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.

 Ishagu wrote:
I thought USRs were terrible for the game and was thrilled when they were removed. I am honestly perplexed at why anyone is getting confused about anything in the current game. A single army follows it's own set of rules and that's that.

One of the funny things people do, is throw previous versions of things under the bus to support the new system. It’s not as bad as that was, so it’s ok now.
USRs are a very simple thing, that I have still not seen much reason not to use them other than how GW just allways sucked at rules.
Army’s will still have there own set to rules to follow, but some with just be tied under the same rules for ease of systems that rely on the,.
It’s the same reason each army still uses the same stat block, to allow for expansive systems in the rules. To allow for more mental space for the game to operate in, and allow for more complexity where in can enhance the game the most.

There is a reason lots of people state 40k has little depth despite how complex the rules are.

 Ishagu wrote:
This topic is 7 pages long and nothing new has really come up for a while. It's just the same people complaining.

Is that justification for telling people to agree with you or get out?

 Ishagu wrote:
I thought USRs were terrible for the game and was thrilled when they were removed. I am honestly perplexed at why anyone is getting confused about anything in the current game. A single army follows it's own set of rules and that's that.

Why were they terrible?

Yes but if I ask someone what rule a unit has they can say Manta Strike, Warp Strike, Children of Baharroth or about a hundred other things. But they're all just Deep Strike. It's needlessly confusing and anti player.

 Ishagu wrote:
I thought USRs were terrible for the game and was thrilled when they were removed. I am honestly perplexed at why anyone is getting confused about anything in the current game. A single army follows it's own set of rules and that's that.

Ok, lets imagine someone is starting out (lets call him John), they pick space marines and decide to play terminators because they like the look of the model. He plays his first game against tau (lets call him Bob). During deployment, John announces that he will use the teleport strike ability of his terminators. Bob then announces he will use the Manta strike ability of his crisis suits. John then asks Bob what Manta strike does and Bob gives him the full explanation, finishing by "its basically the same thing as you did with your terminators".

Now, imagine if both rules were just called "Deep strike", you'd completely skip over this interaction since John would know what deepstrike does since his terminators have the same rule.

Thats the small things that we are asking for with properly implements USR's. It helps newer players, it reduces rules bloat, it reduces rules differences (and i mean accidental difference, not intended ones)

 Ishagu wrote:
I thought USRs were terrible for the game and was thrilled when they were removed. I am honestly perplexed at why anyone is getting confused about anything in the current game. A single army follows it's own set of rules and that's that.

Real quick, what's the difference between Hunters From Hyperspace, Haunting Horrors, Death Descending, Portal Of Exile, Teleportation Matrix, Teleport Strike, Jump Pack Assault, and Meteoric Descent?

If it's so easy to know stuff without USRs, you shouldn't even need to look to know, right?

No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

pm713 wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
I thought USRs were terrible for the game and was thrilled when they were removed. I am honestly perplexed at why anyone is getting confused about anything in the current game. A single army follows it's own set of rules and that's that.

Why were they terrible?

Yes but if I ask someone what rule a unit has they can say Manta Strike, Warp Strike, Children of Baharroth or about a hundred other things. But they're all just Deep Strike. It's needlessly confusing and anti player.

Because USRs don't encompass what Warhammer is.

All those things are deepstrike, but then you have remove and redeploy deepstrike with a Necron character and one other unit, and "regular" remove and redeploy deepstrike with RG, or deepstrike which is remove and place next to a specific character, and deepstrike that is a 3" limit, and so on.

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

Why are you not trying to learn the rules for other armies? Its an important aspect of any game. Its not a fake problem since when i was starting, i felt it was ridiculous that my sicarian infiltrator's "Infiltrate" rule did the same thing as terminator's "Teleport strike"

You are allowed to feel like you need only to know your armies rules, but its an argument based on opinion, not on facts. just because YOU don't see the problem, doesnt mean there isnt a problem.

I don’t need to look them all up, just the one that matters to the unit I play. Deep strike used to represent teleporting or jumping out of planes. Noe the the same mechanic is used for sneaky infiltrating, hiding in a unit until a point, popping out of tunnels. Why should a sicaran infiltrators unit “deep strike”, it’s the same mechanic but infiltrators make more sense as a title for that unit, same with many others.

The rule book having pages of USR doesn’t help a lot of people learn the rules at all.

You are basically arguing that you should change the names of rules so that you have to talk less during a game. It would literally save a handful of sentences per game.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


All those things are deepstrike, but then you have remove and redeploy deepstrike with a Necron character and one other unit, and "regular" remove and redeploy deepstrike with RG, or deepstrike which is remove and place next to a specific character, and deepstrike that is a 3" limit, and so on.

Yeah but true deepstriking abilities are mostly 9", and you prepare your units during deployment.

For the remove and redeploy, you could add a "Teleport" USR, or just leave it as a standalone rule since i don't think it is that common.

For deepstrike that is allowed closer than 9" (Mawloc, Callidus, etc.) you can add a rule to these units

for example :

Callidus Assassin
-Deepstrike
-Whenever you use the Deepstrike ability, substract 1D6" from the minimal distance.

