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.

 BertBert wrote:

 Stux wrote:
He's a fancy cool gunslinger so he gets fancy cool guns. It's rule of cool.

This game was never a simulation, this part doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Rule of cool does not require one to sacrifice internal consistency though. Give him variants of the Plasma Pistol if you want them to be that strong.

I like the model, but hate the implications it makes about GWs design process.

Why not just imagine that his Liberator autostub uses depleted unobtainium bullets? Maybe other people don't use them due to rarity and the harmful effects of even being close to them for too long...

I don't see why people are so stressed out by this.

 Fifty wrote:


Why not just imagine that his Liberator autostub uses depleted unobtainium bullets? Maybe other people don't use them due to rarity and the harmful effects of even being close to them for too long...

I don't see why people are so stressed out by this.

Sure, you can explain away pretty much anything, especially in 40k, but I'd like them to at least try and be more careful about the way they are doing new things.

It's really not that difficult to be consistent and it does improve the setting a lot if you don't have to resort to similar explanations with every other piece of rules or fiction that is being released.

 BertBert wrote:

 Fifty wrote:


Why not just imagine that his Liberator autostub uses depleted unobtainium bullets? Maybe other people don't use them due to rarity and the harmful effects of even being close to them for too long...

I don't see why people are so stressed out by this.

Sure, you can explain away pretty much anything, especially in 40k, but I'd like them to at least try and be more careful about the way they are doing new things.

It's really not that difficult to be consistent and it does improve the setting a lot if you don't have to resort to similar explanations with every other piece of rules or fiction that is being released.

But that is the point... nothing is consistent, why would this be? The most obvious example is that marines are not remotely as powerful in the game as in the novels. It is a fictional universe, one that comes last in order of priority. It is models first, rules second, game background third and novels on a parallel path all of their own.

It really isn't worth stressing over.

 Fifty wrote:

 BertBert wrote:

 Fifty wrote:


Why not just imagine that his Liberator autostub uses depleted unobtainium bullets? Maybe other people don't use them due to rarity and the harmful effects of even being close to them for too long...

I don't see why people are so stressed out by this.

Sure, you can explain away pretty much anything, especially in 40k, but I'd like them to at least try and be more careful about the way they are doing new things.

It's really not that difficult to be consistent and it does improve the setting a lot if you don't have to resort to similar explanations with every other piece of rules or fiction that is being released.

But that is the point... nothing is consistent, why would this be? The most obvious example is that marines are not remotely as powerful in the game as in the novels. It is a fictional universe, one that comes last in order of priority. It is models first, rules second, game background third and novels on a parallel path all of their own.

It really isn't worth stressing over.

If your argument is nothing is inconsistent, so feth everything, that isn't a good argument. Come up with a better one.

 Fifty wrote:
[

But that is the point... nothing is consistent, why would this be? The most obvious example is that marines are not remotely as powerful in the game as in the novels. It is a fictional universe, one that comes last in order of priority. It is models first, rules second, game background third and novels on a parallel path all of their own.

It really isn't worth stressing over.

I'm quite relaxed, thanks

The point is that they should strive to improve.

But they are designing a game and if the game is improved by making this model D2, they will. If the game makes the fluff inconsistent, that is a very secondary concern.

 Fifty wrote:
But they are designing a game and if the game is improved by making this model D2, they will. If the game makes the fluff inconsistent, that is a very secondary concern.

I agree, but I suspect that's not at all what is happening here. Their sculptors/designers go all out and the rules are then made to accomodate whatever the model is supposed to represent.

This is fairly plausible considering the state of the game - It's a sales vehicle for miniatures first and foremost and it shows.

 Quickjager wrote:
If your argument is nothing is inconsistent, so feth everything, that isn't a good argument. Come up with a better one.

I'll rephrase. As the models and the rules take precedence over the fluff for GW, there will always be fluff inconsistencies. It isn't quite "feth everything" but just realising that gameplay experience is the priority, not fluff. If they had called them "Special ammo stubguns" to mirror Deathwatch spcial ammo making bolters better, would you be happier? To me, "Liberator" is just code for "Master-crafted special stubgun."

It is fine to prioritize gameplay over fluff. But when you start ignoring the entire lore of the universe in order to just have a model that is "really cool" well then you don't really have any legs to stand on when it comes to justifying ANYTHING. So I'll flip it on you instead, why are you even here defending it?

 Quickjager wrote:
It is fine to prioritize gameplay over fluff. But when you start ignoring the entire lore of the universe in order to just have a model that is "really cool" well then you don't really have any legs to stand on when it comes to justifying ANYTHING. So I'll flip it on you instead, why are you even here defending it?

