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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Stuck there and you can't make a harem out of them, either. It's reasonably different from all prior systems.

A "harem"? What exactly are you referring to with that term?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Stuck there and you can't make a harem out of them, either. It's reasonably different from all prior systems.

A "harem"? What exactly are you referring to with that term?

The BarkBarkStar, of course.

The pack leader gets Azrael, St. Celestine, some GK psykers... All to themself!

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Stuck there and you can't make a harem out of them, either. It's reasonably different from all prior systems.

A "harem"? What exactly are you referring to with that term?

The BarkBarkStar, of course.

The pack leader gets Azrael, St. Celestine, some GK psykers... All to themself!

So, "harem" is the same as "deathstar"? Daed?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Stuck there and you can't make a harem out of them, either. It's reasonably different from all prior systems.

A "harem"? What exactly are you referring to with that term?

The BarkBarkStar, of course.

The pack leader gets Azrael, St. Celestine, some GK psykers... All to themself!

So, "harem" is the same as "deathstar"? Daed?

I'm pretty sure it's just a joke.
Mine certainly was.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Stuck there and you can't make a harem out of them, either. It's reasonably different from all prior systems.

And you could have just said "No more than one character can join a unit at a time" and that "harem" problem, as you put it, vanishes instantly.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Stuck there and you can't make a harem out of them, either. It's reasonably different from all prior systems.

A "harem"? What exactly are you referring to with that term?

The BarkBarkStar, of course.

The pack leader gets Azrael, St. Celestine, some GK psykers... All to themself!

So, "harem" is the same as "deathstar"? Daed?

I'm pretty sure it's just a joke.
Mine certainly was.

Possibly? But I'd rather Daed explain exactly what they meant.

The sad thing is, we've already got two ways of having multiple leaders. First is the guard way, where the squads allow a second, non-command squad, character to join a unit, and the other is the space marine way, where LTs have a special exemption from the only-one-leader rule (though it only works with captains and chapter masters).
(mentioned way back here:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/11/leaders-now-join-squads-to-personally-deliver-powerful-boons-in-the-new-warhammer-40000/)

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Also, some more venting:

Both the Character rules and the Enhancements seem to be turning most characters into glorified sergeants.

Well that's what happens when a bunch of people don't realize why characters being stuck to squads was always dumb as a mechanic and 8th-9th had it figured out. No longer do you have leaders for your army, just squads!

Except, in previous editions, characters were not "stuck to squads". They could leave them and join them as you pleased. This whole "they're stuck there", is something new for 10th edition.

You have to realize I'm referring to buffs being stuck to squads.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Stuck there and you can't make a harem out of them, either. It's reasonably different from all prior systems.

A "harem"? What exactly are you referring to with that term?

Deathstar, yea. Just being silly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And you could have just said "No more than one character can join a unit at a time" and that "harem" problem, as you put it, vanishes instantly.

Yea - that's essentially what we have now. It was just a comparison of the systems over time going from deathstars to unattached buffers to attached buffers. Though I'd say 10th is very hybrid in it's options, but seemingly no death stars.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Also, some more venting:

Both the Character rules and the Enhancements seem to be turning most characters into glorified sergeants.

Well that's what happens when a bunch of people don't realize why characters being stuck to squads was always dumb as a mechanic and 8th-9th had it figured out. No longer do you have leaders for your army, just squads!

Except, in previous editions, characters were not "stuck to squads". They could leave them and join them as you pleased. This whole "they're stuck there", is something new for 10th edition.

You have to realize I'm referring to buffs being stuck to squads.

Buuuttt ...they aren't, if characters can freely move from squad to squad. I employ that tactic quite often with Heralds in HH. That tactic is missing in 10th. Maybe you're just assuming (again) that everyone plays/played like you and your friends?

Voss wrote:
The sad thing is, we've already got two ways of having multiple leaders. First is the guard way, where the squads allow a second, non-command squad, character to join a unit, and the other is the space marine way, where LTs have a special exemption from the only-one-leader rule (though it only works with captains and chapter masters).
(mentioned way back here:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/11/leaders-now-join-squads-to-personally-deliver-powerful-boons-in-the-new-warhammer-40000/)

Yea I don't see this as particularly problematic based on what we've seen so far.

The whole command squad thing is pretty neat, I think.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breton wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


At the same time rippers are OC0, but halve the OC of enemies. I really enjoy that sort of tactical consideration.

Rounded up or down? I.e. will OC1 models be OC0 or OC1?

Unsure as it was only briefly mentioned here:

https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-reviews-warhammer-40000-10th-edition-bonus-leviathan-unit-datasheets/

Breton wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


At the same time rippers are OC0, but halve the OC of enemies. I really enjoy that sort of tactical consideration.

Rounded up or down? I.e. will OC1 models be OC0 or OC1?

