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:The rules are fine lol

There aren't even 10 examples of something which is so unclear it cannot be resolved in a game with 20 factions and 300+ different units.

Give me 5 examples, please.
Maybe you don't personally like something? Maybe things aren't as want?
Where are these badly written rules that prevent the game from working?

Its not about something being unclear, you're missing the point. Its about something being "almost" the same across the board. If i play multiple armies with bodyguard abilities, why do i need to learn 5 different variety? what does a timing/roll value change that makes the rules be so similar better for the game?

Ishagu wrote:The current system is not hard to handle.

It doesn't need to be easier. It is currently easy. This game is not hard to play lol.

If you're demanding perfection with no errors from both players at all times, I suggest that you don't involve yourself in a manual game played by humans. Humans make mistakes and are not perfect, some even cheat. That's humanity for you.

Why shouldnt we seek to improve? thats litterally how humans became the apex predator? "Why should we try and master fire, eating raw meat is currently easy",

Ishagu wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
The game would be so much more boring and limited if everything was reduced to USRs common across all models in different factions.

You're confusing depth with complexity.

No. I do like variety though.

So a bodyguard unit that intercepts the shot directly VS takes the wounds VS takes the shot but only takes one wound is better for the game in your opinion?

Ishagu wrote:Yes they could. That's the beauty of it. Each of these rules can be changed, removed or updated without impacting other units.

Another massive pro to using bespoke rules.

Sure, thats the main reason to say bespoke rules are interesting.But hey, good news! Its possible to use bespoke rules for unique rules and USRs for rules that are spread across the game (deepstrike, gets hot!)

Ishagu wrote:Actually the second you start to pile on multiple USRs a bespoke rule system becomes easier and more streamlined.

I only need to check one rule when it's bespoke.

I agree that this isn't an issue in the current game. It might be if you have OCD about knowing every single rule. That's on you, however.

good USRs dont have multiple layers like GW did in the past.

You want to only need to check a rule once Yet youre advocating to keep the rules similar yet different across codexes?

Ishagu wrote:But we just illustrated that many do have differences.

And just because some aren't different now doesn't mean they won't be individually adjusted in future. That's the beauty of a bespoke rule.

To me its a horror more than a beauty. Good systems are built on constant variables, not on almost constant ones because "they might change in the future"

Spoletta wrote:


There exists no other game (physical) with the complexity of 40k.

But complexity on it's own is not a good thing, or else FATAL and the Aliens RPG that required multiple rolls and consultation of charts per bullet fired (when guns were firing in bursts) would be the pinnacle of RPG design. Complexity should only be added when it corresponds to an increase in depth (i.e the meaningful choices available to the player).

The problem of course being that 40K doesn't convert that complexity into depth, which means that it ends up being much more shallow than games like Warmachine and Infinity in terms of meaningful choices available to the player.

So it maximises on complexity for zero gain from that complexity. In other words, 40K is an example of how to not design a game.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Spoletta wrote:


There exists no other game (physical) with the complexity of 40k.

The problem of course being that 40K doesn't convert that complexity into depth, which means that it ends up being much more shallow than games like Warmachine and Infinity in terms of meaningful choices available to the player.

So it maximises on complexity for zero gain from that complexity.

i dont understand how anyone can think that 40k is more complex than infinity. Clearly their biased and have never tried it. Infinity having weapons with effective ranges and the possibility to go prone already makes it more complex than 40k lol.

40k is incredibly easy to play. All the special rules being on the unit datasheet is very streamlined.

Unless...?

The guys who oppose this don't actually own the rules? I think I've solved the mystery to their problems!
Go buy the books!

Sorry for the usual digression earlier. I don't think this guy is debating you guys in good faith.

If it were so easy, I wouldn't have to monitor a subset of opponents like a hawk.

If you think this game is easy, you are probably making a lot of mistakes.

Find better opponents? People make mistakes doing even the easiest of tasks. That's humans for you.

Or are you watching them because they cheat? That's a different issue entirely.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Spoletta wrote:


There exists no other game (physical) with the complexity of 40k.

The problem of course being that 40K doesn't convert that complexity into depth, which means that it ends up being much more shallow than games like Warmachine and Infinity in terms of meaningful choices available to the player.