Because I think it's cool. I like the gunslinger trope, crossed with Genestealers, and I'm glad his guns have punch.

 Stux wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
It is fine to prioritize gameplay over fluff. But when you start ignoring the entire lore of the universe in order to just have a model that is "really cool" well then you don't really have any legs to stand on when it comes to justifying ANYTHING. So I'll flip it on you instead, why are you even here defending it?

Because I think it's cool. I like the gunslinger trope, crossed with Genestealers, and I'm glad his guns have punch.

\

Sorry, wasn't addressing you. But on your point, I'm hearing you wouldn't think it was cool if his weapons were weaker?

KurtAngle2 wrote:

PiñaColada wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

In terms of his rules, there's something that bugs me about his pistols having 2 shots each. Does any other non-artefact pistol in the game get 2 shots?

Admech have several multi-shot pistols. The infiltrators have either a 12" Pistol 5 S3 variant or and 18" Pistol 3 S4 variant. The tech priest dominus has a macrostubber which is 5 S4 shots.
So they do exist.

No idea how this guys should be pointed though, since I don't know GSC well enough.. Not even taking into account potential changes in the codex. 120ish seems fair at a glance IMO

"120ish seems fair at a glance": Are you really thinking that a Deffkilla Wartrike (since you seem to play Orks) should cost literally the same as this guy? If it were for me I wouldn't let touch you 40k's Balance even with a 10 meters stick

That's not how it works. Just because a wartrike is T6 with a bunch of wounds for 120 doesn't mean that this guy doesn't have a similar impact on the game.

Wartrike has 3.5 S5 AP1 D1 auto-hit shots as well as 6 S5 AP0 D1 shots at BS5.
This guy has effectively 11 shots with S4 AP1 D2 and can target characters.

//Wartrike
3.5 * .666 * .5 = 1.2
6 * 1.167 * .333 * .666 * .333 = 0.5

//Kelermorph
11 * .833 * .5 * .5 * 2 = 4.6

4.6 vs 1.7 - there is no contest. The KM can do it from further away, too. SO, then the trike can melee and is really durable.

To break it down - the majority of the points of the KM lie in it's shooting. The majority of the points for the trike lie in it's melee and durability. Sniping a key character out has a MUCH larger impact on the game, which is why he would cost a similar amount.

Making a powerful stub gun without giving it a detailed justification is hardly "ignoring the entire lore of the universe." I mean, you have to realise you are using more than just a little bit of hyperbole, right?

Literally all they have done is make a powerful gun without explaining what makes it so powerful. Why you'd get hung up on that when there are simple explanations available is beyond me. It might be special ammo, it might be high calibre, it might be that they ought to have made it a more regular stub gun and given the kelermorph special rules instead. Hell, there might be an explanation in the kill team box or codex. It is not a lore-shattering issue the way you seem to suggest. Just because it hasn't been explained, it doesn't mean it can't be and it doesn't mean it needs to be.

 Fifty wrote:
My gut feeling is that cult ambush will have switched to a 2d6 roll, with the best and worst results being much harder to achieve. Even with his +3, I expect he'll only have a decent chance of the most horrendous ambushes instead of an almost guaranteed chance.

That sounds plausible and would make it more reasonable to make the KM cheaper.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
It is fine to prioritize gameplay over fluff. But when you start ignoring the entire lore of the universe in order to just have a model that is "really cool" well then you don't really have any legs to stand on when it comes to justifying ANYTHING. So I'll flip it on you instead, why are you even here defending it?

You're never going to get a marine that works like the fluff. You're already dealing with inconsistencies. Either separate the fluff from the game or live with it.

 Fifty wrote:
Making a powerful stub gun without giving it a detailed justification is hardly "ignoring the entire lore of the universe." I mean, you have to realise you are using more than just a little bit of hyperbole, right?

Literally all they have done is make a powerful gun without explaining what makes it so powerful. Why you'd get hung up on that when there are simple explanations available is beyond me. It might be special ammo, it might be high calibre, it might be that they ought to have made it a more regular stub gun and given the kelermorph special rules instead. Hell, there might be an explanation in the kill team box or codex. It is not a lore-shattering issue the way you seem to suggest. Just because it hasn't been explained, it doesn't mean it can't be and it doesn't mean it needs to be.