There, you have USR while keeping some rules variety.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andykp wrote:
I don’t need to look them all up, just the one that matters to the unit I play. Deep strike used to represent teleporting or jumping out of planes. Noe the the same mechanic is used for sneaky infiltrating, hiding in a unit until a point, popping out of tunnels. Why should a sicaran infiltrators unit “deep strike”, it’s the same mechanic but infiltrators make more sense as a title for that unit, same with many others.

The rule book having pages of USR doesn’t help a lot of people learn the rules at all.

You are basically arguing that you should change the names of rules so that you have to talk less during a game. It would literally save a handful of sentences per game.

We've been using Deepstrike as an example since everyone knows what it means, changing the actual term wouldnt be a problem. (Anyway, infiltrators appearing behind enemy lines to strike deep in enemy territory still works with the "Deepstrike" rule).

Also, read the whole thread, we've brought up ideas on how to not have to refer to the BRB for USR definition a few pages back.

No, we're arguing to change the names of rules so we have to do 0 mental effort (ie: read through a paragraph of text explaining the fluffy way that the specific unit depstrikes to be sure theres no special rule attached to it) to figure out what a unit does. New players or players starting a new army will have an easier time interacting when the rules are common between armies.

Andykp wrote:
I don’t need to look them all up, just the one that matters to the unit I play. Deep strike used to represent teleporting or jumping out of planes. Noe the the same mechanic is used for sneaky infiltrating, hiding in a unit until a point, popping out of tunnels. Why should a sicaran infiltrators unit “deep strike”, it’s the same mechanic but infiltrators make more sense as a title for that unit, same with many others.

The rule book having pages of USR doesn’t help a lot of people learn the rules at all.

You are basically arguing that you should change the names of rules so that you have to talk less during a game. It would literally save a handful of sentences per game.

Having consistent rules all in one, central location does help people learn the rules. I'm confused how anyone thinks otherwise. As for the terminology, we're talking about mechanics here, not fluff. Every Codex has a page dedicated to each unit in the army which gives all the background you need. The player can then infer what the Deep Strike rules are representing if that's something they care about. It's not about talking less, it's about consistency too. It helps prevent those annoying "gotcha" moments in a game when you think you know a rule but actually don't because it's inexplicably different to similar rules elsewhere. It provides a common language we can use when discussing the game. Veteran players already use FNP and Deep Strike as shorthand for the myriad rules that fall under those descriptions now so consistent naming clearly has a great deal of utility.

Just look at the difference between 're-roll misses' and 're-roll any to-hit die' for a great example of why this bespoke-rules-for-everything approach is confusing as heck.

 catbarf wrote:
Just look at the difference between 're-roll misses' and 're-roll any to-hit die' for a great example of why this bespoke-rules-for-everything approach is confusing as heck.

These are two different rules.

 Ishagu wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Just look at the difference between 're-roll misses' and 're-roll any to-hit die' for a great example of why this bespoke-rules-for-everything approach is confusing as heck.

These are two different rules.

By mistake rather than intent from what I can see. So now they are changing them one by one since errata all of them at the same time would add a ton of text because they are not a USR

Cant see how this is not in favor of USR over what we have now.

No, they are fully intentional. Why is this a mistake lol? One is a better rule than the other.

Are you taking units with both varieties in your army? If you can't keep track of rules maybe don't soup.

Klickor wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Just look at the difference between 're-roll misses' and 're-roll any to-hit die' for a great example of why this bespoke-rules-for-everything approach is confusing as heck.

These are two different rules.

By mistake rather than intent from what I can see. So now they are changing them one by one since errata all of them at the same time would add a ton of text because they are not a USR

Cant see how this is not in favor of USR over what we have now.

honestly it makes no sense that some values are checked before modifiers and other after modifiers, it should be all the same if the rule engine had perfect logic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
No, they are fully intentional. Why is this a mistake lol? One is a better rule than the other.

Then why are they slowly phasing the old rule out? Its an unintuitive rule that basically exists because of poor wording (in the context of the rules).
still, this particular example isnt the point of this thread.

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

you would have to be very trusting of people that they rules work the way they say they do. And while you could find the rules durning game, this would mean you would never fit it in to 60 min. For people here this would mean paying for a second hour of playing, at the store. While this may not be a problem for everyone, it is a problem for everyone whose game lenght is limited in anyway.

Klickor wrote:


I could if I wanted cheat a lot in most of my games since my opponent probably dont know all my special rules and cant be bothered to read through all my stratagems, traits, relics, powers and the FAQs for them everytime I use an unique rule.

It's even worse - I'm probably cheating by accident because I'm getting confused about whether the plasma gun is 1MW on a roll of 1 or remove the model, is it unmodified or with mods? Do I get to re-roll all dice or only misses? How close can these guys be to my units when they turn up, where do I have to keep my screening units?
Can I just see your book? Again? And now I need to check mine. And yours, again.

