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.
We don't know what terrain keywords models/fortifications will have. With that one i wouldnt be giving it obscuring. So you can see whats on it and behind it.
Its unlikely keywords will change for terrain. What you probably mean is traits. Terrain will have whatever traits you and your opponent will give it. It can be none, or could be up to ten, or even twenty, depending how many there will be. Right now we know seven traits. With 10-15 terrain pieces, and maybe 10 traits, thats a lot to define before the game begins. There will be guidelines in the rules for terrain pieces, but guidelines arent mandatory. The same terrain piece could have had six traits in your last game yesterday, and today it only has one. Almost infinite possibilities for combinations of 10 terrain pieces with maybe 10 different traits. Sounds fun, doesnt it ? For tournaments the traits will probably be pre-defined.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/13 09:38:25
I honestly do not know why so many people are freaking out or are having a hard time understanding this. All the ruled will be explained in the rules. What a model is, how you trace line of sight etc.
The obscure rule is on characteristic some terain can have. From a flavour perspective your terain are abstract representations of terain. If the forest has the obscure rule and are above 5" the forrest is so thick you can not see through it. They represent this abstract instead of modelling rnough trees to block line of sight.
It is a clear response to 8th edition complaints that it is very hard to block line of sight. Almost all gw terrain are big thin things (like the trees or the drill) or they are full of holes and windows. (All official GW ruins.)
For the most part one shoulder on an opposing model coul trace line of sight to my tyrants hoof through a window and he could be targeted. With propper possitioning this rule prevents that.
For instance if you and your ppponent agreed the drill has the obscure rules and you where behind it you can not be targeted.
Weather you get an armour save in it or not depends on other tags the drill might have. Since GSC can bring the drill along I really hope GW states its tags so that GSC can consistenly bring obsuring terain or not.
I expect that I will be using the guidlines as written (like the ruins and container examples) at least initially unless they turn out to be not much fun to play with.
I expect the day 1 FAQ/errata will assign terrain traits to the existing fortifications and for new ones to have traits on their datasheets.
GW's quest to "streamline" everything just create more extreme edge cases.
Case in point, these two models below can't see each other.
Spoiler:
It’s almost as if that’s a problem those players created for themselves by applying a silly attribute to the middle terrain piece... or they chose it to represent clouds of toxic smoke belching out that block LOS for some immersion.
Not actually a problem with rules there, more with how players choose to define their terrain. If you make an edge case yourself you only have yourselves to blame.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/06/14 10:08:54
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
GW's quest to "streamline" everything just create more extreme edge cases.
Case in point, these two models below can't see each other.
Spoiler:
It’s almost as if that’s a problem those players created for themselves by applying a silly attribute to the middle terrain piece... or they chose it to represent clouds of toxic smoke belching out that block LOS for some immersion.
Not actually a problem with rules there, more with how players choose to define their terrain. If you make an edge case yourself you only have yourselves to blame.
Exactly. That middle piece of terrain is a solid object so I'd assume you don't give it the Obscuring trait since you don't need to. Just treat it as you would now, without the need for any special traits and it functions fine. I think this is another example of why this thread doesn't really belong in YMDC too. The rules seem pretty clear and unambiguous even if the consequences of those rules may not be the most intuitive. But we don't have the full picture yet so it's impossible to say anything with any certainty.
The Obscuring trait allows common terrain pieces like "ruins" and woods to functional and removes things like "magic boxes." It also allows for things like Knights without the requirement for the ridiculous looking pieces (the giant Ls) we see on the tourney circuit. Players who play on a tabletop can now, presumably, designate the terrain pieces before the game in a way that makes sense. A shipping crate does not need Obscuring unless you decide it needs to.
I am looking forward to woods and functional ruins/buildings creating "dead ground" where we can manoeuvre. Terrain can now look good and be functional with game pieces on a tabletop.
All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand
Wakshaani wrote: LOS to, or from, an AIRCRAFT model cannot be blocked.
Not sure how you think this is true, especially when you got the models with more than 18 wounds correct.
"AIRCRAFT, and models with a wounds characteristic [ W ] of 18 or more..."
Aircraft can be seen, but cannot see; just the same as models with 18+W.
This is my Rulebook. There are many Like it, but this one is mine. Without me, my rulebook is useless. Without my rulebook, I am useless.
Stop looking for buzz words and start reading the whole sentences.
What the terrain traits give you are more options for more nuanced terrain representations for your games of 40K. If you want to be all anal about it, you can just decide not to assign any terrain traits to anything and just keep TLOSing on.
"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems"
I LIKE the apoc terrain rules. They should have basically stuck with those.
Embarking into terrain is great. They have pieces of that in that you can see into and out of terrain but not through it (if it obscures).
