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.

 harlokin wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Actually the proposed rules forum is a nice place to look for inspiration for when you are so fed up that you decide to write your own campaign, or rebalance stuff. And that it does actually quite well.

I'm sure it is. The point I am failing to make is you can see how much of a variation of opinion there is among the player base as to what the solution to any given problem is (or even if something is a problem). Then there is the issue that GW's rules (flawed as they are) allow you to play with strangers and have an common understanding of how the game works. What are the chances that some stranger will agree with you on which house rule variation of the game is the right one to use.

Maybe give onepagerules a try, I've been looking to play that system myself for a while now.

On topic: get fethed pointy ears! (jk) How unplayable are harlequins now?

what I experieced, Harlequines are doing pretty good.
A highly mobile army, with invuls all around, that can use the new scenery to it's benefit - although I'm speaking from the view of a single riptide (sometimes not even that) tau player, so I might be a bit biased...

tneva82 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
I still maintain best thing that could happen to 40k is if players would raise middle finger to GW for rules and do it themselves. Players have shown they can outdo GW on that area.

Leave GW doing models. Take hand of rules from them.

Did someone tell you that you can't? Amongst your friends and acquaintances you can play with any weird and wacky rules you like.

Among friends and acquiaintances I can yes. I'm talking about expanding it LARGER base. Like pretty much every major tournament scale larger.

All this does is split the community further. Just look at the constant bickering between EEFLer, 6th Eders, KoW, and 9th Age groups to see how that works in reality.

Nibbler wrote:
what I experieced, Harlequines are doing pretty good.

They were up until this FAQ. I'm afraid they just went from top tables to trash tier. Protecting characters with transports was literally their whole point.

ThePorcupine wrote:

Nibbler wrote:
what I experieced, Harlequines are doing pretty good.

They were up until this FAQ. I'm afraid they just went from top tables to trash tier. Protecting characters with transports was literally their whole point.

The whole point of...harlequins?

But their transports are open topped. Their characters generally dont get out and try to hide behind the vehicle, they tend to get out when the vehicle is destroyed.

Yes the whole point of harlequins. In the traditional soaring spite list a shadowseer stays out in order to 1. provide a -1 to wound aura to your transports and 2. twilight pathways a unit forward. Solitaire naturally stays out because he doesn't need a transport. Death Jesters used to hang out on objectives. Now they 100% cannot do that even with a transport nearby.

Really the only character this doesn't effect is the troupe master.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So besides getting rid of the super-friends gimmick what exactly is the "good" you're seeing? What's the upside of characters not gaining protection from a nearby box dread but getting protection from a nearby rhino or squad of scouts that's been reduced to only three models? Honest question.

There were a few lists out there that were quite lame. We had a guy springing for an all landspeeder and talonmaster army. Now if dreads go to 10 wounds then moot point for dread spam.

You can't keep harlequin characters in the transports. Every single one is made useless by staying in a transport. Staying in a transport = no strats, no auras, no psychic powers, and no close combat. I guess you could keep a death jester in a transport if they weren't the faction that uses the double shoot strat, but aside from that, there is no point to running harlequin characters if they have to stay in transports.

This was a stupid attempt to fix the Daemon Prince Super Friend thing by people who lazily fixed something without thinking through what else it would break. When all they had to do to fix it was specify that CHARACTER MONSTERS and VEHICLES don't block.

ThePorcupine wrote:
Yes the whole point of harlequins. In the traditional soaring spite list a shadowseer stays out in order to 1. provide a -1 to wound aura to your transports and 2. twilight pathways a unit forward. Solitaire naturally stays out because he doesn't need a transport. Death Jesters used to hang out on objectives. Now they 100% cannot do that even with a transport nearby.

Really the only character this doesn't effect is the troupe master.

I thought the shadowseer's aura was infantry only?

I guess I can see the point about the death jester, but I almost always tuck my Solitaire somewhere totally out of LOS anyway. The corner of a ruin, behind a crate, he's a teeny tiny model and it's pretty easy to put him somewhere the enemy would hugely open themselves up trying to get to see him.

I don't think I've ever struggled to get a solitaire in to combat. When he dies, he dies after he's shredded his first target and the enemy goes "oh gak, that guy needs to go!"