So it maximises on complexity for zero gain from that complexity.

i dont understand how anyone can think that 40k is more complex than infinity. Clearly their biased and have never tried it. Infinity having weapons with effective ranges and the possibility to go prone already makes it more complex than 40k lol.

In terms of clarity of rules, Infinity is much less complex thanks to its effective use of USRs. You look at a weapon or unit, see the special rules listed for it and if you know what they do then you know what they do. You look at the range brackets and the modifiers and you instantly see how they work.

And those complexities add to the meaningful choices a player has. If a unit has gun which is much more dangerous at close range, then the player needs to weigh in whether the benefit of doing more damage is offset by the risk of trying to close that distance in order to use it to its maximum effectiveness. Maybe it would be better to hold up, stay alive and use that gun as a deterrent to your opponents close range units instead, at least until you can clear out a safe path to flank the enemy. 40K has very little of such decisions, there is usually one obvious best decision (or only decision)

I've played infinity.

1: It's a skirmish game and not a good comparison.

2: It's definitely not easier to play than 40k.

 Ishagu wrote:
40k is incredibly easy to play. All the special rules being on the unit datasheet is very streamlined.

Unless...?

The guys who oppose this don't actually own the rules? I think I've solved the mystery to their problems!
Go buy the books!

Now you are using baseless assumptions and accusations. This does not help the discussion.

The general concept of the game is fairly accessible, far more than the earlier editions. This is a good thing, and having all the relevant rules on the datasheet (bar exceptions like "character" or "fly") or in the same book (e.g. "reanimation protocols") helps a lot. However, the game can get very complex ruleswise very quickly, when several special rules interact with each other, such as mortal wounds on hit with shield drones. What I think many people are looking for (including me) is that rules like the different deep strike variants of tyranids are either treated the same as "reanimation protocols" with an addendum for e.g. the reroll to charge or the disembark, or are worded identical in the paragraphs that describe the deep strike part. And that those rules are kept the same for all armies where they are applicable, which especially are deepstrike, bodyguard and feel no pain (and probably others I did not mention).

 Ishagu wrote:
40k is incredibly easy to play. All the special rules being on the unit datasheet is very streamlined.

Yep, every special rule is on every datasheet.

Like Quicksilver Swiftness for Slaanesh, which... oh, bother. Let me flip around my codex to find that, sorry, not on the datasheet. At least I only need the Datasheet to know what Demonic Ritual does... oh, wait, hmm, not there. Well, I can always look on the datasheet to find out what the Locus of Swiftness does - oh, um, never mind. Let's use the datasheet to look up Demonic then. Oh, wait, no, that's not there either...

 Ishagu wrote:
40k is incredibly easy to play. All the special rules being on the unit datasheet is very streamlined.

Unless...?

The guys who oppose this don't actually own the rules? I think I've solved the mystery to their problems!
Go buy the books!

i own all the books i need to play the game (with a shared chapter approved for the points value at my LGS). The rules are ok when you take them one at a time. The problem is that there is artificial complexity by making rules almost the same for no good reason.

But yeah, i'll skip arguing with you since you clearly came on this thread to dump your "holier than thou" attitude down our throats.
have a good day

Well seeing as I find the rules very easy to understand, and even easier to source. Why is that?

<Removed>

I'm fact there is far less contention than there was with playing in 7th, 6th and even 5th editions. What's up with that? They were swimming with USRs. That's odd.

If the game is more complex than before, why has it grown so much and attracted so many new players. Maybe the Chaos Gods are at play?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
40k is incredibly easy to play. All the special rules being on the unit datasheet is very streamlined.

Yep, every special rule is on every datasheet.

Like Quicksilver Swiftness for Slaanesh, which... oh, bother. Let me flip around my codex to find that, sorry, not on the datasheet. At least I only need the Datasheet to know what Demonic Ritual does... oh, wait, hmm, not there. Well, I can always look on the datasheet to find out what the Locus of Swiftness does - oh, um, never mind. Let's use the datasheet to look up Demonic then. Oh, wait, no, that's not there either...

nah, the rules being 3 different places if good for the game's complexity and variety /s

 Ishagu wrote:
Well seeing as I find the rules very easy to understand, and even easier to source. Why is that?

Is my grasp of the English language far greater than most?

Can you answer my question from earlier in the thread about the interaction between the Belt of Russ and Quicksilver Swiftness and whether or not I can spend CP to interrupt as the Slaanesh player?

