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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
But a Grav-Gun isn't a Plasma Gun, and a Power Axe is still a power weapon.

What you're actually arguing is to make the Plasma Gun and the Grav-Gun into "Generic Anti-Monster Gun". That's more consolidationist nonsense.

That's really all Grav WAS though, it just had the added bonus of throwing out easy glancing hits for 6th-7th just because. Grav Cannon just had Shred because GW never made rules to try to sell models.

Really though, you haven't presented a good argument to keep Grav as a profile around, just merely that it needs a bespoke rule because model exists. Bespoke is fine once in a while, not for every blasted kit.

As well, it kinda ignores my point of how great consolidation can work vs GW's implementation via cutting a head off a chicken and seeing where the body lands. You'll see I haven't defended new Combi-Weapons once.

Marines got to keep grav but the new Ork Kommando kit lost Shokka pistol and the new death korp kit lost demo charges...

watched a few games last night, I have to say the idea of the card deck being how you build your scenario being part of the actual rules is something I like and seemed reasonably well done

looks like it will reward a careful read through of the possibilities and taking account of the requirements to score VP in how an army is put together

I'm not enjoying the distinct lack of rules buffing Deathwatch against Xenos. One whole unit has buffs to fighting Xenos. Also not a fan of the seemingly random and weird condensing of profiles.

That being said, having played a game with the DW, they were fun. I need to do some tweaking to the army in some places but certain aspects are quite fun. Having far fewer Stratagems is a huge part of this I think. Sure some are still going to be a dud from time to time but when I've got 6 options instead of like 50 of which I can only use half, it's far more useful.

 Gert wrote:
I'm not enjoying the distinct lack of rules buffing Deathwatch against Xenos. One whole unit has buffs to fighting Xenos. Also not a fan of the seemingly random and weird condensing of profiles.

That being said, having played a game with the DW, they were fun. I need to do some tweaking to the army in some places but certain aspects are quite fun. Having far fewer Stratagems is a huge part of this I think. Sure some are still going to be a dud from time to time but when I've got 6 options instead of like 50 of which I can only use half, it's far more useful.

The problem with Deathwatch having rules specifically targeting xenos is that there is no way to balance that on a grander scale. It is technically rock-paper-scissor nonsense that is factionwide and should not be a part of the game.

 Eldarsif wrote:

 Gert wrote:
I'm not enjoying the distinct lack of rules buffing Deathwatch against Xenos. One whole unit has buffs to fighting Xenos. Also not a fan of the seemingly random and weird condensing of profiles.

That being said, having played a game with the DW, they were fun. I need to do some tweaking to the army in some places but certain aspects are quite fun. Having far fewer Stratagems is a huge part of this I think. Sure some are still going to be a dud from time to time but when I've got 6 options instead of like 50 of which I can only use half, it's far more useful.

The problem with Deathwatch having rules specifically targeting xenos is that there is no way to balance that on a grander scale. It is technically rock-paper-scissor nonsense that is factionwide and should not be a part of the game.

I'd go farther and say Deathwatch as an independent army should probably not really be part of the game, as well as Grey Knight. In my opinion, these forces should act more like a reservoir of Special Forces and Operatives, where you draw the odd Killteam, Character or Squad or a small allied Detachment from. Whole armies of them are very hard to do both fluff-accurate and balanced, either the Demonhunters are not that good at hunting Demons or they're overpowered in some cases and overcosted in others.

 Eldarsif wrote:

 Gert wrote:
I'm not enjoying the distinct lack of rules buffing Deathwatch against Xenos. One whole unit has buffs to fighting Xenos. Also not a fan of the seemingly random and weird condensing of profiles.

That being said, having played a game with the DW, they were fun. I need to do some tweaking to the army in some places but certain aspects are quite fun. Having far fewer Stratagems is a huge part of this I think. Sure some are still going to be a dud from time to time but when I've got 6 options instead of like 50 of which I can only use half, it's far more useful.

The problem with Deathwatch having rules specifically targeting xenos is that there is no way to balance that on a grander scale. It is technically rock-paper-scissor nonsense that is factionwide and should not be a part of the game.

It depends on the scale, a little salt enhances flavor, too much drowns out other flavors.

 Eldarsif wrote:
The problem with Deathwatch having rules specifically targeting xenos is that there is no way to balance that on a grander scale. It is technically rock-paper-scissor nonsense that is factionwide and should not be a part of the game.