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So besides getting rid of the super-friends gimmick what exactly is the "good" you're seeing? What's the upside of characters not gaining protection from a nearby box dread but getting protection from a nearby rhino or squad of scouts that's been reduced to only three models? Honest question.

There were a few lists out there that were quite lame. We had a guy springing for an all landspeeder and talonmaster army. Now if dreads go to 10 wounds then moot point for dread spam.

Yeah,I could see that being annoying. Agreed that an across the board increase in wounds for units could render this moot. It would, however, also greatly affect what vehicles could benefit from Obscuring terrain. I'll come right out and say: if things like Repulsor Executioners go to 18 wounds and no longer benefit from Obscuring terrain I'll stop complaining about the unequal interactions that rule creates for super heavys with smaller vehicles. It's the "almost a super heavy" vehicles getting the benefits of it that drives me crazy.

the_scotsman wrote:

ThePorcupine wrote:

Nibbler wrote:
what I experieced, Harlequines are doing pretty good.

They were up until this FAQ. I'm afraid they just went from top tables to trash tier. Protecting characters with transports was literally their whole point.

The whole point of...harlequins?

But their transports are open topped. Their characters generally dont get out and try to hide behind the vehicle, they tend to get out when the vehicle is destroyed.

In my experience "when the vehicle is destroyed" part happens in turn 1 for the vast majority of them

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So besides getting rid of the super-friends gimmick what exactly is the "good" you're seeing? What's the upside of characters not gaining protection from a nearby box dread but getting protection from a nearby rhino or squad of scouts that's been reduced to only three models? Honest question.

There were a few lists out there that were quite lame. We had a guy springing for an all landspeeder and talonmaster army. Now if dreads go to 10 wounds then moot point for dread spam.

Yeah,I could see that being annoying. Agreed that an across the board increase in wounds for units could render this moot. It would, however, also greatly affect what vehicles could benefit from Obscuring terrain. I'll come right out and say: if things like Repulsor Executioners go to 18 wounds and no longer benefit from Obscuring terrain I'll stop complaining about the unequal interactions that rule creates for super heavys with smaller vehicles. It's the "almost a super heavy" vehicles getting the benefits of it that drives me crazy.

Actually if a dreadnaught deamon prince goes to 11-14 wounds it doesnt as he is now just flat removed from lookout sir and is always targetable which in many ways would make more sence than the current rules which seem to draw odd cut off lines.

Also agreed many units need more wounds, heck I have heard one pod cast saying that every 2nd piece of terrain should be obscuring to reduce the lethality, while ignoring that it doesnt fix the core issues or help a number of armies and units.

Ice_can wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So besides getting rid of the super-friends gimmick what exactly is the "good" you're seeing? What's the upside of characters not gaining protection from a nearby box dread but getting protection from a nearby rhino or squad of scouts that's been reduced to only three models? Honest question.

There were a few lists out there that were quite lame. We had a guy springing for an all landspeeder and talonmaster army. Now if dreads go to 10 wounds then moot point for dread spam.

Yeah,I could see that being annoying. Agreed that an across the board increase in wounds for units could render this moot. It would, however, also greatly affect what vehicles could benefit from Obscuring terrain. I'll come right out and say: if things like Repulsor Executioners go to 18 wounds and no longer benefit from Obscuring terrain I'll stop complaining about the unequal interactions that rule creates for super heavys with smaller vehicles. It's the "almost a super heavy" vehicles getting the benefits of it that drives me crazy.

Actually if a dreadnaught deamon prince goes to 11-14 wounds it doesnt as he is now just flat removed from lookout sir and is always targetable which in many ways would make more sence than the current rules which seem to draw odd cut off lines.

Also agreed many units need more wounds, heck I have heard one pod cast saying that every 2nd piece of terrain should be obscuring to reduce the lethality, while ignoring that it doesnt fix the core issues or help a number of armies and units.

I hadn't considered that. But that could be changed by giving dreadnought/monster characters rules like the one Old One Eye has. Effectively they couldn't be protected by infantry but could be by other large vehicles/monsters of a specific type, so they'd want to run in packs of their own kind.

the_scotsman wrote:
I thought the shadowseer's aura was infantry only?

