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.

Breton wrote:

 Super Ready wrote:
I like the implications of what this COULD mean. However, I'm concerned for what will end up counting as a core unit.
I'm hoping at least some of the Marine craziness with Aggressors and the like will be reined in.

If Terminators get it, I’d guess Aggressors do too.

Core is fine if they lose shoot twice. No single unit should be firing 144 shots in a turn, especially at their point cost.

Selfcontrol wrote:

What I wish though, that core rule changes were included in the core rule book.

It is not a "core rule change". Which keyword affects or not a specific unit is very much a Codex thing. Also, not ALL auras will be changed according to GW. As a result, the general core rule according to which auras affect all units and also the unit which is the source of the aura is still very much valid.

Changing how auras work is a core change to me. Same as retro activly adding keywords. And if this means GW is going to be adding the aura changes on a codex by codex basis, then it is even worse, because it creates a situation where armies that get codex in lets say 18 months get non 9th ed rules for that time, and I can't think when something like that doesn't create problems.

And if the change is only ment for space marine captins and Lts, then it is a stupid change. Because it will spill over in to armies that never had access to over laping auras, but happen to share a profile with marines like GK or some CSM.

This is definitely going to screw my sisters, but I still like it quite a lot.

Also, I'm calling it now. Aggressors and eradicators are not core and the double attack rules change into RR all hits. Would make them more balanced and fluffier.

Karol wrote:

Changing how auras work is a core change to me. Same as retro activly adding keywords. And if this means GW is going to be adding the aura changes on a codex by codex basis, then it is even worse, because it creates a situation where armies that get codex in lets say 18 months get non 9th ed rules for that time, and I can't think when something like that doesn't create problems.

The basic concept of auras isnt changing Karol. What is changing is the implementation of those auras for certain armies. That's never going to be handled in a core rulebook, because rules for specific armies dont go in the core rulebook.

Karol wrote:

And if the change is only ment for space marine captins and Lts, then it is a stupid change. Because it will spill over in to armies that never had access to over laping auras, but happen to share a profile with marines like GK or some CSM.

Both GK and CSM have multiple auras that can (and frequently do) overlap.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Selfcontrol wrote:

Spoiler:

Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.

Which is exactly why I expect Endless Cacophonies to be severly nerfed / limited in the future Codex.

or just remove it and buff the usual targets with either pts drop or output potential buff.

Termies, Havocs and oblits are overcosted when they dont have VotlW + EC on them.

Yes! Remove shoot twice and +1 to wound strategems like Cacophony and VOTLW and rework units so that they actually work without buffs. Price them accordingly. Done. Kill WOMBO COMBO.

Ok, I hope character thunderhammers drop in price now, because 40pts is too much when you take out rerolls.

Selfcontrol wrote:

Spoiler:

Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.

Which is exactly why I expect Endless Cacophonies to be severly nerfed / limited in the future Codex.

We are still referring to the current rules though and what people were wishing for.

Also all y'all completely forgot about the arbitrary "these units don't benefit from Chapter Tactic equivalents" but okay.

I like this rule but am kind of bummed that it's an "extra" rule pasted in, not in the actual BRB...

 bullyboy wrote:
Ok, I hope character thunderhammers drop in price now, because 40pts is too much when you take out rerolls.

Um. No. Especially if they go up to D4 (D5 for a mastercrafted one. D6 for a White Scars guy with a Mastercrafted one).

A character-keyword-protected Captain that can take out a Knight on a good roll and some CP should still be 300 points minimum, better 400.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Thats really under the assumption that giant tanks with the reroll were problems to begin with. They already created a new unit entry for the Chapter Master. If you dont want something expensive you can get the Captain. Rerolling all hits regardless of modifiers should be expensive. You don't want that for anything with dinky offense to begin with.
And Roboute was too powerful because you really can't price rerolling all wounds for ANYTHING in an aura like his. He was too good with Razorbacks but he was too good with even just Predators and Intercessors and Grav Devastators, etc.

Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.

Dreads and DA speeders certainly were. I'll agree it doesn't change much if stuff like Eradicators and Aggressors still get rerolls. People are preferring those units over tanks already. We'll just have to wait and see the full shake out.

And absolutely, Oblits should pay more CP to shoot twice. But it is an old as dirt strat. I'm certain it will see tweaks in the new book.

Karol wrote:

Selfcontrol wrote:

What I wish though, that core rule changes were included in the core rule book.

It is not a "core rule change". Which keyword affects or not a specific unit is very much a Codex thing. Also, not ALL auras will be changed according to GW. As a result, the general core rule according to which auras affect all units and also the unit which is the source of the aura is still very much valid.

Changing how auras work is a core change to me. Same as retro activly adding keywords. And if this means GW is going to be adding the aura changes on a codex by codex basis, then it is even worse, because it creates a situation where armies that get codex in lets say 18 months get non 9th ed rules for that time, and I can't think when something like that doesn't create problems.

And if the change is only ment for space marine captins and Lts, then it is a stupid change. Because it will spill over in to armies that never had access to over laping auras, but happen to share a profile with marines like GK or some CSM.