Unsure as it was only briefly mentioned here:

https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-reviews-warhammer-40000-10th-edition-bonus-leviathan-unit-datasheets/

 vipoid wrote:

Both the Character rules and the Enhancements seem to be turning most characters into glorified sergeants. Really not a fan. Apparently every army has flushed all their relic weapons and relic armour down the toilet, so that basically all that's left is squad-buffs. Can't wait for every single DE character to have the ranged capability of a Brussel Sprout except now they can't even buy a relic pistol to have a worthwhile gun.


/rant

So character getting +1/2 s and a for his weapon is squad buff...how?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

I'm guessing your thoughts are more focused on Warlock Skyrunners rather than other HQs, which I don't think follow the pattern of concern you have here.

Not just warlock skyrunners. We've seen this from many other units - e.g. the SM Libratian, the GSC Patriarch, Ahriman (apart from his 1/game ability), etc.

Moreover, even with units like the Farseer, you're still stuck with a very specific combination of powers. What if you wanted to Guide a unit rather than Fortuning it? What if you wanted to Doom and Mind War enemies, rather than only being able to Eldritch Storm them?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The buffs remaining within the unit is pretty crucial. A Farseer can Fortune an Avatar. That's a pretty significant effect and it shows why that particular spell has a 2+ roll on it. If we were to allow a nearby Warlock Skyrunner to also grant the Avatar Stealth he would become even more durable.

But there are other ways to handle that.

If you are worried about buff-stacking, you could implement a similar rule to Warmachine and say that a unit can only be affected by 1 friendly psychic buff and 1 enemy psychic debuff at any one time. If a new buff/debuff is applied, the oldest one expires. We've even got the [Psychic] keyword to use for this purpose.

(Incidentally, you could actually do the same with non-psychic buffs, thereby dramatically reducing the effectiveness of attaching multiple, different characters to the same unit - potentially killing Death Stars without the need for the much clunkier 'only one character and one lieutenant can join a unit'.)

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Right now it's pretty trivial to hide a Farseer near an Avatar and throw out Doom and Fortune with no further investment. Now that investment becomes a unit to protect the Farseer reducing the total power and making the game less lethal.

Except that you haven't just added a requirement to better protect the Farseer - you've also stripped them of most of their power (and choice) as well.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

I suspect that if the statement of '2000 datasheets' is true that we're going to see multiple sheets for Farseers and Warlocks. Each will have a different spell. So it could be possible to have a foot Farseer with Doom and a foot Farseer with Fortune, but the unit joining restrictions keep you again from focusing this power in one place.

Even if that's true, it's the worst possible way to go about it. It's the same reason people hate having 47 different dataslates for Primaris Lieutenants, rather than just a few with options for different gear.

I will say, too, that a model's spell selection should not be determined by whether or not it is mounted.

Multiple sheets for Farseers so they can have different powers? That's like replacing a busted light-bulb by turning the building to unscrew the busted bulb!

Just special character seers with different rules. But honestly after seeing all the eldar rules, I had a hearty laugh at the "lowering of re-rolls and kill power in 10th ed". If my dudes are to match that, then I expect a relic/enhamcment that gives everyone in the army a +4 FNP and another one that doubles the strenght of psychic weapons if the bearer has not cast a psychic power that turn.

While not buff stacking, we can get more buff spreading now I think.

In 9th, you could only cast each power once, so you could only cast conceal on one squad. Now in 10th, if you wanted you could have 3 warlock skyrunners attached to 3 different windrider squads, and they all could be cloaked with psychic goodness.

So we can return to times where warlocks we basically sergeants in guardian squads, and using their powers on them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Multiple sheets for Farseers so they can have different powers? That's like replacing a busted light-bulb by turning the building to unscrew the busted bulb!

Karol wrote:
Just special character seers with different rules. But honestly after seeing all the eldar rules, I had a hearty laugh at the "lowering of re-rolls and kill power in 10th ed". If my dudes are to match that, then I expect a relic/enhamcment that gives everyone in the army a +4 FNP and another one that doubles the strenght of psychic weapons if the bearer has not cast a psychic power that turn.

There's definitely a lot of weirdness in how Eldar have been handled.

A lot of the nerfs seem to be very random. Was anyone dominating with Witchblades in 9th? Also, were the Phoenix Lords particularly problematic? They're not really my thing either way but it definitely seems like quite a comedown for supposedly the greatest fighters the Eldar have to offer.

But then we have the stuff that has been left virtually unscathed. DE poison was slightly buffed against infantry but massively nerfed against everything else. Even the Splinter Cannon, already a pitiful weapon in 9th, is only marginally better against infantry whilst now having no utility whatsoever against monsters or even bikers.