The new white dwarf harlequin rules give them a few amazing stratagems, one of which lets you apply the shadowseer wound aura to all units, not just infantry.

Also gives the shadowseer another great aura that reduces the range of things shooting at your units (infantry and vehicles).

So yes, you DEFINITELY want your shadowseer to be outside.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So besides getting rid of the super-friends gimmick what exactly is the "good" you're seeing? What's the upside of characters not gaining protection from a nearby box dread but getting protection from a nearby rhino or squad of scouts that's been reduced to only three models? Honest question.

There were a few lists out there that were quite lame. We had a guy springing for an all landspeeder and talonmaster army. Now if dreads go to 10 wounds then moot point for dread spam.

Yeah,I could see that being annoying. Agreed that an across the board increase in wounds for units could render this moot. It would, however, also greatly affect what vehicles could benefit from Obscuring terrain. I'll come right out and say: if things like Repulsor Executioners go to 18 wounds and no longer benefit from Obscuring terrain I'll stop complaining about the unequal interactions that rule creates for super heavys with smaller vehicles. It's the "almost a super heavy" vehicles getting the benefits of it that drives me crazy.

Watch none of this happen and we're all just making random connections and we'll be left holding the bag at the end of the day.

I learned a long time ago that when GW does something that doesn't seem to make sense...9/10 it just doesn't make sense. There is very rarely some cunning and subtle plan people missed. GW drops the ball far more often than it makes rules people don't appreciate the genius of until later.

I learned a long time ago that when GW does something that doesn't seem to make sense...9/10 it just doesn't make sense. There is very rarely some cunning and subtle plan people missed. GW drops the ball far more often than it makes rules people don't appreciate the genius of until later.

I've been saying this since March. If I could exalt this post a million times I would. Ditto this one:

Watch none of this happen and we're all just making random connections and we'll be left holding the bag at the end of the day.

Everyone is so quick anymore to ascribe some ulterior motive or conspiracy to so much of this stuff and 9 times out of 10, when it comes to GW, they did something odd that doesn't make sense for no other reason than because they did something odd that doesn't make sense. I often wonder if, when you cross through the front door of their offices, you come out in "Wonderland" on the other side - the Mad Hatter is handing out desk assignments and that crazy rabbit is in charge of FAQ updates and Jervis is just chilling on a mushroom smoking a hooka .....

Tycho wrote:

I learned a long time ago that when GW does something that doesn't seem to make sense...9/10 it just doesn't make sense. There is very rarely some cunning and subtle plan people missed. GW drops the ball far more often than it makes rules people don't appreciate the genius of until later.

I've been saying this since March. If I could exalt this post a million times I would. Ditto this one:

Watch none of this happen and we're all just making random connections and we'll be left holding the bag at the end of the day.

Everyone is so quick anymore to ascribe some ulterior motive or conspiracy to so much of this stuff and 9 times out of 10, when it comes to GW, they did something odd that doesn't make sense for no other reason than because they did something odd that doesn't make sense. I often wonder if, when you cross through the front door of their offices, you come out in "Wonderland" on the other side - the Mad Hatter is handing out desk assignments and that crazy rabbit is in charge of FAQ updates and Jervis is just chilling on a mushroom smoking a hooka .....

Yes, but then at the same time we're seeing weapon changes for things untouched for eons on top of wound increases for models not thought eligible. Something is going on. What it is precisely....*shrug*

Quality control of rules has always been GW's Achilles heel, something they have been chronically, consistently unable to manage. I don't know why, because their quality control on the miniatures/manufacturing side is really very good (aside from Failcast). But for whatever reason, they simply cannot for the life of them seem to create consistent quality rules.

Anybody who says GW never creates good rules is totally wrong - GW can create awesome rules, and it can even create awesome, balanced rules. The trouble is that it just doesn't do so nearly often enough. And the lack of attention that goes to proofreading and thinking through the weird interactions those rules create is especially glaring.

Yes, but then at the same time we're seeing weapon changes for things untouched for eons on top of wound increases for models not thought eligible. Something is going on. What it is precisely....*shrug*

Maybe? Thing is, there's always a "but ...". From reading your posts, I get the sense that you've been around GW for a while - We've both been around long enough to see them doing some weird "bleep", and to have everyone try to figure out where it's heading (that's part of the fun after all), then have the results released only for the community to blink at it and go "but ... that doesn't make sense .... OK! HERE'S WHERE THEY'RE REALLY GOING WITH THIS!" and start the cycle all over again.