But in Apoc you had 2 rules. Obscured and Stealth. Each provided a -1 to hit. They were binary statuses you could have on a unit which means they stacked with each other but multiple instances of the same one would not stack.
Tau stealth suits or ghostkeels? Stealth. Venomthropes? Obscured. Inside of terrain? Obscured. Stealth suits inside of terrain, -2 to hit.
Granted, I don't know what rules they are going to use in their entirety yet. And granted I could just take the apoc rules whole sale and use them without all the crap complication. But it seems like so far they are just making it way more complicated then it needs to be.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
TangoTwoBravo wrote: The Obscuring trait allows common terrain pieces like "ruins" and woods to functional and removes things like "magic boxes." It also allows for things like Knights without the requirement for the ridiculous looking pieces (the giant Ls) we see on the tourney circuit. Players who play on a tabletop can now, presumably, designate the terrain pieces before the game in a way that makes sense. A shipping crate does not need Obscuring unless you decide it needs to.
I am looking forward to woods and functional ruins/buildings creating "dead ground" where we can manoeuvre. Terrain can now look good and be functional with game pieces on a tabletop.
Except you will still need such terrain as GW terrain rules via obscured mean LoW still need the Huge L's to avoid getting shot of the bored turn 1. Not to mention the additional issue of not even being able to shoot back should the oppoent be lucky enough to have an obscuring piece of terrain just infront of their deployment zone.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/14 20:17:54
TangoTwoBravo wrote: The Obscuring trait allows common terrain pieces like "ruins" and woods to functional and removes things like "magic boxes." It also allows for things like Knights without the requirement for the ridiculous looking pieces (the giant Ls) we see on the tourney circuit. Players who play on a tabletop can now, presumably, designate the terrain pieces before the game in a way that makes sense. A shipping crate does not need Obscuring unless you decide it needs to.
I am looking forward to woods and functional ruins/buildings creating "dead ground" where we can manoeuvre. Terrain can now look good and be functional with game pieces on a tabletop.
Except you will still need such terrain as GW terrain rules via obscured mean LoW still need the Huge L's to avoid getting shot of the bored turn 1. Not to mention the additional issue of not even being able to shoot back should the oppoent be lucky enough to have an obscuring piece of terrain just infront of their deployment zone.
I think the main implication here is that terrains will be/is planned to be a larger part of the gameplay as a whole. Currently, alpha-strike focused army has 1 deployment option, which is to bring all of your guns as close to the enemy in turn 1 by deploying along the edge of your deployment zone. Going forward, players will be incentivized to deploy more tactically in order to prevent their knights blowing up in turn 1.
TangoTwoBravo wrote: The Obscuring trait allows common terrain pieces like "ruins" and woods to functional and removes things like "magic boxes." It also allows for things like Knights without the requirement for the ridiculous looking pieces (the giant Ls) we see on the tourney circuit. Players who play on a tabletop can now, presumably, designate the terrain pieces before the game in a way that makes sense. A shipping crate does not need Obscuring unless you decide it needs to.
I am looking forward to woods and functional ruins/buildings creating "dead ground" where we can manoeuvre. Terrain can now look good and be functional with game pieces on a tabletop.
Except you will still need such terrain as GW terrain rules via obscured mean LoW still need the Huge L's to avoid getting shot of the bored turn 1. Not to mention the additional issue of not even being able to shoot back should the oppoent be lucky enough to have an obscuring piece of terrain just infront of their deployment zone.
I think the main implication here is that terrains will be/is planned to be a larger part of the gameplay as a whole. Currently, alpha-strike focused army has 1 deployment option, which is to bring all of your guns as close to the enemy in turn 1 by deploying along the edge of your deployment zone. Going forward, players will be incentivized to deploy more tactically in order to prevent their knights blowing up in turn 1.
Except they never benifit from the Obscured rule, atleast with ITC rules they had some hope of hiding, now they are going to be loosing multiple knights per turn and probably to more than Marines if what GW is saying about Necrons is true and they are now Marines level of OP.
TangoTwoBravo wrote: The Obscuring trait allows common terrain pieces like "ruins" and woods to functional and removes things like "magic boxes." It also allows for things like Knights without the requirement for the ridiculous looking pieces (the giant Ls) we see on the tourney circuit. Players who play on a tabletop can now, presumably, designate the terrain pieces before the game in a way that makes sense. A shipping crate does not need Obscuring unless you decide it needs to.
I am looking forward to woods and functional ruins/buildings creating "dead ground" where we can manoeuvre. Terrain can now look good and be functional with game pieces on a tabletop.
Except you will still need such terrain as GW terrain rules via obscured mean LoW still need the Huge L's to avoid getting shot of the bored turn 1. Not to mention the additional issue of not even being able to shoot back should the oppoent be lucky enough to have an obscuring piece of terrain just infront of their deployment zone.