No but its ignoring the universe, and if you want to keep it out of hyperbole you should start with yourself and your unobtanium bullets, right? I see you jumping on a guy for voicing his opinion and it rubs me the wrong way AND I think his side has more merit. So tell me, why are you so hung up on this?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Fifty wrote:
My gut feeling is that cult ambush will have switched to a 2d6 roll, with the best and worst results being much harder to achieve. Even with his +3, I expect he'll only have a decent chance of the most horrendous ambushes instead of an almost guaranteed chance.

That sounds plausible and would make it more reasonable to make the KM cheaper.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
It is fine to prioritize gameplay over fluff. But when you start ignoring the entire lore of the universe in order to just have a model that is "really cool" well then you don't really have any legs to stand on when it comes to justifying ANYTHING. So I'll flip it on you instead, why are you even here defending it?

You're never going to get a marine that works like the fluff. You're already dealing with inconsistencies. Either separate the fluff from the game or live with it.

You've no idea where I'm going with this Daed.

 Quickjager wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
It is fine to prioritize gameplay over fluff. But when you start ignoring the entire lore of the universe in order to just have a model that is "really cool" well then you don't really have any legs to stand on when it comes to justifying ANYTHING. So I'll flip it on you instead, why are you even here defending it?

Because I think it's cool. I like the gunslinger trope, crossed with Genestealers, and I'm glad his guns have punch.

\

Sorry, wasn't addressing you. But on your point, I'm hearing you wouldn't think it was cool if his weapons were weaker?

Basically. Probably not as cool. Like, they could have been a little weaker and it would be fine though, but that will depend on his points cost for me, way more than the lore.

I can easily headcanon reasons his guns shoot good, it just isn't a problem for me.

I get that, everyone likes strong models. We like using things we like and not getting punished for taking them.

And we get that GK suck right now.

That's unfortunate-but that's no reason to try to make everything new suck too. It'd be better to bring Grey Knights up a LOT, and bring the top stuff down by a smaller amount. Meet a little above the middle, is my ideal.

No but its ignoring the universe, and if you want to keep it out of hyperbole you should start with yourself and your unobtanium bullets, right?

It is not ignoring the universe, it is just adding something to it. How is unobtanium in any sci-fi medium hyperbole? I am using the phrase unobtanium in the generic sense of something in a fictional universe that cannot be explained by reference to modern technology. Other examples of unobtanium already present in 40k include ceramite, plasteel, blackstone, necrodermis, any number of tyranid bioforms, and so on.

I see you jumping on a guy for voicing his opinion and it rubs me the wrong way AND I think his side has more merit. So tell me, why are you so hung up on this?

I certainly don't feel I've jumped on anyone, and if BertBert feels that way then A) he hasn't shown it and B) I apologise to him. If anyone is coming on strong in this conversation, I think it is you, but certainly not in a way that upsets me. It is just a debate about a fictitious game on a website. I'm far more bothered by a conversation in Nuts & Bolts right now, and if I didn't get a chance to respond to that, it would not bother me at all.

As for why I am hung up on this, I'm just passing the time as I watch a mediocre Netflix movie with my fiancee. I have an opinion, time to share it and enjoy the distraction. Honestly, no more than that. If you are actually upset by it, I suppose I could stop responding to you, so if you ask I will make this my last response to you.

 JNAProductions wrote:
And we get that GK suck right now.

That's unfortunate-but that's no reason to try to make everything new suck too. It'd be better to bring Grey Knights up a LOT, and bring the top stuff down by a smaller amount. Meet a little above the middle, is my ideal.

This isn't about GK sucking, I don't ever make it about Grey Knights sucking, you guys do when you want to drown out what I want to say.

 Quickjager wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
And we get that GK suck right now.

That's unfortunate-but that's no reason to try to make everything new suck too. It'd be better to bring Grey Knights up a LOT, and bring the top stuff down by a smaller amount. Meet a little above the middle, is my ideal.

This isn't about GK sucking, I don't ever make it about Grey Knights sucking, you guys do when you want to drown out what I want to say.

Then why do you want the Kelermorph to be 150 points? He's got less durability than a 30 point Company Commander, unless surrounded by friends who can take the hit for him (but they, of course, cost points).

I'll certainly agree that he's got a LOT more killing power, but he's not worth 150 points.

 Fifty wrote:


I certainly don't feel I've jumped on anyone, and if BertBert feels that way then A) he hasn't shown it and B) I apologise to him.

No harm done, mate.

It's fine you want to use the it's a game card Fifty and I'm glad your life has someone special in it, even though it has nothing to do with the conversation.

So please act like how you wish to in regards to debates and actually put forth an argument that amounts to more than, "it doesn't need to be".

