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.

Am I missing something, or do Assassins not have an invulnerable save? Only T4 4+ makes them seem real fragile.

Panoply of the Assassin grants a 4+/4++ (p.156).

Ah, another victim of nesting rules within rules.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Ah, another victim of nesting rules within rules.

this is, in general, something the 8th edition reboot got right.. no more "rule X" that when you read it grants "rule Y" & "rule Z", which when you read means "+1 Attack" and "+1 Save", its now all in the profile where it should be..

to be honest the profiles could do with being expanded a bit anyway (e.g. have a save as something like Sv: 3+{2+}/5++ where the {} bit is a save in melee only - allowing different normal and invulnerable saves in melee since some rules work that way)

makes the profiles a bit longer but avoids rules bloat

leopard wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Ah, another victim of nesting rules within rules.

this is, in general, something the 8th edition reboot got right.. no more "rule X" that when you read it grants "rule Y" & "rule Z", which when you read means "+1 Attack" and "+1 Save", its now all in the profile where it should be..

to be honest the profiles could do with being expanded a bit anyway (e.g. have a save as something like Sv: 3+{2+}/5++ where the {} bit is a save in melee only - allowing different normal and invulnerable saves in melee since some rules work that way)

makes the profiles a bit longer but avoids rules bloat

40k is already famous for it's rules bloat.

Pick any legion specific unit and grab one of it's rules that make it unique. Now only one unit can have that rule per turn and you have to pay for it.

And if many units have the same rule now it's printed on every dataslate. Oh, and keywords pretty much do the exact same thing as wargear rules.

leopard wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Ah, another victim of nesting rules within rules.

this is, in general, something the 8th edition reboot got right.. no more "rule X" that when you read it grants "rule Y" & "rule Z", which when you read means "+1 Attack" and "+1 Save", its now all in the profile where it should be..

to be honest the profiles could do with being expanded a bit anyway (e.g. have a save as something like Sv: 3+{2+}/5++ where the {} bit is a save in melee only - allowing different normal and invulnerable saves in melee since some rules work that way)

makes the profiles a bit longer but avoids rules bloat

That sounds incredibly awkward to me. I think I much prefer the way it is now. Ive always thought USRs and rules in wargear were much more elegant.

Bobug wrote:

leopard wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Ah, another victim of nesting rules within rules.

this is, in general, something the 8th edition reboot got right.. no more "rule X" that when you read it grants "rule Y" & "rule Z", which when you read means "+1 Attack" and "+1 Save", its now all in the profile where it should be..

to be honest the profiles could do with being expanded a bit anyway (e.g. have a save as something like Sv: 3+{2+}/5++ where the {} bit is a save in melee only - allowing different normal and invulnerable saves in melee since some rules work that way)

makes the profiles a bit longer but avoids rules bloat

That sounds incredibly awkward to me. I think I much prefer the way it is now. Ive always thought USRs and rules in wargear were much more elegant.

I'd not worry, I can't see it changing any time soon, just that for me any USR that basically just modifies a stat line is better handled by actually modifying the stat line in some way - the bulk of the USR in 30k though are fine, they seem to have filtered out the silly ones and putting the movement stat back in as it should be seriously simplified a stack of rules anyway