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.

Hey everyone,

Links to the rules on Google Docs:
Core rules (English) / (Deutsch)
General psychic disciplines (English)
3D printable tokens and token box (Link)
Planetary Assault (Campaign system) (English)
Escalation (Lords of War for all factions) (Englisch)

Adeptus Custodes (English)
Adeptus Sororitas (English) / (Deutsch)
Assassins (English)
Chaos Demons (English)
Chaos Space Marines (English) / Deutsch
Dark Eldar (English) / (Deutsch)
Death Guard (English) / (Deutsch)
Eldar (English)
Grey Knights (English) / (Deutsch)
Genestealer Cults (English)
Horus Heresy Codex Supplement (English) / (Deutsch)
Imperial Guard (English) / (Deutsch)
Inquisition (English)
Leagues of Votann (English)
Necrons (English) / (Deutsch)
Orks (English) / (Deutsch)
Space Marines (English) / (Deutsch)
Tau Empire (English)
Thousand Sons (English)
Tyranids (English)
World Eaters (English)


Why am I doing a customised 40k?
Last year when I was organising a big Crusade campaign in my local club, we had a lot of people attending it and playing regularely. We had newcomers freshly starting out as well as more experienced players who have been with the hobby for some years. You could see and feel the passion they had for the setting and miniatures. The problem was, that this passion did not last or translate into the actual games. The worst offender at the time where Dhrukari. Basically everybody who played against them once didn't want to play them a second time. But it wasn't only them. Even in a casual game without any optimisation on either side, bringing only what you wanted to play, people would get stomped or lose some key units before they even got to react. Big multiplayer battles were the worst tabletop experience I personally had in my whole life. And I was even on the winning side.

All in all, the overall frustration with the game rules was big enough for basically killing the Crusade scene over night and quite a lot of people, newcomers and experienced players, stopped with playing the game altogether. So my problem was that I had nobody to play with anymore. I needed a new rules system that was fun to play, so I set out to find something or create it from scratch.

Why am I sharing it on Dakka?
The recent thread about what people would hope for to be changed about 10th edition got me thinking that quite a lot seem to think the same as I do or have the same problem with the core mechanics. The scope of this project was never intented to leave my local club, but seeing how successfull the system is with the local player base, I wanted to share it with the internet. I can say with pride that everybody who tried it out comes back for another game. Maybe you want to give it a try, too. And maybe you even like it. I would be glad to hear your feedback! In my local scene over the past 3 months I managed to get a total of 10 additional players hooked on the game. Every Sunday there are usually half a dozen players in the club house just coming to play this set of rules. Including at least 4 players who quit 9th completely and now are even starting new armies, just because they trust me to balance them out and make them fun. And so far, it works wonderfully.

Goals of Custom40k
- Shorten waiting time between turns by using Alternate Activation
- Removing rolls and re-rolls for the rolls god.
- Toning down lethality.
- Re-introducing armor value.
- Balance vehicles against monstrous creatures.
- Tone down the bloat while keeping customisation options and vastly expanding them.
- Balance units as good as possible as well as interesting to play.
- Add a tiny bit of tactical depth
- Most importantly: Make the game fun.

What do you need to play?
- Two armies
- Somebody to play with
- A bunch of D6
- A scatter die
- Command tokens. There is a sample to print out in the core rules, but you can use anything really. We 3d printed our own tokens which use the symbols from the old Kill Team edition.

------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
Not all armies are on the same level, when it comes to how complete the rules are. Thats because writing rules is a lot of work and I focus on the units that my co-players actually have and want to field. I'm very happy to add more units anytime, though. Just leave a comment if you will and it will be ready for the next game you play.

Have a read, please leave me your feedback. Looking forward to anybody giving it a shot. I'll slowly add the missing translations over the next few weeks.

I have a questions.

Befindet sich ein Psioniker im Nahkampf, kann er zu seiner Initiativephase Psikräfte vom Typ “Einfach” wirken. Er kann nur Einheiten, die sich mit ihm im Nahkampf befinden, als Ziele auswählen.

Does this mean that he can't cast any easy powers on himself and only use offensive ones?

I really like how open toped and apothecary-like healing works in your rule set.

Thanks!

I changed the wording to make it more clear.

The psyker is supposed to be able to affect himself as well as friendly and enemy units in the same melee combat.

