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.
2023/04/11 17:34:40
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
MaxT wrote: Urgh, they're also setting themselves up for future pain - anytime they release a new unit, as well as the new unit datasheet they will also now have to update all the leaders in the faction to identify which leader models can join that particular unit - fun indeed :/
First World Space Marine problems
It's an absolutely dumb way to handle this, when they have freaking keywords right there... there is absolutely no reason to enumerate the joinable units.
That would add more units they can join though adding more ways to break things. Same rule isn't as valuable to every unit.
How? You can literally invent another keyword like 'Astartes bonkulus' that all, and only, the units that are enumerated on this list have, and have 'Can join any Astartes bonkulus unit' instead of the list. Then, if you release new units, you can decide if they are Astartes bonkulus or not, without re-touching every Lieutenant entry etc.
So adding new keyword just for this makes sense?
What keyword you would use to cover list but not the new missile guys? We know keywords, which archieve it?
Incidently aos had such a thing as keywoid that did 1 thing. Was fun searching 70 warscroll that had that 1 obscure keyword that had one purpose. Don't miss.
Soon we would have half a dozen keywords just to cover what combos unit can be taken
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/11 17:38:46
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2023/04/11 17:38:15
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Nevelon wrote: The restrictions on units seems like it should prevent some of the corner cases of prior editions. Like when a capheracti terminator captain with “slow and purposeful” could attach to a devastator squad to let them move and fire
Yes because that was terribly broken and being done by everyone
I’m simply listing it as an example of what happens when you have characters with special rules join units that GW didn’t necessarily have in mind when they handed out those special rules.
How was it not intended? They did Slow and Purposeful instead of Relentless for a reason.
IIRC (away from my books at the moment) S&P was basically relentless with drawbacks. Relentless affected the model, so a normal terminator character would not cause issues. S&P did effect the unit, for no running/pursuit reasons. But as it applied the drawbacks to everything, it also applied the buffs. So because you were hanging out with a sluggish friend, you would walk and shoot your heavy. Something you could not do otherwise.
The CTDA captain got S&P because all units in that armor got it. It (IMHO) was not intended to be a buff/upgrade, but a quirk of the rules that caused some funky interactions. I can’t think of other S&P characters that could join units, but there may have been some.
Nevelon wrote: The restrictions on units seems like it should prevent some of the corner cases of prior editions. Like when a capheracti terminator captain with “slow and purposeful” could attach to a devastator squad to let them move and fire
Yes because that was terribly broken and being done by everyone
I’m simply listing it as an example of what happens when you have characters with special rules join units that GW didn’t necessarily have in mind when they handed out those special rules.
How was it not intended? They did Slow and Purposeful instead of Relentless for a reason.
IIRC (away from my books at the moment) S&P was basically relentless with drawbacks. Relentless affected the model, so a normal terminator character would not cause issues. S&P did effect the unit, for no running/pursuit reasons. But as it applied the drawbacks to everything, it also applied the buffs. So because you were hanging out with a sluggish friend, you would walk and shoot your heavy. Something you could not do otherwise.
The CTDA captain got S&P because all units in that armor got it. It (IMHO) was not intended to be a buff/upgrade, but a quirk of the rules that caused some funky interactions. I can’t think of other S&P characters that could join units, but there may have been some.
But you're not answering the question. Slow and Purposeful was written to work that way. Why is it not an intended consequence?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/11 17:52:30
2023/04/11 17:52:43
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
When GW is known for adding stuff mid-stream an approach that is regimented and sensibly restricted is better than having to worry about new interactions popping up and needing to rewrite rules to deal with them.
2023/04/11 17:56:10
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Daedalus81 wrote: So the JP can roll 3D6 to charge. How do you resolve that?
you mean like core rules which say no model can move more than its movement value and you need to keep unit coherency at any point
you have one model that can be placed in the back of the unit and still be in the front after a charge, that is all, no further rules needed
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2023/04/11 18:00:29
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
it is going to be a mess either wayno change in the core will avoid that
GW is going to screw and players will ask for a full reset in 6 years anyway, no matter what the core is now
Nevelon wrote: The restrictions on units seems like it should prevent some of the corner cases of prior editions. Like when a capheracti terminator captain with “slow and purposeful” could attach to a devastator squad to let them move and fire
Yes because that was terribly broken and being done by everyone
I’m simply listing it as an example of what happens when you have characters with special rules join units that GW didn’t necessarily have in mind when they handed out those special rules.