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

I am. Perhaps I'm the only one?

It breaks up the flow of the game and by extension any immersion there may have been.

Who’s playing 40K in one hour anyway?????

Karol wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

you would have to be very trusting of people that they rules work the way they say they do. And while you could find the rules durning game, this would mean you would never fit it in to 60 min. For people here this would mean paying for a second hour of playing, at the store. While this may not be a problem for everyone, it is a problem for everyone whose game lenght is limited in anyway.

If something smells fishy ask to see the rule. If you don't trust the people you play with find a better group of players, or refuse to play the cheaters.

If someone cheats the rules as written will only be one element of what they do wrong.

 Ishagu wrote:
No, they are fully intentional.

GW's designers have literally said in interview that they are replacing 're-roll failed hits' with 're-roll any die' because people get it wrong and play the former as the latter.

It's so confusing that GW is replacing the mechanic. But because they don't have USRs, they have to do it one rule at a time as they get updated.

 Ishagu wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

you would have to be very trusting of people that they rules work the way they say they do. And while you could find the rules durning game, this would mean you would never fit it in to 60 min. For people here this would mean paying for a second hour of playing, at the store. While this may not be a problem for everyone, it is a problem for everyone whose game lenght is limited in anyway.

If something smells fishy ask to see the rule. If you don't trust the people you play with find a better group of players, or refuse to play the cheaters.

If someone cheats the rules as written will only be one element of what they do wrong.

but how would you know if someone cheats if you dont learn their rules




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Who’s playing 40K in one hour anyway?????

i think karol's post meant an additional hours. So from 2h -> 3h

JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
I thought USRs were terrible for the game and was thrilled when they were removed. I am honestly perplexed at why anyone is getting confused about anything in the current game. A single army follows it's own set of rules and that's that.

Real quick, what's the difference between Hunters From Hyperspace, Haunting Horrors, Death Descending, Portal Of Exile, Teleportation Matrix, Teleport Strike, Jump Pack Assault, and Meteoric Descent?

If it's so easy to know stuff without USRs, you shouldn't even need to look to know, right?

Ishagu wrote:No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

Please explain the differences between all those rules. Without looking, if you can, because there’s apparently no problem with understanding them.

 Ishagu wrote:
No, they are fully intentional. Why is this a mistake lol? One is a better rule than the other.

Are you taking units with both varieties in your army? If you can't keep track of rules maybe don't soup.

Can you explain why its intentional to have them different yet they are changing them to the new wording in every new update?

This is the most obvious example of someone being flat out wrong in this thread.

If it were an USR they could and probably would have changed it for everyone with a single update. But since that kind of ability is all over the place it would be a lot of erratas/faqs to fix that.

It not being an USR is the whole reason its a mess right now. Instead of changing a single word in a document they now have to wait for each new book to replace it so units that are supposed to have the same reroll ability wont just due to when they get the new updated codex. BA/DA/SW/DW are ofc supposed to have the same chapter master reroll but they dont. Its obviously not intentional since they used to have the same and only difference is their place in the update cycle.

I have no problem knowing which units can reroll everything and which cant. None of my models even when I soup gets the new reroll rule. That might change soon though and I will have different versions in the same list.

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

That's just wrong. I and every person I've ever taught as asked about rules armies have even without playing them. You're just in a magic world aren't you...

How do you learn the opponents rules, Ishagu? Do you have them read the whole text, or just the name?

To be fair, I don't trust GW with an USR system.

Snugiraffe wrote:
It's even worse - I'm probably cheating by accident because I'm getting confused about whether the plasma gun is 1MW on a roll of 1 or remove the model, is it unmodified or with mods? Do I get to re-roll all dice or only misses? How close can these guys be to my units when they turn up, where do I have to keep my screening units?
Can I just see your book? Again? And now I need to check mine. And yours, again.

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

I am. Perhaps I'm the only one?

It breaks up the flow of the game and by extension any immersion there may have been.

You're not. Especially people who play more than one army get things wrong all the time because of these issues - including me.

Yeah, even with players who read their own codices it's a recurring issue.

I once had a game where we didn't realize until after that Ork plasma only explodes on an unmodified 1, not a 1 after modifiers, because why the feth would it work differently from Imperial plasma?

 Ishagu wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
No one is confused lol

Why are you trying to learn the name of rules for all the armies? That is a very niche problems. New players only focus on the faction of their choice. You guys are describing fake problems.

you would have to be very trusting of people that they rules work the way they say they do. And while you could find the rules durning game, this would mean you would never fit it in to 60 min. For people here this would mean paying for a second hour of playing, at the store. While this may not be a problem for everyone, it is a problem for everyone whose game lenght is limited in anyway.

If something smells fishy ask to see the rule. If you don't trust the people you play with find a better group of players, or refuse to play the cheaters.

If someone cheats the rules as written will only be one element of what they do wrong.

You may prefer, even enjoy, expending unnecessary effort to play the game because you are comfortable with its present state, but most players do not want to ask their opponent to explain each and every rule their units' possess each and every time they become relevant.