One anecdote battle I like to share, because it pleasantly surpised me last Sunday. I had a low points game of 1500 points with my Space Marines against Imperial Guard.

Imperial Guard had:
- A command squad with an officer (5 models)
- Three heavy weapon teams (6 models)
- A Conscript squad (20 models)
- 3x10 men Infantry squads with various special weapons
- A Basilisk
- A Chimera
- Some sparkling of doctrines. Sharpshooter, Deepstrike and Bionics

I had:
- A Librarian Dreadnought
- A Redemptor Dreadnought
- 5 Infiltrators
- 3 Outriders
- A Drop pod

So all in all 61 infantry models + 2 tanks against 8 Marines and two Cybots. The game was super tactical and fun. It ended in a draw with both sides scoring 9 points. Felt a bit like playing a scene in a novel.

The Necrons codex hasn't been translated fully. A lot of the vehicle options should just be included in the base datasheet, Marine vehicles don't have to be upgraded to become BS3+ right? C'tan are also way too susceptible to bolters and poisoned weaponry, reducing damage by 1 is totally missing the point of what made C'tan boring to use in earlier editions. I assume S4 can wound T7 on 6s without further issues.

Capitalizing the first letter in the names of weapons like Hyperphase sword and unit types like Jump pack is a weird choice. Generally, you want to follow GW's way of doing things unless you have a good reason not to.

 vict0988 wrote:
The Necrons codex hasn't been translated fully. A lot of the vehicle options should just be included in the base datasheet, Marine vehicles don't have to be upgraded to become BS3+ right? C'tan are also way too susceptible to bolters and poisoned weaponry, reducing damage by 1 is totally missing the point of what made C'tan boring to use in earlier editions. I assume S4 can wound T7 on 6s without further issues.

Capitalizing the first letter in the names of weapons like Hyperphase sword and unit types like Jump pack is a weird choice. Generally, you want to follow GW's way of doing things unless you have a good reason not to.

Can you point me towards the datasheets or entries that have not been translated, yet? I skimmed over it again now and couldn't find anything.
What benefit do you see for including the equipment in the base datasheet, instead of having it available for purchase? (Marines don't have to upgrade for BS3+, but they are paying for having the stat)

I ran the numbers for an unnamed C'tan Shard and it would take 68 BS3+ bolter shots to kill one outside of cover. 135 shots in cover with a "Stand & Shoot command" and 180 with a "Move & Shoot" command. I respectfully disagree, that they are too vulnerable to small arms fire. To achieve that amount of bolter shots you have to spend a considerable amount of your points into bolter units and I don't think it would be feasable in a regular game size. It is only slightly better for poison, where you need 60 shots without cover.

C'tan Shards are able to take their armor save alongside their Necrodermis save (like every model who got both saves). So it is a 4+ and 4+, modified by cover, which gives +2 to your save and -1 to hit to the attacker.

In regards to the naming: I see what you mean and will update the names for everything, thanks for pointing it out!

Necrons should have these upgrades as part of their wargear and be forced to pay for it for the same reason that Space Marines are forced to pay for BS3+ instead of being BS4+ with the option to upgrade to BS3+.

There must be something I don't know about your shooting system because I don't understand the math, sorry I am not going to read the core rules because it doesn't seem like my thing. I'm just a huge Necron fan so I thought I'd look through your codex. Don't bother trying to explain the math, I trust it is not an issue.

Necrodermis for all shards and C'tan splitter "ist" and powers of the C'tan. Scarab "Swawm" and "kampf". Canoptek Wraith "vivious" claws need to be fixed. Control F to search.

I don't remember the best colours for colour-blind friendliness but I think green and yellow could be an issue. It's also just generally harder to read anything other than black or dark blue or dark grey on a white page. Adding * or ** to the cost is an alternative option to colour coding.

In your codex index having each of the relevant rules in the codex listed would be cool in my opinion.

Fixed most (all?) typos and missing translations in the Necron codex. Incorporated mandatory wargear for vehicles into their profiles and datasheets. Clarified Tomb world ability selection and added an additional marker for Lord and Cryptomant only items.

In addition, here are some pictures from last Sunday, showcasing how much terrain we use on our battlefields.
The first one is missing a big LoS blocking centerpiece, but it was Sisters against Demon hunters, so no biggie for either army. Ideally I would recommend it, though, so the game isn't a shooting gallery for some armies.