However, on the Eldar side, Shuriken weapons have lost Rending but have kept the all-important AP-1. Making them far, far more versatile against basically all units. Not only that, but while the Splinter Cannon has been heavily nerfed two editions running (despite never being a good weapon to begin with), the far superior Shuriken Cannon has been buffed still further - keeping all the bonuses it received in 9th while also adding Sustained Hits.

Weirdly, the Scatter Laser (a weapon I would have already considered weaker than the Shuriken Cannon) has actually lost a point of strength.


It just seems like the whole 'reducing lethality' thing has been applied very selectively, even within the same faction. It seems that many strong weapons have stayed the same or even improved, whilst many weak or niche weapons have received the bulk of the nerfs. I really struggle to see any overall pattern to the manner in which weapons have been changed.

Eldrad

Unsurprisingly doom reappeared

tneva82 wrote:
Unsurprisingly doom reappeared

And Mind War seems like a decent snipe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
A lot of the nerfs seem to be very random. Was anyone dominating with Witchblades in 9th? Also, were the Phoenix Lords particularly problematic? They're not really my thing either way but it definitely seems like quite a comedown for supposedly the greatest fighters the Eldar have to offer.

But then we have the stuff that has been left virtually unscathed. DE poison was slightly buffed against infantry but massively nerfed against everything else. Even the Splinter Cannon, already a pitiful weapon in 9th, is only marginally better against infantry whilst now having no utility whatsoever against monsters or even bikers.

However, on the Eldar side, Shuriken weapons have lost Rending but have kept the all-important AP-1. Making them far, far more versatile against basically all units. Not only that, but while the Splinter Cannon has been heavily nerfed two editions running (despite never being a good weapon to begin with), the far superior Shuriken Cannon has been buffed still further - keeping all the bonuses it received in 9th while also adding Sustained Hits.

Weirdly, the Scatter Laser (a weapon I would have already considered weaker than the Shuriken Cannon) has actually lost a point of strength.


It just seems like the whole 'reducing lethality' thing has been applied very selectively, even within the same faction. It seems that many strong weapons have stayed the same or even improved, whilst many weak or niche weapons have received the bulk of the nerfs. I really struggle to see any overall pattern to the manner in which weapons have been changed.

I don't think this really conveys the differences.

Splinter 36" A3 AP1 S3 D2 SH [1] AI [3+]
Shuriken Cannon 24" A3 S6 AP1 D2 SH[1]

DE have more range and trade 3 strength for anti-infantry. The Shuriken tackles mid-range vehicles and the Splinter tackles infantry.

Shuriken does 0.8 to Sentinels and Splinter does 0.4.
Splinter does 1.1 to Custodes and Shuriken does 0.55.

Both those targets are T7.

It seems pretty clear that neither is the superior weapon over the other. They just serve different roles.

A Scatter being S5 differentiates it from Shuriken in a way we can't yet judge, because we don't know of many units sitting in the T6 band. Couple this with 3+ not benefitting from cover against AP0 and the effectiveness of this weapon changes relative to weapons with AP1.

Eldrad seems like an auto-take for the fate dice alone.

 Trickstick wrote:
Eldrad seems like an auto-take for the fate dice alone.

Yea though fortunately it's once similar to Ahriman. Eldar will probably be the strongest faction based on what we've seen unless their points go way up. I'm going to go cost the list from the exhibition game and see what it comes up to.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

I don't think this really conveys the differences.

Splinter 36" A3 AP1 S3 D2 SH [1] AI [3+]
Shuriken Cannon 24" A3 S6 AP1 D2 SH[1]

DE have more range and trade 3 strength for anti-infantry. The Shuriken tackles mid-range vehicles and the Splinter tackles infantry.

Shuriken does 0.8 to Sentinels and Splinter does 0.4.
Splinter does 1.1 to Custodes and Shuriken does 0.55.

Both those targets are T7.

It seems pretty clear that neither is the superior weapon over the other. They just serve different roles.

I don't think your math is showing what you seem to think it is.

Shuriken Cannons are only slightly worse against infantry, whilst Splinter is half as effective even against a vehicle that the Cannon is wounding on 5s.

It's not an exaggeration to say that if DE players could swap out their Splinter Cannons for Shuriken ones, they would do so in a heartbeat.

So I could see --

2 Prisms
Wave Serpent
War Walker
2x Support Weapons
3 Windwiders
Warlock Skyrunner
3 Vypers
5 Scorpions
Karandras
10 Avengers
Asurmen
2x5 Spiders

There may have also been a 5 man and another character, but I couldn't be sure. So at the low end 1650 and high end 1850 best guess.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

I don't think this really conveys the differences.

Splinter 36" A3 AP1 S3 D2 SH [1] AI [3+]
Shuriken Cannon 24" A3 S6 AP1 D2 SH[1]

DE have more range and trade 3 strength for anti-infantry. The Shuriken tackles mid-range vehicles and the Splinter tackles infantry.