Meanwhile non of it ever comes to fruition and the initial thing that made no sense, continues to go unchanged and not make sense. 9th is off to such a poor start, that all bets are off, but if I were going to bet on it, my bet would be - none of this will pan out in a way that makes any sense to us and the explanation will be "because reasons" ...

EDIT:

- The explanation will more likely be: "Because reasons .... BUY THIS NEW PRIMARIS BATTLE FORTRESS!!!!!"

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So besides getting rid of the super-friends gimmick what exactly is the "good" you're seeing? What's the upside of characters not gaining protection from a nearby box dread but getting protection from a nearby rhino or squad of scouts that's been reduced to only three models? Honest question.

There were a few lists out there that were quite lame. We had a guy springing for an all landspeeder and talonmaster army. Now if dreads go to 10 wounds then moot point for dread spam.

Yeah,I could see that being annoying. Agreed that an across the board increase in wounds for units could render this moot. It would, however, also greatly affect what vehicles could benefit from Obscuring terrain. I'll come right out and say: if things like Repulsor Executioners go to 18 wounds and no longer benefit from Obscuring terrain I'll stop complaining about the unequal interactions that rule creates for super heavys with smaller vehicles. It's the "almost a super heavy" vehicles getting the benefits of it that drives me crazy.

Watch none of this happen and we're all just making random connections and we'll be left holding the bag at the end of the day.

Yeah, the AP on terminator powerfists may not be the only typo on that datasheet......

yukishiro1 wrote:
...Anybody who says GW never creates good rules is totally wrong - GW can create awesome rules, and it can even create awesome, balanced rules. The trouble is that it just doesn't do so nearly often enough. And the lack of attention that goes to proofreading and thinking through the weird interactions those rules create is especially glaring.

GW can create interesting rules in a vacuum, but they're terrible at considering them in context. Almost everything they build is characterful, creative, and interesting, but they appear to have a number of different rules authors who don't talk to each other, armies only get attention and real updates when there's someone on the design team who really likes the army, there's no consistent vision for the game, they don't pay attention to their playtesters, and their proofreading is horrible. The game we play is made up of the glitches and unintended consequences of the rules GW wrote; all the creative energy they pour into their rules almost doesn't matter because the game is so bad at communicating their intent to the players.

New set of FAQs are out.

Fixes Look Out Sir!.

Fixes Space Wolves Obsec.

Clarifies flying units charging over screens.

Clarifies how Obscuring works for determining line of sight to big stuff.

TS and GK get this note: "PSYCHIC FOCUS Many veteran Thousand Sons players are unclear whether or not a matched play rule called Psychic Focus, which was published in the previous edition of the game and enabled their psykers to ignore the increasing Warp Charge cost of Smite, should continue to apply or not. For clarity, this rule is not a feature of the 9th edition of Warhammer 40,000, and Thousand Sons psykers manifest Smite just like any other psyker unit. Rest assured that the psychic might of this army can be reflected using the additional updates and rules found within Psychic Awakening: Ritual of the Damned, and we will be building upon this even more in the 9th edition version of Codex: Thousand Sons."

 Jidmah wrote:
I've changed my mind. If every FAQ results in an ork nerf, I want to go back to 6th edition when GW simply didn't talk to us and never FAQed anything.

 Asmodai wrote:
New set of FAQs are out.

Fixes Look Out Sir!.

Fixes Space Wolves Obsec.

Clarifies flying units charging over screens.

Clarifies how Obscuring works for determining line of sight to big stuff.

TS and GK get this note: "PSYCHIC FOCUS Many veteran Thousand Sons players are unclear whether or not a matched play rule called Psychic Focus, which was published in the previous edition of the game and enabled their psykers to ignore the increasing Warp Charge cost of Smite, should continue to apply or not. For clarity, this rule is not a feature of the 9th edition of Warhammer 40,000, and Thousand Sons psykers manifest Smite just like any other psyker unit. Rest assured that the psychic might of this army can be reflected using the additional updates and rules found within Psychic Awakening: Ritual of the Damned, and we will be building upon this even more in the 9th edition version of Codex: Thousand Sons."