EDIT: Bad grammar

 Quickjager wrote:
It's fine you want to used the it's a game card Fifty and I'm glad your life has someone special in it, even though it has nothing to do with the conversation.

So please act like how you wish to in regards to debates and actually put forth a argument that amounts to more than, "it doesn't need to be".

Hey, you asked why I was so hung up on it. I just responded. I'm not hung up; It is a distraction from Annihilation. Sorry if you don't like the context of my response.

Now, I have put forth an argument, and I'll re-summarise;

1) The Warhammer universe functions on many examples of Unobtaniums and MacGuffins, of which I have previously given several examples.
2) This pistol presently has little or no explanation.
3) It would be easy for GW to create a new Unobtanium or MacGuffin.to explain this pistol. They may do so in the codex, but there are a limited number of pages, and maybe more importannt things to explain.
4) There are many other things in W40k which could be explained have not been.
4) The fact they have not explained this one weapon of one character in one army is, for me, a minor issue which I am happy to resolve with head-cannon that equates "Liberator" to something akin to Deathwatch Special Ammo.

I just don't regard a lack of detail about one gun a lore-breaking issue.

To address something you asked someone else, "I'm hearing you wouldn't think it was cool if his weapons were weaker?"

You are probably partially right. BUT, I used Howling Banshees occasionally even when they were dreadful. When I use marines, I use tactical marines. I used Grey Knight terminators in a campaign weekend last summer because I think my old Rogue Trader terminators look cool. I'll buy this model whether the points cost is reasonable or not, and use it sometimes. I'll use it more often if it is powerful. I'd think it is cool either way.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
And we get that GK suck right now.

That's unfortunate-but that's no reason to try to make everything new suck too. It'd be better to bring Grey Knights up a LOT, and bring the top stuff down by a smaller amount. Meet a little above the middle, is my ideal.

This isn't about GK sucking, I don't ever make it about Grey Knights sucking, you guys do when you want to drown out what I want to say.

Then why do you want the Kelermorph to be 150 points? He's got less durability than a 30 point Company Commander, unless surrounded by friends who can take the hit for him (but they, of course, cost points).

I'll certainly agree that he's got a LOT more killing power, but he's not worth 150 points.

This might be surprising, but I don't cost other units in regards to how GK how costed because GK are costed poorly, I would be an idiot of amazing proportions if I ever started distorting the game around how a GKSS is costed. I think saying that he has less durability than a company commander is also in bad faith because we are not talking about just durability, if we use that kind of comparison then we know he should cost more than a grot but less than a commander. Which isn't true. Instead we should compare him to similar roles such as the assassins I mentioned before, all of which are in the 80-90 range (off the top of my head).

I think most can agree the assassins are a little bit overpriced for what they bring as they really fail to actually perform their role. This guy on the other hand can actually accomplish it, but he is less durable, -1W -1T 5++ (it is probably like 20 bolter shot difference if I mathed it out). But you will almost always get the alpha with with his squad he brings, and this squad will almost always get an alpha with their ranged weapons as well (You could play risky and hope for a 4+ where you can charge after moving and take purestrain). I put a large amount of value on alpha strikes, which this guy offers very safely, he could even be a beta strike if the game unfolds that way.

The value I'm putting on this guy isn't because of his durability, or just his weapons; but it is the advantage he gives his squad in being able to be where they actually want to be. I'd say 90 points if he isn't a character, but if he is I'd still be leaning towards the high side.

-1T, -1W, 5+ instead of 4++. He does NOT have an invuln.

And I do agree he's pretty comparable to Assassins-he's better at killing, but much less durable, especially since he has no range. The Vindicare can safely sit back and shoot away with his range, the Culexus is STUPIDLY more durable with him dropping your hits to a 6+, the Eversor has 50% more wounds, and the Callidus feths with your opponent's CP.

If you think the Assassins are overcosted, why would you put someone who's pretty comparable at twice their price?

We don't know what the new ambush table will look like, but if it is similar to the current one, you'll be absolutely right about the alpha potential of this unit. My gut feeling is that I'd happily pay 90 points for what we've seen so far and possibly more.

On my phone right now, he does have an invul read the community page. Real quick, if old table remains I stand by costing, if there is a new one it the costing is subject to change.

Yeah, he has 5++ due to fast reflexes.

The fantasy of a gunslinger has him use normal looking guns, but do amazing things with them.

I assume that is their reasoning anyway.

Pretty much this. Seems like people would have liked it better if it had stated "Gunslinger gives their weapons a +1 to damage". Since the Gunslinger is unable to drop his weapon and another cultists is unable to pick up said weapon this is a cleaner ruling than adding extra text for days.