A Stratagem or an Enhancement could have been added that targets Xenos units but as it stands the only thing that makes the Deathwatch (the Xenos hunting Chamber Militant of the Ordo Xenos) anti-Xenos are the Deathwatch Veterans unit that gets re-rolls to hit.
Should Thousand Sons not get bonuses for using psychic powers? Should Genestealer Cults not get rules to represent Cult uprisings? Why does every other 40k army get rules that reflect their background, yet Deathwatch doesn't?
I'm not asking for the entire army to get re-rolls or bonuses against Xenos armies but come on, one unit? It's very disappointing.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:

 Gert wrote:
I'm not enjoying the distinct lack of rules buffing Deathwatch against Xenos. One whole unit has buffs to fighting Xenos. Also not a fan of the seemingly random and weird condensing of profiles.

That being said, having played a game with the DW, they were fun. I need to do some tweaking to the army in some places but certain aspects are quite fun. Having far fewer Stratagems is a huge part of this I think. Sure some are still going to be a dud from time to time but when I've got 6 options instead of like 50 of which I can only use half, it's far more useful.

The problem with Deathwatch having rules specifically targeting xenos is that there is no way to balance that on a grander scale. It is technically rock-paper-scissor nonsense that is factionwide and should not be a part of the game.

It depends on the scale, a little salt enhances flavor, too much drowns out other flavors.

Well, both Deathwatch and Grey Knights evolved from a single squad you could ally in that was especially good against a single type of enemy to full-blown armies with full model ranges, and the first GK codex was no-holds-barred especially, ridiculously geared towards fighting Daemons and so-so at best against everything else, to the point you could have hundreds of points sunk into stuff that was of no use whatsoever if the enemy did not bring a lot of Daemons, or none at all. It got toned down from there, but then stuff like the Nemesis Dreadknight et al were added to artificially inflate what used to be a one-trick pony into a full range. Deathwatch are even worse, their concept is pretty much 'Marines+' with a cool flyer and some characters thrown in, and mixed squads as a gimmick. And i say this as a fan of Deathwatch starting from the original INQ54 Brother Artemis on

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'd rather find a way to give something a role than cut it from the game. Besides, Grav weapons have models, so...

I'm much happier with "Long Vigil Melee Weapons" than having mechanical advantages to running a Power Sword/Mace/Axe/etc. Feels way more free to run my weapon of choice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gert wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
The problem with Deathwatch having rules specifically targeting xenos is that there is no way to balance that on a grander scale. It is technically rock-paper-scissor nonsense that is factionwide and should not be a part of the game.

A Stratagem or an Enhancement could have been added that targets Xenos units but as it stands the only thing that makes the Deathwatch (the Xenos hunting Chamber Militant of the Ordo Xenos) anti-Xenos are the Deathwatch Veterans unit that gets re-rolls to hit.
Should Thousand Sons not get bonuses for using psychic powers? Should Genestealer Cults not get rules to represent Cult uprisings? Why does every other 40k army get rules that reflect their background, yet Deathwatch doesn't?
I'm not asking for the entire army to get re-rolls or bonuses against Xenos armies but come on, one unit? It's very disappointing.

It's one unit, but its also THE unit. Lets not pretend its an army with a ton of bespoke units to pick from. Personally I'm overall very happy with Deathwatch in 10th. I wish the Spectrus KT had a little more synergy and didn't lose so many interesting rules (there's no good 10th model), but overall it's great. I think a lot of the anit-Xenos flavor is still there, even if its not specifically called out. A lot of our rules are great at dealing with the kind of stuff that is traditionally Xenos. Hellfire rounds are good against monsters and large infantry blobs; Purgatus is designed to pick out Synapse. There's a lot of stuff that's good against Xenos; it just is no longer ONLY good against Xenos.

Surely if it's not specifically anti-Xenos then it's not there? As it stands a Deathwatch army will do just as well against Daemons or Sisters of Battle as against a Xenos army.
From a game balance perspective that's nice but when the other non-Codex Chapters get rules that compliment their background really well (especially Templars with the Vows) it's just a bit disappointing, especially considering the army rule is essentially just a rules clarification for how to determine unit toughness and transport capacity while the rest all get Oath of Moment and something that gives buffs to the entire army.

Again, I'm still having fun playing Deathwatch but they've reached the point where GW could just put the few explicitly Deathwatch kits (Artemis, Veterans, Watchmaster, Team Cassius, Blackstar) into the main Marine rules because there's no real substance to the army difference barring an exceptionally good Stratagem.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

God can you imagine how much ridicule GW would get if Angron's datasheet had "infantry" in its keywords

Definitely liking the new mission deck. Massive improvement over 9e boredom.