I think the main implication here is that terrains will be/is planned to be a larger part of the gameplay as a whole. Currently, alpha-strike focused army has 1 deployment option, which is to bring all of your guns as close to the enemy in turn 1 by deploying along the edge of your deployment zone. Going forward, players will be incentivized to deploy more tactically in order to prevent their knights blowing up in turn 1.
Except they never benifit from the Obscured rule, atleast with ITC rules they had some hope of hiding, now they are going to be loosing multiple knights per turn and probably to more than Marines if what GW is saying about Necrons is true and they are now Marines level of OP.
I mean, coming from someone who plays bike army primarily, if you put all of your eggs in one basket (i.e. all bike army, all knights army, all melee army) you should be expecting to play with somewhat of a handicap.
If you're (not specifically YOU, ice_can) one of those meta chasers who went and bought castellan and few other smaller knights and some extra helverins for CP's, you can't possibly have thought that the fun was going to last forever. Plus, if you're a meta chaser, isn't it your 'job' to keep buying new models to replace your invalidated list?
Point I'm trying to make is that addition of fleshed out terrain rule will benefit the game overall (not saying there won't be edge case scenarios requiring SFF fix) by providing obvious disadvantages to skew lists. Skew lists are not healthy in either LGS or major tourney scenes.
Better way of reacting to the information we have so far isn't to worry about how knights are going to blow up in turn 1, but rather, how list building will be affected. Obviously it's going to be bad idea to focus solely on elements that won't be able to take advantage of terrain. Knight focused lists will need to bring additional distraction carnifex in order to draw fire away from the knight, or force the aggro onto the knight to keep your other heavy hitters a chance to avoid getting shot at. This IS a war after all - there will be casualties.
Plus, I suspect there will be some sort of trait for completely blocking LOS and Obscured trait recommended for terrain features with windows like the ones GW sells.
This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2020/06/16 19:15:40
TangoTwoBravo wrote: The Obscuring trait allows common terrain pieces like "ruins" and woods to functional and removes things like "magic boxes." It also allows for things like Knights without the requirement for the ridiculous looking pieces (the giant Ls) we see on the tourney circuit. Players who play on a tabletop can now, presumably, designate the terrain pieces before the game in a way that makes sense. A shipping crate does not need Obscuring unless you decide it needs to.
I am looking forward to woods and functional ruins/buildings creating "dead ground" where we can manoeuvre. Terrain can now look good and be functional with game pieces on a tabletop.
Except you will still need such terrain as GW terrain rules via obscured mean LoW still need the Huge L's to avoid getting shot of the bored turn 1. Not to mention the additional issue of not even being able to shoot back should the oppoent be lucky enough to have an obscuring piece of terrain just infront of their deployment zone.
I think the main implication here is that terrains will be/is planned to be a larger part of the gameplay as a whole. Currently, alpha-strike focused army has 1 deployment option, which is to bring all of your guns as close to the enemy in turn 1 by deploying along the edge of your deployment zone. Going forward, players will be incentivized to deploy more tactically in order to prevent their knights blowing up in turn 1.
Except they never benifit from the Obscured rule, atleast with ITC rules they had some hope of hiding, now they are going to be loosing multiple knights per turn and probably to more than Marines if what GW is saying about Necrons is true and they are now Marines level of OP.
I mean, coming from someone who plays bike army primarily, if you put all of your eggs in one basket (i.e. all bike army, all knights army, all melee army) you should be expecting to play with somewhat of a handicap.
If you're (not specifically YOU, ice_can) one of those meta chasers who went and bought castellan and few other smaller knights and some extra helverins for CP's, you can't possibly have thought that the fun was going to last forever. Plus, if you're a meta chaser, isn't it your 'job' to keep buying new models to replace your invalidated list?
Point I'm trying to make is that addition of fleshed out terrain rule will benefit the game overall (not saying there won't be edge case scenarios requiring SFF fix) by providing obvious disadvantages to skew lists. Skew lists are not healthy in either LGS or major tourney scenes.
Better way of reacting to the information we have so far isn't to worry about how knights are going to blow up in turn 1, but rather, how list building will be affected. Obviously it's going to be bad idea to focus solely on elements that won't be able to take advantage of terrain. Knight focused lists will need to bring additional distraction carnifex in order to draw fire away from the knight, or force the aggro onto the knight to keep your other heavy hitters a chance to avoid getting shot at. This IS a war after all - there will be casualties.
Plus, I suspect there will be some sort of trait for completely blocking LOS and Obscured trait recommended for terrain features with windows like the ones GW sells.
Think I have 5 or 6k of Knight's at this point, meta chasing it's not I just like the look of the army.
