Terminator armor thanks you for your observation.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Terminator_Armour -> "....Offensively, it provides the strength to maintain mobility while serving as a solid heavy-weapons platform in open-field combat."

Or gear heads, for that matter. Guard tank platoons, Iron Wing, and Speed Freaks would be some good examples of play style that were greatly affected by that loss, not just Deathwing and their cousins.

Amishprn86 wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Where else are you going to define rules that are "universal" if not in the main rulebook?

this isnt about adding USR to the rulebook

 Amishprn86 wrote:

6 USR that needs to be added to the BRB or many Datasheets

Yes, i said USR or "Added to datasheets" b.c COVER isnt going to be on datasheets, do you not understand? Not every rule is allowed on datasheets, some do go into the brb.. hmm like cover rules. Thats why i said both, some will be in the brb someone datasheets.

So, if you want to talk about if USR should be a thing again, do it somewhere else.

You included the BRB in the opening statement. Then in a later statement you said it wasn't about the BRB in an absolute statement, which is countering your initial statement. And the more "universal" a rule is going to be, such as the above quoted "Relentless" was for heavy infantry, monsters, and vehicles, it would be in the rulebook. Now, a more proper statement would have been, "this isn't just about adding USRs to the rulebook."

One example was Fleet, which was semi-universal until 5th Edition. Only a few had it, so it wasn't needed to be defined just the places that had it. But when Run was put in and more models were given Fleet, it became a USR instead of a sUSR.

 Charistoph wrote:

Lord Clinto wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
One of the most core USR from past editions was Relentless and yet its rarely listed on 8th edition units. Completely ruins things when a big stompy unit has heavy weapons and gets -1 to hit when it moves despite it was originally designed to be able to use heavy weapons without a problem.

Any marine (loyalist or traitor) in Terminator armor thanks you for your observation.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Terminator_Armour -> "....Offensively, it provides the strength to maintain mobility while serving as a solid heavy-weapons platform in open-field combat."

Or gear heads, for that matter. Guard tank platoons, Iron Wing, and Speed Freaks would be some good examples of play style that were greatly affected by that loss, not just Deathwing and their cousins.

Amishprn86 wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Where else are you going to define rules that are "universal" if not in the main rulebook?

this isnt about adding USR to the rulebook

 Amishprn86 wrote:

6 USR that needs to be added to the BRB or many Datasheets

Yes, i said USR or "Added to datasheets" b.c COVER isnt going to be on datasheets, do you not understand? Not every rule is allowed on datasheets, some do go into the brb.. hmm like cover rules. Thats why i said both, some will be in the brb someone datasheets.

So, if you want to talk about if USR should be a thing again, do it somewhere else.

You included the BRB in the opening statement. Then in a later statement you said it wasn't about the BRB in an absolute statement, which is countering your initial statement. And the more "universal" a rule is going to be, such as the above quoted "Relentless" was for heavy infantry, monsters, and vehicles, it would be in the rulebook. Now, a more proper statement would have been, "this isn't just about adding USRs to the rulebook."

One example was Fleet, which was semi-universal until 5th Edition. Only a few had it, so it wasn't needed to be defined just the places that had it. But when Run was put in and more models were given Fleet, it became a USR instead of a sUSR.

So, wait, you want cover rules on datasheets now too? And fallback rules on datasheets as well? So we should remove them from the BRB where they are right now?

Yes i mention the BRB and i also mention the Datasheets (as its int he title and opening page, hmm), but i thought people were smart enough to know that not all rules go onto the datasheets and some of them are in the BRB.

Thanks for showing me you dont understand how this works.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
So, wait, you want cover rules on datasheets now too? And fallback rules on datasheets as well? So we should remove them from the BRB where they are right now?

That is a hyperbolic strawman statement with no correlation to what you quoted.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yes i mention the BRB and i also mention the Datasheets (as its int he title and opening page, hmm), but i thought people were smart enough to know that not all rules go onto the datasheets and some of them are in the BRB.

Thanks for showing me you dont understand how this works.

No, it shows that you didn't bother reading what was written by me or by Quasistellar. Try again.

The first statement QS quoted was you saying it wasn't about adding USR to the rulebook, but then he quoted your OP about adding USRs to the rulebook (while also including the datasheets).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the long run, part of the problem is that to truly qualify it as a USR, it needs to be in the rulebook, otherwise it is only a semi-Universal Special Rule (sUSR).

 Charistoph wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
So, wait, you want cover rules on datasheets now too? And fallback rules on datasheets as well? So we should remove them from the BRB where they are right now?

That is a hyperbolic strawman statement with no correlation to what you quoted.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yes i mention the BRB and i also mention the Datasheets (as its int he title and opening page, hmm), but i thought people were smart enough to know that not all rules go onto the datasheets and some of them are in the BRB.

Thanks for showing me you dont understand how this works.

No, it shows that you didn't bother reading what was written by me or by Quasistellar. Try again.

The first statement QS quoted was you saying it wasn't about adding USR to the rulebook, but then he quoted your OP about adding USRs to the rulebook (while also including the datasheets).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the long run, part of the problem is that to truly qualify it as a USR, it needs to be in the rulebook, otherwise it is only a semi-Universal Special Rule (sUSR).

We can keep derailing the thread with this worthless talk or talk about some rules that needs to be added into the game other than "Make marines better an guardsmen cheaper" that would be good for the health of the game.

As i have said, some rules will need to be in the BRB, and some of datasheets, leave it as that and move on.

BRB should be to codex what encyclopedia is to subject specific books.

The BRB is almost without any function as battle primers cover the core rules and codex supplemental rules.

BRB should function as a reference book in which all these 40k jargons are explained rather than a shelf decoration that it is now.