Battleshock good and loving armies not being immune to it. Was pleasant surprise having to worry about morale with marines despite it kicking me in teeth

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Breton wrote:
So you're saying delete MONSTER from the Primarchs, the Hive Tyrants, etc so there's next to no rules for them in the movement phase?

I said removing Monster from things that aren't Monsters. A Hive Tyrant is a Monster. How did you miss that? I was talking about Primarchs, and that sort of thing - the Epic heroes that have been saddled with 'Monster' in this edition for no reason. Monsters would keep Monster, because that makes sense.

And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

Breton wrote:
I get you keep wanting to turn this into Checkers 40,000...

I don't, I haven't the faintest idea where you get that idea, and your continued attempts to paint me as an unthinking simpleton who only understands checkers and not complex mechanics has reached the point where I will no longer put up with it. I'm done with you.

Well for starters, you make yourself sound like an unthinking simpleton.

Guilliman and the other primarchs have been a MONSTER for as long as they've been around. It's what gives them Big Guns, moving over other models, and so on that their giant bases need to get around. Secondly, making The Primarchs INFANTRY puts them into a transports like a Rhino etc and is another one of the reasons they've been MONSTERS since they were initially released. Third up, we have the inconsistency of protecting the central large HQ model represented by a Primarch from the Anti-Monster shortcut, but not the central large HQ model represented by a Hive Tyrant or Swarm Lord etc? I thought you were just bitching about inconsistencies?

Have you actually read all these rules you hate? Did someone have to read them to you? Do you understand them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gert wrote:
I'm not enjoying the distinct lack of rules buffing Deathwatch against Xenos. One whole unit has buffs to fighting Xenos. Also not a fan of the seemingly random and weird condensing of profiles.

That being said, having played a game with the DW, they were fun. I need to do some tweaking to the army in some places but certain aspects are quite fun. Having far fewer Stratagems is a huge part of this I think. Sure some are still going to be a dud from time to time but when I've got 6 options instead of like 50 of which I can only use half, it's far more useful.

The problem is Preferred Enemy is so tough to get working, and the skills should transfer over at least a little. I mean just for an example, lets say their Faction rule is everthing has Anti-Xenos 4+ - (and all the Xenos races on the webpage get the Xenos keyword so it works) - when you're in a pickup game against non-xenos your faction ability spends all day twiddling it's thumbs, whereas if your Carnifex Killer Squad has Anti-Monster, it can still do some work against a Greater Daemon, and your Falcon Grav Tank Hunters can still put in some work against Exorcists and Predators and such. They've done it before... at one point the Ultramarines Tyranic War Veterans had a special rule that was basically punching a carnifex in the mount so it would swallow a grenade - and it worked on any monster like Greater Daemons and such (I think this was before monsters were MONSTER) - so they had a purpose outside of a prepared narrative game. That's what they should be doing with Deathwatch. Tailoring the units for the xenos archetypes - squads that do well against Guardians/Gaunts/Gants etc... squads that do well against Wraith/Carnifex/etc as a generic target not a specific Anti-Nids.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

God can you imagine how much ridicule GW would get if Angron's datasheet had "infantry" in its keywords

Except he wouldn't be. He'd be a Monster. Because he's a giant, fething winged daemon.

Aircraft are just vehicles that cant be charged. It just feels uninspired and lazy.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
But a Grav-Gun isn't a Plasma Gun, and a Power Axe is still a power weapon.

What you're actually arguing is to make the Plasma Gun and the Grav-Gun into "Generic Anti-Monster Gun". That's more consolidationist nonsense.

That's really all Grav WAS though, it just had the added bonus of throwing out easy glancing hits for 6th-7th just because. Grav Cannon just had Shred because GW never made rules to try to sell models.

Really though, you haven't presented a good argument to keep Grav as a profile around, just merely that it needs a bespoke rule because model exists. Bespoke is fine once in a while, not for every blasted kit.

As well, it kinda ignores my point of how great consolidation can work vs GW's implementation via cutting a head off a chicken and seeing where the body lands. You'll see I haven't defended new Combi-Weapons once.