I just am getting kinda fed up of GW pandering to people claimijg they must be able to kill XYZ turn 1, I have seen marines lift 48 T8 3+,4++ wounds of the table in 1 turn thats over 1000points.
Excluding LoW from terrain rules seems like GW believingthe collective wisdom that Knights are OP, yeah Mono they had 40% win rate pre covid, clearly a faction that needed nerfing while all the rules seem to be coming up Marine's.
New terrain rules are exactly what we all wanted, I just wish they felt a bit more balanced around actual logic or balance instead of apparently being yet more rules that appear to be stacking things infavour of Primaris.
TangoTwoBravo wrote: The Obscuring trait allows common terrain pieces like "ruins" and woods to functional and removes things like "magic boxes." It also allows for things like Knights without the requirement for the ridiculous looking pieces (the giant Ls) we see on the tourney circuit. Players who play on a tabletop can now, presumably, designate the terrain pieces before the game in a way that makes sense. A shipping crate does not need Obscuring unless you decide it needs to.
I am looking forward to woods and functional ruins/buildings creating "dead ground" where we can manoeuvre. Terrain can now look good and be functional with game pieces on a tabletop.
Except you will still need such terrain as GW terrain rules via obscured mean LoW still need the Huge L's to avoid getting shot of the bored turn 1. Not to mention the additional issue of not even being able to shoot back should the oppoent be lucky enough to have an obscuring piece of terrain just infront of their deployment zone.
I think the main implication here is that terrains will be/is planned to be a larger part of the gameplay as a whole. Currently, alpha-strike focused army has 1 deployment option, which is to bring all of your guns as close to the enemy in turn 1 by deploying along the edge of your deployment zone. Going forward, players will be incentivized to deploy more tactically in order to prevent their knights blowing up in turn 1.
Except they never benifit from the Obscured rule, atleast with ITC rules they had some hope of hiding, now they are going to be loosing multiple knights per turn and probably to more than Marines if what GW is saying about Necrons is true and they are now Marines level of OP.
I mean, coming from someone who plays bike army primarily, if you put all of your eggs in one basket (i.e. all bike army, all knights army, all melee army) you should be expecting to play with somewhat of a handicap.
If you're (not specifically YOU, ice_can) one of those meta chasers who went and bought castellan and few other smaller knights and some extra helverins for CP's, you can't possibly have thought that the fun was going to last forever. Plus, if you're a meta chaser, isn't it your 'job' to keep buying new models to replace your invalidated list?
Point I'm trying to make is that addition of fleshed out terrain rule will benefit the game overall (not saying there won't be edge case scenarios requiring SFF fix) by providing obvious disadvantages to skew lists. Skew lists are not healthy in either LGS or major tourney scenes.
Better way of reacting to the information we have so far isn't to worry about how knights are going to blow up in turn 1, but rather, how list building will be affected. Obviously it's going to be bad idea to focus solely on elements that won't be able to take advantage of terrain. Knight focused lists will need to bring additional distraction carnifex in order to draw fire away from the knight, or force the aggro onto the knight to keep your other heavy hitters a chance to avoid getting shot at. This IS a war after all - there will be casualties.
Plus, I suspect there will be some sort of trait for completely blocking LOS and Obscured trait recommended for terrain features with windows like the ones GW sells.
Think I have 5 or 6k of Knight's at this point, meta chasing it's not I just like the look of the army.
I just am getting kinda fed up of GW pandering to people claimijg they must be able to kill XYZ turn 1, I have seen marines lift 48 T8 3+,4++ wounds of the table in 1 turn thats over 1000points. Excluding LoW from terrain rules seems like GW believingthe collective wisdom that Knights are OP, yeah Mono they had 40% win rate pre covid, clearly a faction that needed nerfing while all the rules seem to be coming up Marine's.
New terrain rules are exactly what we all wanted, I just wish they felt a bit more balanced around actual logic or balance instead of apparently being yet more rules that appear to be stacking things infavour of Primaris.
I'm hopeful that the obscuring rules won't be the only way to block LOS in the new edition. I assume (dangerous, i know) that the obscuring trait is so that things like the ruins GW produces with windows and tress/woods can be used as useful LOS blocking terrain in conjunction with "genuine" LOS blocking stuff like buildings, solid walls and whatnot, which wouldn't have "obscuring" but would instead would operate with TLOS, allowing knights and other large things to avoid being shot to death with good placement.
I think the idea with the new terrain rules is to give a codified set of tools to make terrain have a variety of uses in game and allow for some aesthetic terrain to be useful.
The key to make the new terrain system work will be to have a variety of different types to serve different functions. A tabletop with only ruins with obscuring will not be fun to play on with knights in the same way that planet bowling ball isn't much fun for a CC army. Hopefully the terrain guidance/recommendations will clarify this.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/06/17 09:28:45