How was it not intended? They did Slow and Purposeful instead of Relentless for a reason.
IIRC (away from my books at the moment) S&P was basically relentless with drawbacks. Relentless affected the model, so a normal terminator character would not cause issues. S&P did effect the unit, for no running/pursuit reasons. But as it applied the drawbacks to everything, it also applied the buffs. So because you were hanging out with a sluggish friend, you would walk and shoot your heavy. Something you could not do otherwise.
The CTDA captain got S&P because all units in that armor got it. It (IMHO) was not intended to be a buff/upgrade, but a quirk of the rules that caused some funky interactions. I can’t think of other S&P characters that could join units, but there may have been some.
But you're not answering the question. Slow and Purposeful was written to work that way. Why is it not an intended consequence?
It concerns me that in one post where you say that GWs rules writing is gak you also call them out to say that tagging the obviously improved profile character onto some Devastators, allowing them to move and fire without penalty, was by intent. Likely because it benefitted you.
2023/04/11 18:13:34
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
But you're not answering the question. Slow and Purposeful was written to work that way. Why is it not an intended consequence?
My read of GW’s rule team at the time was that S&P was not intended to be used as a buff for units. It was a “worse” version of relentless. RAW it did offer some significant boosts that I believe were not RAI. I think GW never even though what would happen if they added S&P to a character who could then be attached to all sorts of squads. But when the BaC box dropped, and they added the 40k rules for the 30k stuff, that’s what they ended up with. It was a fairly benign interaction, and FAQ/errata was not as big a thing at the time.
You have a series of abilities that might be fine individually, but sometimes get layered up for unforeseen consequences. Especially when competitive players push the envelope to get the most power out of things. I don’t think GW expected the worse cases of 5th ed wound allocations, or 2++ re-rollable invuns. But they happen.
Obviously, I don’t have any inside info on the thoughts of the designers at the time. I don’t think it was called out as a “look what this unit can do” at the time. Just a corner case of the rules that did things.
So the JP can roll 3D6 to charge. How do you resolve that?
I resolve via letting you know that you're defending a garbage restriction because of what you think GW's writing level is.
Resolve that in particular? Strat just says "Use for a unit where all Models have the JUMP keyword".
This isn't as difficult as you want it to be.
Or... don't let the jump pack guy tag onto the terminators.
My solution fixed your problem though, all through the ease of use of Keywords.
IMHO if it can be made to work with keywords, it should be made to work with keywords, because enumerating units is just another set of by-rules a player would need to know and learn, which works by its own principles, if by any principles at all. I thought they wanted to remove stuff like that. Yes, that would probably mean you'd need some additional keywords, but in my opinion that's better than having to keep oversight about reams of disparate lists that are published god-knows-where.
2023/04/11 18:24:05
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Nevelon wrote: The restrictions on units seems like it should prevent some of the corner cases of prior editions. Like when a capheracti terminator captain with “slow and purposeful” could attach to a devastator squad to let them move and fire
Yes because that was terribly broken and being done by everyone
I’m simply listing it as an example of what happens when you have characters with special rules join units that GW didn’t necessarily have in mind when they handed out those special rules.
How was it not intended? They did Slow and Purposeful instead of Relentless for a reason.
IIRC (away from my books at the moment) S&P was basically relentless with drawbacks. Relentless affected the model, so a normal terminator character would not cause issues. S&P did effect the unit, for no running/pursuit reasons. But as it applied the drawbacks to everything, it also applied the buffs. So because you were hanging out with a sluggish friend, you would walk and shoot your heavy. Something you could not do otherwise.
The CTDA captain got S&P because all units in that armor got it. It (IMHO) was not intended to be a buff/upgrade, but a quirk of the rules that caused some funky interactions. I can’t think of other S&P characters that could join units, but there may have been some.