100% this.. I don't know if the rule itself will be good or not. but the introduction of a new keyword and new mechanic after the core book but before the first codex stinks like GW just screwing their game up again.. Also how does everyone feel knowing that their rulebooks are now invalidated.. In so much that you can't give a brand new never heard of 40k person the rule book and they be fully aware of the rules.. it'll have to be here's the rule book, plus FAQ plus this other document that describes core

Selfcontrol wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

No major game mechanics had changed.

This is demonstrably false. As you yourself go on to admit. Im beginning to recall why you're unable to grokk quite literally anything placed in your path.

You are talking to the guy who repeatdly stated he couldn't wait for GW to "crash and burn" as a result of 3D printers because he was struggling to do anything with his Ultramarines prior to the second Codex. After the release of the aforementioned second Codex, he became for a couple of months one of the biggest defender of GW (what a surprise) before switching back to his old habits when GW came with the nerfhammer.

TL;DR : he is an idiot and a buffoon. Don't answer to him

This is the problem with the world today. People like this speaking about what others have said and bending the truth with malicious slander.

I am not and never have been a defender of GWs rules. They are terrible at writing rules. Routinely I call out the Anti-marine hate on Dakka because it is omnipresent. Anytime marines have something remotely powerful it is instagibbed. Now the armies core identity has been deleted. Meanwhile for months or years other armies best performing tournament winning abilities will remain untouched. Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long. Also I manage to make my points without insulting people.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Thats really under the assumption that giant tanks with the reroll were problems to begin with. They already created a new unit entry for the Chapter Master. If you dont want something expensive you can get the Captain. Rerolling all hits regardless of modifiers should be expensive. You don't want that for anything with dinky offense to begin with.
And Roboute was too powerful because you really can't price rerolling all wounds for ANYTHING in an aura like his. He was too good with Razorbacks but he was too good with even just Predators and Intercessors and Grav Devastators, etc.

Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.

Dreads and DA speeders certainly were. I'll agree it doesn't change much if stuff like Eradicators and Aggressors still get rerolls. People are preferring those units over tanks already. We'll just have to wait and see the full shake out.

And absolutely, Oblits should pay more CP to shoot twice. But it is an old as dirt strat. I'm certain it will see tweaks in the new book.

But then you'll have the arbitrary "this unit doesn't get rerolls because...reasons". It's inconsistency to say those two Gravis units don't get rerolls but Inceptors and Heavy Intercessors do. There's a problem with the core units and the Captain already.

And yes even if you priced double shooting for Oblits at 3CP and CSM troops at ZERO CP you'd still not use it on the Chaos Marines. Some offense just isn't worth buffing to begin with.

Both GK and CSM have multiple auras that can (and frequently do) overlap.

That is what I am saying. 8th for me was a history of GW fixing something in the marine codex, or calling something a fix that mirrors stuff from the marine codex. But a cheaper dreadnought, or higher point cost razorback was a very different thing for someone playing the marine codex and someone playing a GK one. Also non of the GK or CSM auras can compare to what marines had, but both had their models costed as if they did. This is hardly a solitary thing in w40k or limited to those two armies. One day someone will explain to me why a powerfist on a s3 model costs as much as on a s4 one.

The basic concept of auras isnt changing Karol. What is changing is the implementation of those auras for certain armies. That's never going to be handled in a core rulebook, because rules for specific armies dont go in the core rulebook.

Not sure this will translate well, but we have something we call hair spliting. If the MKOL changes to rules to wrestling events run only in my weight cathegory and age group , then it is a change to the rule set as a whole. Also even if the change is true only for necron and marines, and further books are not going to have identical or similar changes to their auras, then marines still take up the majority of players around the world. So in my MKOL rules change example, it would be as if the change was done to all male wrestlers.

But again it does not matter as much to me, I don't think it will break the game. Seems like the change is a good thing, but I would rather have big changes like that, and a change to all marines is a big change in my eyes, be in the core rule book. I guess it could be worse and GW could have just put it in in to a 2ed or 3ed CA book this year.

If GW tested it, and I like to assume they did, the change should have been in the core rules.


Ah and the pessimist inside me hope that this change doesn't end with chaos lords not being able to buff DG vehicles, but GW making some sort of DG poison techmarine that has an aura that very much buffs the vehicles. Same with marines and techmarines. I like to think this is a good change to fix some bad rule interaction and not opening the door to people being forced to buy more models.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Now the armies core identity has been deleted.

Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.

If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.

 Lord Clinto wrote:
I like this rule but am kind of bummed that it's an "extra" rule pasted in, not in the actual BRB...

What do you mean? It's not an extra rule.

They are not saying that auras will affect only CORE units. They are saying that some auras will have that interaction with some units. We already know that some auras will for sure affect non-CORE units.

Since it is an interaction between specific abilities and keywords, it is correct that it is introduced into the datasheet that contains the ability.

It is surely not a rule that should go into the rulebook.

Since when was "foot commander standing among a squadron of buttoned-up battle tanks so that his inspiring presence may inspire them to greater accuracy" a core identity of the Space Marine army?