The second pair of images shows a smaller board for 1500 points. I suggest this to be used strictly for introduction games, as some armies struggle to bring units to the table.

Added the first version of Chaos Demons (Nurgle only for the moment) to the first post.

And some further pictures as suggestions how a battlefield should look like:

Horus Heresy Emperor's Children against melee focused Imperial Guard (including an Inquisitor with Crusaders, Bullgryns and Ogryns). Melee Guard actually prevailed!


Orks against vehicle heavy Guard (a Vendetta and a Manticore are outside of the picture).

Updated OP:
- Chaos Demons received Khorne and Tzeentch units and wargear.
- English translation for Chaos Space Marines.
- English translation for Thousand Sons.
- Several tweaks and adjustments to more or less every codex and core rules. Outliers in every direction got adjusted, unclear rules interactions got solved.


We currently have an active crusade campaign running with 11 people.

Some more pictures of our games and boards (sorry for the lower quality ^^):
Wasteland and ruins:


"Forest":


Orky wasteland:

- First version of the Tau Empire added.
- First bunch of Horus Heresy units and wargear.
- Chaos demons now have units from all four gods.
- Several bigger and smaller profile and rule adjustments across the board, based on game feedback.

A picture of the command tokens that we use. They come in two colors to match each player's paint scheme:



As always, some pictures from our last games

"Green zone, Lost & Damned vs. 30k loyalist Emperor's Children"


"City fight, Death Guard vs. Necrons"


"Barren land"

It's been some time, but updates have been flowing!

- Tau roster got expanded after their first premiere. They already feel right at home compared to the remaining power level.
- Updates and expanded roster for Imperial Guard, Necrons, Chaos Demons, Chaos Space Marines and Death Guard.

Added the Inquisition and general psychic disciplines in English to the first post.

Eldar have been properly expanded to nearly their full roster. Link in the first post got updated.

I added a link to the OP for the 3D printable tokens and token boxes that we use.

It was not made by me and I don't know the original author. If you happen to be the creator, let me know and I will credit you. It was originally taken from an open source database for 3D printing stuff.

- Massive update to the Chaos Space Marine codex to bring it in line with more recently released armies.
- Updates all psychic disciplines to make them more fun to use.
- Smaller adjustments to Death Guard and Sisters.

a_typical_hero wrote:
- Massive update to the Chaos Space Marine codex to bring it in line with more recently released armies.
- Updates all psychic disciplines to make them more fun to use.
- Smaller adjustments to Death Guard and Sisters.

Does S affect saves?

Name: Bleed
Range: 12"
Target: Enemy unit
Cast value: 6
Effect: Roll 1D6 for each model in the target unit. For every 4+ it suffers an automatic wound with S:4 AP:0 D:1; "Seeking".
Duration: Instant
Complexity: Basic

No, it does not. The Strength value is given in such instances because some units have invulnerability saves which can not be used against Strength 8 and above.

Added English translation for Dark Eldar to OP, along with smaller profile adjustments to bring them in line with more recent armies.

Added Obsessions to Dark Eldar. Barring some units, the codex is now complete and up to date.

Added Tyranid rules!

- Added English translation for Grey Knights.
- Added German translation for Assassins
- Added German translation for Horus Heresy equipment.

Carnifex: 7 wounds
Tyrannofex: 6 wounds.

WTF?

Hey!

Thanks for your feedback.

The Tyranid rules were made by a fellow player, as I'm not knowledgable enough about the faction to do them justice.

I guess the "bulky" of the Tyrannofex is supposed to be presented by a higher Toughness and Armor save, but I will relay your feedback regardless.

Vehicle durability seems weird.

You need to pen and then you need to roll 5+ to strip away a HP, and you need to do that 3-4 times.

That seems like ridiculously durable, not even 5th edition vehicles were this durable and that was the parking lot edition.

Anti-vehicle weaponry comes with an ability called "AT(x)".

For example a missile launcher got AT(1), while a Multi-melta in melta range gets AT(3).

The AT value increases your roll on the vehicle damage chart by the numerical value. Once you reach 8 or higher, the vehicle suffers a hull point damage and you roll again.

If you score a penetrating hit, your first roll on the vehicle damage chart gets an additional +2. The sample Multi-melta would cause a hull point for a penetrating hit on a 2+ OR 3+ and rolls another time, still retaining its innate +3 bonus to the roll.