But you're not answering the question. Slow and Purposeful was written to work that way. Why is it not an intended consequence?
It concerns me that in one post where you say that GWs rules writing is gak you also call them out to say that tagging the obviously improved profile character onto some Devastators, allowing them to move and fire without penalty, was by intent. Likely because it benefitted you.
That's the point of an Individual model with having Slow and Purposeful vs Relentless as two separate rules. It's intentional.
Also who fething CARES if it improved Devastators LOL If that was a concern for you, I've got a feeling that wasn't the primary reason you'd have lost to that player.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2023/04/11 18:25:51
2023/04/11 18:33:14
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
So the JP can roll 3D6 to charge. How do you resolve that?
I resolve via letting you know that you're defending a garbage restriction because of what you think GW's writing level is.
Resolve that in particular? Strat just says "Use for a unit where all Models have the JUMP keyword".
This isn't as difficult as you want it to be.
Or... don't let the jump pack guy tag onto the terminators.
My solution fixed your problem though, all through the ease of use of Keywords.
IMHO if it can be made to work with keywords, it should be made to work with keywords, because enumerating units is just another set of by-rules a player would need to know and learn, which works by its own principles, if by any principles at all. I thought they wanted to remove stuff like that. Yes, that would probably mean you'd need some additional keywords, but in my opinion that's better than having to keep oversight about reams of disparate lists that are published god-knows-where.
What's additional? JUMP and TERMINATOR are already things and aren't just being added.
2023/04/11 18:36:37
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
So the JP can roll 3D6 to charge. How do you resolve that?
I resolve via letting you know that you're defending a garbage restriction because of what you think GW's writing level is.
Resolve that in particular? Strat just says "Use for a unit where all Models have the JUMP keyword".
This isn't as difficult as you want it to be.
Or... don't let the jump pack guy tag onto the terminators.
My solution fixed your problem though, all through the ease of use of Keywords.
IMHO if it can be made to work with keywords, it should be made to work with keywords, because enumerating units is just another set of by-rules a player would need to know and learn, which works by its own principles, if by any principles at all. I thought they wanted to remove stuff like that. Yes, that would probably mean you'd need some additional keywords, but in my opinion that's better than having to keep oversight about reams of disparate lists that are published god-knows-where.
What's additional? JUMP and TERMINATOR are already things and aren't just being added.
I was speaking in more general terms, your specific example obviously works with existing keywords.
2023/04/11 18:39:15
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Santtu wrote: I hope all the minor characters that used to be part of units, like standard bearers and apothecaries, go back to the units where they belong.
I'm really hoping this is what they've done with exarchs. The current 9th ed rules are about as close to the classic 1/2 edition exarchs as we've had in a while.
It would really suck for them to backslide back to crappy sergeants.
I'm hoping they are characters that effectively have to join a squad and it can only be of their chosen aspect.
I'm expecting that last line to be what the Phoenix Lords get.
I also hope Exarch will be character leaders instead of being downgraded to Sergeants.
Phoenix Lords are a tricky one, since you could argue that as immortals they often act as lone operatives, but clearly their presence on the battlefield inspires their Aspects. Perhaps Phoenix Lords will go the Primarch route and be solo operatives that provide an Aura or similar ability.
2023/04/11 18:59:22
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
EviscerationPlague wrote:
That's the point of an Individual model with having Slow and Purposeful vs Relentless as two separate rules. It's intentional.
Also who fething CARES if it improved Devastators LOL If that was a concern for you, I've got a feeling that wasn't the primary reason you'd have lost to that player.
You care, you constantly gak on GW's rules writing and yet you mysteriously hand wave away anything that doesn't suit your argument. You're literally giving them a free pass to let a captain in elite armour designed for shock assaults with upgrades make a totally unrelated unit function beyond it's designed capacity by hiding in them and walking at the back of the field, simply because it backs up your bizzare whine about the presumed restriction of similar armour types joining one another. Stop being a hypocrite for once.
So the JP can roll 3D6 to charge. How do you resolve that?