Shuriken does 0.8 to Sentinels and Splinter does 0.4.
Splinter does 1.1 to Custodes and Shuriken does 0.55.

Both those targets are T7.

It seems pretty clear that neither is the superior weapon over the other. They just serve different roles.

I don't think your math is showing what you seem to think it is.

Shuriken Cannons are only slightly worse against infantry, whilst Splinter is half as effective even against a vehicle that the Cannon is wounding on 5s.

It's not an exaggeration to say that if DE players could swap out their Splinter Cannons for Shuriken ones, they would do so in a heartbeat.

You COULD trade for a Shuriken if you were worried about vehicles or GEQ, but I don't think you want to ignore heavy infantry. Add in the additional range of Splinter and the transport options and you have lots to consider about the balance between these two things.

Neither of these are anti-tank so worry about their performance in the medium to heavy vehicles seems arbitrary. Shuriken is for light vehicles. Splinter is for heavy infantry. They otherwise perform very similarly.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

You COULD trade for a Shuriken if you were worried about vehicles or GEQ, but I don't think you want to ignore heavy infantry. Add in the additional range of Splinter and the transport options and you have lots to consider about the balance between these two things.

Remember that bikers and the like are no longer infantry. So far from being superior against such targets, Splinter is now wounding them on 6s.

As to the range, the issue is that DE have virtually way to make use of it without sacrificing their other shooting. Splinter Rifles are 24". Blasters and Shredders are 18". The most you can do is combat-squad Warriors to get a single Dark Lance or extra Splinter Cannon (as if) in a Venom, but even then you're sacrificing the shooting of the rest of the squad if you want to stay at max range.

Put simply, the range is nowhere near the drawback you're making it out to be. If anything, it's an example of how Splinter Cannons have been heavily nerfed. Back in 8th they were Rapid Fire 3 - so they got 6 shots at 18". However, while the Shuriken Cannon got extra AP and damage at no cost whatsoever, the Splinter Cannon was forced to pay through the nose for them.

Yea, but it picked up D2. Having 6 shots in 18" w/ D2 would make it far too good.

I couldn't speak on the effect of bikes running around and such, but I imagine we'll see a strat that lets poison go into other targets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

If you are worried about buff-stacking, you could implement a similar rule to Warmachine and say that a unit can only be affected by 1 friendly psychic buff and 1 enemy psychic debuff at any one time. If a new buff/debuff is applied, the oldest one expires. We've even got the [Psychic] keyword to use for this purpose.

There are many ways to tackle problems. This one above would require a lot of changes to the system and Warmachine had way more restrictive list building in practice than 40K seems to have in 10th.

The idea of buffs expiring is fine, but either it's a bad decision or it isn't. If it isn't then you didn't change anything. If it is then why not just restrict it to one anyway?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea, but it picked up D2. Having 6 shots in 18" w/ D2 would make it far too good.

Good point.

Imagine if the anti-infantry cannon on an NPC faction like Dark Eldar was allowed to kill a whole Marine every time it fired. Madness.

 vipoid wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea, but it picked up D2. Having 6 shots in 18" w/ D2 would make it far too good.

Good point.

Imagine if the anti-infantry cannon on an NPC faction like Dark Eldar was allowed to kill a whole Marine every time it fired. Madness.

Oh please. It's not because you're an "NPC faction", it's because they've been changing the way these keyworded things function.

To throw an example out?
Onagers with Icarus Arrays went from being effective against skimmers, aircraft, flying monsters, jetbikes, and jump infantry to...just aircraft.

Poison never should have been able to jank up bikers.

 vipoid wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

I don't think this really conveys the differences.

Splinter 36" A3 AP1 S3 D2 SH [1] AI [3+]
Shuriken Cannon 24" A3 S6 AP1 D2 SH[1]

DE have more range and trade 3 strength for anti-infantry. The Shuriken tackles mid-range vehicles and the Splinter tackles infantry.

Shuriken does 0.8 to Sentinels and Splinter does 0.4.
Splinter does 1.1 to Custodes and Shuriken does 0.55.

Both those targets are T7.

It seems pretty clear that neither is the superior weapon over the other. They just serve different roles.

I don't think your math is showing what you seem to think it is.

Shuriken Cannons are only slightly worse against infantry, whilst Splinter is half as effective even against a vehicle that the Cannon is wounding on 5s.

It's not an exaggeration to say that if DE players could swap out their Splinter Cannons for Shuriken ones, they would do so in a heartbeat.

Amen to that. I actually emailed GW months ago as a preemptive suggestion/request, and for whatever that wasn't worth, to ask for that. Or rather for a fething strength of 4. Nothing craycray even just s4 cannons. Thats how gakky splinter weaponry is. But yes I'd trade poison for shuriken in a heartbeat and throw in eldrads mom to sweeten the deal.