Assuming a fully functional vehicle, another 7 (4+ with the Multi-melta on the second roll) is already sufficient to cause another single hull point damage (but you don't get another roll on the chart). So you already killed a smaller vehicle like a Rhino or Ork buggy.

The amount of hull points a vehicle got depends on their front AV.

10-11 -> 2 Hull points.
12-13 -> 3 Hull points.
14 -> 4 Hull points.

There are other ways to kill a vehicle. Once all weapons are destroyed or it suffered engine damage for three times, every further of these results will cause another hull point loss.

I don't know if this is something I can get across via words, but on the table, vehicles currently feel right in regards to their damage output and durability.

Some folks are in love with ability symphonies that kite them up higher and higher. Alternate activation will cause knee-jerk unreasoning objection from these people.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Anti-vehicle weaponry comes with an ability called "AT(x)".

For example a missile launcher got AT(1), while a Multi-melta in melta range gets AT(3).

The AT value increases your roll on the vehicle damage chart by the numerical value. Once you reach 8 or higher, the vehicle suffers a hull point damage and you roll again.

If you score a penetrating hit, your first roll on the vehicle damage chart gets an additional +2. The sample Multi-melta would cause a hull point for a penetrating hit on a 2+ OR 3+ and rolls another time, still retaining its innate +3 bonus to the roll.

Assuming a fully functional vehicle, another 7 (4+ with the Multi-melta on the second roll) is already sufficient to cause another single hull point damage (but you don't get another roll on the chart). So you already killed a smaller vehicle like a Rhino or Ork buggy.

The amount of hull points a vehicle got depends on their front AV.

10-11 -> 2 Hull points.
12-13 -> 3 Hull points.
14 -> 4 Hull points.

There are other ways to kill a vehicle. Once all weapons are destroyed or it suffered engine damage for three times, every further of these results will cause another hull point loss.

I don't know if this is something I can get across via words, but on the table, vehicles currently feel right in regards to their damage output and durability.

Ok, but if AT is meant to be such an important part of anti-vehicle play then I suggest you verify that all factions have a decent access to that rule. Otherwise it can lead to some pretty awful matchups.

TomWilton wrote:
Some folks are in love with ability symphonies that kite them up higher and higher. Alternate activation will cause knee-jerk unreasoning objection from these people.

The alternate activation is actually the single most impactful change that this ruleset offers to the overall feel of the game, in my opinion. If GW wouldn't change anything else but this, I would happily be playing some mainline 40k to see if I like the rest enough to stay. If you have the chance, give it a try. The difference is night and day to play against anything, but especially non interactive gunlines.

 Tyran wrote:
Ok, but if AT is meant to be such an important part of anti-vehicle play then I suggest you verify that all factions have a decent access to that rule. Otherwise it can lead to some pretty awful matchups.

Internal as well as external balancing of factions is a big big focus of the project. If Tyranids (or any other faction) is failing to be a fluffy, fun and viable army, there will be adjustments. That being said, I have rather limited data to work with due to the small playerbase and feedback. Not every army is played equally as often, so some are in a more refined state. With the current rules, Tyranids mainly bring their can openers in melee, where Monstrous Creatures roll 2D6+Strength to overcome armor values.

Most played (and finetuned):
- Adeptus Sororitas
- Chaos Space Marines
- Death Guard
- Imperial Guard
- Necrons
- Space Marines

A few games here and there:
- Orks
- Tau
- Thousand Sons
- Tyranids

Not played at all:
- Dark Eldar
- Eldar
- Grey Knights

Last weekend saw our first tournament completed using the Custom40k ruleset. We had 8 participants in total, consisting of:
1x Adeptus Sororitas, 1x Chaos Space Marines, 1x Eldar, 1x Necrons, 1x Orks, 2x Space Marines and 1x Tau.

Impression 1


Impression 2


Impression 3



In the meantime, there were balance and profile updates for:
- Adeptus Sororitas
- Chaos Space Marines
- Eldar
- General psychic disciplines
- Inquisition
- Necrons
- Space Marines
- Tau

The next bigger updates that are currently work in progress are the English translation for Adeptus Sororitas, the first draft for Leagues of Votan as well as a dynamic pick & choose builder tool for all Chaos players to create their own Demon weapon.

Leagues of Votann have been added to the first post.