I resolve via letting you know that you're defending a garbage restriction because of what you think GW's writing level is.
Resolve that in particular? Strat just says "Use for a unit where all Models have the JUMP keyword".
This isn't as difficult as you want it to be.
Or... don't let the jump pack guy tag onto the terminators.
My solution fixed your problem though, all through the ease of use of Keywords.
We don't have any datasheets, it's an entirely hypothetical, you fixed nothing as we don't know if once the units are joined, they are considered one unit. In which case yes, the terminators would by flying with jump packs and allowed to use those strats. Conversely if you assume they don't share keywords, which could honestly go either way, you still leave the complexity of mixed movement, mish mash of keywords to interact with and the aforementioned ambiguity on stratagems where now every entry has to be worded to only affect "units entirely consisting of X". In your example how do you affect a unit with the fly keyword? Would you have to limit all affects to the one model despite being a joined unit? What if the effect creates mortal wounds, can you palm those off onto the attached squad despite them not flying?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/11 19:08:23
2023/04/11 19:00:44
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Warwick, Warwickshire, England, UK, NW Europe, Sol-3, Western Spiral Arm, Milky Way
I am about 30 pages behind this discussion and every time I try to read the thread, two pages get added for every one I manage to read :/
I'm glad that they're bringing back actually embedding leaders into squads - I always hated having to roll seperately for two charges and stuff, I much preferred the older method that you got in 3rd-7th.
Kanluwen wrote: I doubt Exarchs will be "character leaders", since that would require stripping them out of the unit boxes.
No, it would not. Especially if they're limited to their own squad type. See Ogryns (separate bodyguard in this case), Tyranid warriors (and Primes) and multiple Imperial Guard command squads (in particular, since they've been doing character + separate squad for the duration of 8th/9th), Space marine company command and death wing command squads.
And honestly with the warlock box, GW did something even weirder, the two model unit that can be an even larger unit or characters.
Add in the fact that most of the aspect warriors still need plastic kits, and they've got plenty of options to do a better job with Exarchs.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2023/04/11 19:40:36
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2023/04/11 19:40:20
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Kanluwen wrote: I doubt Exarchs will be "character leaders", since that would require stripping them out of the unit boxes.
I hope they do just that and restore them to their place of glory
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
Kanluwen wrote: I doubt Exarchs will be "character leaders", since that would require stripping them out of the unit boxes.
No, it would not. Especially if they're limited to their own squad type. See Ogryns (separate bodyguard in this case),
Ogryn are now part of the Command Squad for Guard characters or attached to a single character to create a unit.
and multiple Imperial Guard command squads (in particular, since they've been doing character + separate squad for the duration of 8th/9th)
Except this isn't correct. Guard Command Squads are now all back to their pre-8th iteration. Exception is for the Commandant keyworded models(Castellans, DKoK Marshal, and Colonel Straken).
And honestly with the warlock box, GW did something even weirder, the two model unit that can be an even larger unit or characters.
Add in the fact that most of the aspect warriors still need plastic kits, and they've got plenty of options to do a better job with Exarchs.
Yes, but that means redoing kits that are relatively new or just sucking it up and admitting that certain units should always be built at "unit box-1" size.
Reading between the lines it sounds like Chaplains/Libbies either won't join units or if they do LTs can't also join. It would make sense that they didn't join so they can cast buffs on whomever.
2023/04/11 20:34:07
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Kanluwen wrote: I doubt Exarchs will be "character leaders", since that would require stripping them out of the unit boxes.
Squig Hog Rider box say otherwise.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/11 20:35:02
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
2023/04/11 20:56:11
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Daedalus81 wrote: By allowing non-terminators to join terminators you suddenly need a bunch of extra rules to handle deepstrike and their teleport homer. It just doesn't make sense.
A bunch? "The unit may only Deep Strike if all models in the unit have the Deep Strike rule".
Phwar! That was hard!
And what if you're not Deep Striking? Land Raiders are still a thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/11 21:00:34
Ultramarines, 3rd Co. and friends, 16k+ 
4k 
4k Points
Competition Index