This is the stuff that gets me legitimately confused. If I was this poor at my job, I would no longer have a job. I'm sure a lot of people are in similar boats... Does GW not realize that this makes them look like idiots? Do they not care? Furthermore, if they are this successful WITH all the errors, omissions, the "whoopsie!" changes, etc., could they not make a lot more money if they just had competent management?

I'm sure all of this is harder than it seems, but everything I see tells me unpaid fans could do a better job than G-Dubs full-time employees. Maybe they should clean house and hire some people who give a

IronNerd wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:
New set of FAQs are out.

Fixes Look Out Sir!.

Fixes Space Wolves Obsec.

Clarifies flying units charging over screens.

Clarifies how Obscuring works for determining line of sight to big stuff.

TS and GK get this note: "PSYCHIC FOCUS Many veteran Thousand Sons players are unclear whether or not a matched play rule called Psychic Focus, which was published in the previous edition of the game and enabled their psykers to ignore the increasing Warp Charge cost of Smite, should continue to apply or not. For clarity, this rule is not a feature of the 9th edition of Warhammer 40,000, and Thousand Sons psykers manifest Smite just like any other psyker unit. Rest assured that the psychic might of this army can be reflected using the additional updates and rules found within Psychic Awakening: Ritual of the Damned, and we will be building upon this even more in the 9th edition version of Codex: Thousand Sons."

This is the stuff that gets me legitimately confused. If I was this poor at my job, I would no longer have a job. I'm sure a lot of people are in similar boats... Does GW not realize that this makes them look like idiots? Do they not care? Furthermore, if they are this successful WITH all the errors, omissions, the "whoopsie!" changes, etc., could they not make a lot more money if they just had competent management?

I'm sure all of this is harder than it seems, but everything I see tells me unpaid fans could do a better job than G-Dubs full-time employees. Maybe they should clean house and hire some people who give a

They give a gak. We just get the benefit of hindsight and the lack of being overworked, underpaid, lack of tools, support, etc.

They probably spun out more books in the last 3 years than they did in the prior 10 on top of now what looks to be a ridiculously ambitious re-balancing of the game well beyond simple point changes.

@Gadzilla - you should be happy on this piece :

. Specifically, even though the Obscuring
rules state that Aircraft and models with a Wounds characteristic
of 18+ can be seen through Obscuring terrain, they are still only
visible (and hence eligible) targets if the firing model can physically
see them (so if the terrain in question is solid and opaque, they
are still not eligible targets).

That part about obscuring terrain is better, for sure, but it still doesn't fix the underlying problems with 9th's terrain and LOS rules:

1. You can still target something even if you can see just the tip of a spike.
2. Vehicles gain zero benefits for cover.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
@Gadzilla - you should be happy on this piece :

. Specifically, even though the Obscuring
rules state that Aircraft and models with a Wounds characteristic
of 18+ can be seen through Obscuring terrain, they are still only
visible (and hence eligible) targets if the firing model can physically
see them (so if the terrain in question is solid and opaque, they
are still not eligible targets).

Yeah, it's good they clarified that. I always understand that was RAI, but it saves arguments with those who don't. I guess I can live with the idea that a 300 ton tank is harder to hide than an 80 ton one. Of course if the current points don't change I doubt I'll be bringing my big toys out for anything less than Onslaught.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That part about obscuring terrain is better, for sure, but it still doesn't fix the underlying problems with 9th's terrain and LOS rules:

1. You can still target something even if you can see just the tip of a spike.
2. Vehicles gain zero benefits for cover.

Vehicles (and bikes) can't 'receive the benefits of cover' from area terrain or obstacles (so can't benefit from Light or Heavy cover).
They can benefit from the -1 to hit from dense cover, if the attacking model is drawing a line through the terrain and isn't actually in it (or are within 3" of a dense cover obstacle, and its the only dense cover they're drawing lines through)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That part about obscuring terrain is better, for sure, but it still doesn't fix the underlying problems with 9th's terrain and LOS rules:

1. You can still target something even if you can see just the tip of a spike.
2. Vehicles gain zero benefits for cover.

Agreed. #1 in particular irks me to no end, and to me is still a bigger problem than any of the ones they did address.