All you need is check the unit's datasheets, after all, since all the rules are there. It was a Rune Priest and a KoS if you need to google the datasheets.

Take a photo of the rules and I'll have a look at it.

I'm not familiar with every rule 100%. How often does that interaction come up? Every game you play or is it one of very few confusing interactions.

I did ask for 10 examples than can't be resolved. Maybe this is one?

 Ishagu wrote:
Take a photo of the rules and I'll have a look at it.

I'm not familiar with every rule 100%. How often does that interaction come up? Every game you play or is it one of very few confusing interactions.

I did ask for 10 examples than can't be resolved. Maybe this is one?

Its not about if the interactions can or can't be resolved you keep missing the point.

He's just pushing your buttons at this point. He's not debating in good faith.

Martel732 wrote:
He's just pushing your buttons at this point. He's not debating in good faith.

yeah, hes consistently been doing this for a long time sadly .

I absolutely am.

But here's my question. If we all agree that Bespoke rules and USRs both have pros and cons, why are people still arguing?

One is not better than the other. The designers don't agree with your preference after using them for 20+ years. Accept it and move on.

If GW switched back to USR tomorrow, he'd probably say that he always thought that USRs were great, and that GW was just testing the bespoken rule thing in 8th ed.

I'm enjoying this version of the game more than any in 23 years of playing.

If the next version is more fun and is a better game I will defend it.

 Ishagu wrote:
Take a photo of the rules and I'll have a look at it.

I'm not familiar with every rule 100%. How often does that interaction come up? Every game you play or is it one of very few confusing interactions.

I did ask for 10 examples than can't be resolved. Maybe this is one?

So far it has come up every game since March, given that my opponent is the same person (thanks COVID). We resolved it our way, but not because of RAW. Because we had to.
Here's the datasheets for the units in question:
Keeper of Secrets:

Primaris Rune Priest:

 Ishagu wrote:
I'm enjoying this version of the game more than any in 23 years of playing.

If the next version is more fun and is a better game I will defend it.

I think you'll defend it no matter what.

 Ishagu wrote:
I absolutely am.

But here's my question. If we all agree that Bespoke rules and USRs both have pros and cons, why are people still arguing?

One is not better than the other. The designers don't agree with your preference after using them for 20+ years. Accept it and move on.

were not saying to go 100% for one or the other. were saying that things that have the same effect should have USRS, complemented by bespoke rules. Youre arguing the wrong thing.

And I'm saying I prefer every faction to have bespoke rules in the same way they have bespoke weapons.

It allows for individual adjustment to rules, points and abilities without impacting anything else. Better for a fluid game system like what 40k is.

I am going to ask this once nicely: Stay on topic and be polite to one another, the amount of alerts this topic is generating is on the wrong side of hilarious.

Grabbed the datasheets for you so you can answer our rules question, Ishagu.

 Ishagu wrote:
But we just illustrated that many do have differences.

And just because some aren't different now doesn't mean they won't be individually adjusted in future. That's the beauty of a bespoke rule.

They don't have difference. They simply have some additional that comes up after they Deep Strike.

 Ishagu wrote:
And I'm saying I prefer every faction to have bespoke rules in the same way they have bespoke weapons.

It allows for individual adjustment to rules, points and abilities without impacting anything else. Better for a fluid game system like what 40k is.

And, again, to my knowledge, GW have never actually errata'd or changed what is effectively a USR on a unit in that way in the whole of 8th edition. Can you give me an example of where that's happened? Even if it has, you can get the exact same effect by adding a bespoke rule to the unit as well as the USR. It even takes up less space.

Slipspace wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
And I'm saying I prefer every faction to have bespoke rules in the same way they have bespoke weapons.

It allows for individual adjustment to rules, points and abilities without impacting anything else. Better for a fluid game system like what 40k is.

And, again, to my knowledge, GW have never actually errata'd or changed what is effectively a USR on a unit in that way in the whole of 8th edition. Can you give me an example of where that's happened? Even if it has, you can get the exact same effect by adding a bespoke rule to the unit as well as the USR. It even takes up less space.

To my knowledge they have not, even when FLY was change the harlequins had the perfect time to show GW they are willing to change units unique rules with their Flip Belts, they did not, instead they made another Large faq for all liked rules and ignore quins.