I also hope this means there will be a corresponding drop in price for Land Raiders.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long.

Space Marines, who dominated 8th at the start and for the entire second half of the edition, and who are showered with constant updates and new toys, are not allowed to have nice things? That's a hot take if I've ever seen one.

 Xenomancers wrote:

This is the problem with the world today. People like this speaking about what others have said and bending the truth with malicious slander.

I am not and never have been a defender of GWs rules. They are terrible at writing rules. Routinely I call out the Anti-marine hate on Dakka because it is omnipresent. Anytime marines have something remotely powerful it is instagibbed. Now the armies core identity has been deleted. Meanwhile for months or years other armies best performing tournament winning abilities will remain untouched. Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long. Also I manage to make my points without insulting people.

Not really.

This is a far, far cry from a Ynnari / GSC-style gutting of an army.

Marines get off very, very lightly for the unprecedented mess they made of the game for the past 12 months.

Spoletta wrote:

 Lord Clinto wrote:
I like this rule but am kind of bummed that it's an "extra" rule pasted in, not in the actual BRB...

What do you mean? It's not an extra rule.

They are not saying that auras will affect only CORE units. They are saying that some auras will have that interaction with some units. We already know that some auras will for sure affect non-CORE units.

Since it is an interaction between specific abilities and keywords, it is correct that it is introduced into the datasheet that contains the ability.

It is surely not a rule that should go into the rulebook.

What is the keyword system if not part of core rule though?

If GW keeps adding new keywords retroactively, I'd imagine it will soon turn into the USR rule bloat of pre-8th ed. Let's face it - keyword is just another USR but without the lengthy explanation.

Karol wrote:

If GW tested it, and I like to assume they did, the change should have been in the core rules.

How is this addressed in the core rulebook? What army specific rules are addressed in the BRB? Where are my rules for my Deathwatch Kill Teams in there?

They dont exist because the BRB is not the place for these faction specific rules, anymore than Synapse or Psychic Locus doesnt go in the GT packet.

Karol wrote:

Not sure this will translate well, but we have something we call hair spliting. If the MKOL changes to rules to wrestling events run only in my weight cathegory and age group , then it is a change to the rule set as a whole. Also even if the change is true only for necron and marines, and further books are not going to have identical or similar changes to their auras, then marines still take up the majority of players around the world. So in my MKOL rules change example, it would be as if the change was done to all male wrestlers.

This isnt even remotely analagous. What would be analagous is if your MKOL made a change to the rules for you specifically. Not anyone else. You.

 catbarf wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Now the armies core identity has been deleted.

Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.

If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.

Maybe some armies need auras to make units that are their core esthetic, and without them they are just a worse version of some other army. But I don't know enough marine list building to be in the know, if it is the case.

Overall I like the rule. Makes me excited to see the final product.

Am I the only one expecting a "Core if" mechanic (e.g., Necron Destroyers are core if the warlord is a Destroyer Lord)?

 catbarf wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Now the armies core identity has been deleted.

Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.

If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.

I am speaking of the play-style identity. Powerful buff HQ is the signature of the marines now. Now these buff HQ have lost the ability to buff the majority of their army. Also if you really consider it = rerolls speed up the game - the more players kill the less actions to take in the next turn. All for the cost of picking up a few dice on 1's and 2's and rerolling them.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

This is the problem with the world today. People like this speaking about what others have said and bending the truth with malicious slander.

I am not and never have been a defender of GWs rules. They are terrible at writing rules. Routinely I call out the Anti-marine hate on Dakka because it is omnipresent. Anytime marines have something remotely powerful it is instagibbed. Now the armies core identity has been deleted. Meanwhile for months or years other armies best performing tournament winning abilities will remain untouched. Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long. Also I manage to make my points without insulting people.

Not really.

This is a far, far cry from a Ynnari / GSC-style gutting of an army.

Marines get off very, very lightly for the unprecedented mess they made of the game for the past 12 months.

I was horrified and saddened by what happened to GSC.. Their identity was nerfed out of the gate. Then a SM chapter came along that was better at it then they were... There is no reason to play purple guardsmen.

 skchsan wrote:
What is the keyword system if not part of core rule though?

The keyword system isnt changing. If anything, its functioning exactly as designed. GW are simply adding specificity that was not present in 8th for certain abilities.

 Ghaz wrote:
Am I the only one expecting a "Core if" mechanic (e.g., Necron Destroyers are core if the warlord is a Destroyer Lord)?

That'd be awesome, it happens quite a lot in AoS if I'm not mistaken, Elite units that become Troops depending on the subfaction. Could be the same but with the CORE keyword. It gives armies with less variety a lot more open to new types of playstyle.

This isnt even remotely analagous. What would be analagous is if your MKOL made a change to the rules for you specifically. Not anyone else. You.

If you think that a change to how marine and necron auras work , affects one person, then I think am writing all of this in worse english they I normaly do.

How is this addressed in the core rulebook?

It isn't. That is the problem. The aura change is a big change, that affects multiple armies.