The reason(s) to keep Grav is:
Its one of the GW/40 "Four Elements" theme. It needs to get floated out to the rest of the factions, not removed. Each faction should have some las, flamer, melta, plasma, and grav. Each faction should rank and use those elements differently but they should be there - for example Death Guard have diseased fire which is stronger and could be more comparable to Marine Grav (or what Marine Grav should be). Meanwhile Marines took Las and instead of the AAA Batteries Guardsmen use, hooked it up to the nuclear power station in their backpack

because of what Grav was SUPPOSED to be. It was supposed to target those mid-tier INFANTRY without intruding on the design space of the other weapons - then became too good at other targets like tanks - and now inexplicably has flat D2 or D3, and Anti-Vehicle2+ on it instead of the Melta where you'd expect it. It shouldn't be what it currently is, but it should be there.

Between Plasma and Grav one should be the Anti-Monster, and one should be the midrange Infantry version of a Heavy Bolter. The Heavy Bolter itself should probably drop back down to 1W and go up in shots - with probably some sort of BLAST mechanic. It is the "chaff mower" (think T3/T4 W1, squad size 20) the Grav Gun should instead choke on a "horde" squad like Boyz or Gants/Gaunts, and ping off the tougher stuff like Rhinos and up(T9+, W10+), but melt the midtier infantry (Think T5/T6, W3 or 4). Plasma should burn through the upper tier monsters (T8-11, W10ish) - not the actual Daemon Prince(s) because its a character, but things like the Daemon Princes. Melta gets the Anti-Vehicle and even then only 3+ or 4+. Each of these elements should have a role - and each faction should swap those roles around a bit for flavor - And each role should also have some generic "guns" they overlap with. Auto/Assault cannons into the Grav targets, Frag into the Heavy Bolter targets, Krak into the plasma, Lascannons into the Melta.

 vipoid wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

God can you imagine how much ridicule GW would get if Angron's datasheet had "infantry" in its keywords

Except he wouldn't be. He'd be a Monster. Because he's a giant, fething winged daemon.

Ah, so this is just privilege for loyalist primarchs specifically then.

 Sledgehammer wrote:
Aircraft are just vehicles that cant be charged. It just feels uninspired and lazy.

The perpetual issue with Aircraft is that they do not belong in the game.

Whatever rules they get, they're going to end up being a complete mess because 40k simply has no capacity to abstract their height.

It's made even worse by the massive based being inexplicable dead-zones where no other model is permitted to tread.

 Sledgehammer wrote:
Aircraft are just vehicles that cant be charged. It just feels uninspired and lazy.

In some ways Aircraft are inspired. In some ways Aircraft play on the same board but in a different fourth dimension that can only be crossed in specific ways. In most ways they didn't really take full advantage of the idea, stopped haflway through the concept and then tacked on a couple bandaids that only served to open the wound even further.

They're not freakin daemons, so yeah they wouldn't be monsters. They'd just be bulky.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

God can you imagine how much ridicule GW would get if Angron's datasheet had "infantry" in its keywords

Except he wouldn't be. He'd be a Monster. Because he's a giant, fething winged daemon.

Ah, so this is just privilege for loyalist primarchs specifically then.

 Sledgehammer wrote:
Aircraft are just vehicles that cant be charged. It just feels uninspired and lazy.

No, they can't pivot before moving and have to move 20+". I'm guessing aircraft are trash, we'll see.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

God can you imagine how much ridicule GW would get if Angron's datasheet had "infantry" in its keywords

Except he wouldn't be. He'd be a Monster. Because he's a giant, fething winged daemon.

Ah, so this is just privilege for loyalist primarchs specifically then.

Hey, don't get me wrong, I'd love to stick Guilliman in a Land Raider or a Storm Raven (the semi-sarcastic/parody fantasy of Guilliman hugging the back ramp of the Storm Raven with the Dreadnaught crane hooked into his belt has been around for years) but even then it was the Dreadnaught part of the Storm Raven not the 1 INFATNRY model part. It IS possible Vipoid didn't scroll back far enough to see someone suggest replacing MONSTER on the Primarchs with INFANTRY and thus did not understand the question because that suggestion and its ramifications are so completely utterly ridiculous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vict0988 wrote:

 Sledgehammer wrote:
Aircraft are just vehicles that cant be charged. It just feels uninspired and lazy.

No, they can't pivot before moving and have to move 20+". I'm guessing aircraft are trash, we'll see.

Aircraft haven't really changed themselves. I think the Aircraft rules were lifted straight out of 9th and dropped into 10th en masse. The Timing of the pivot changed, and the Deployment Screw You rule may be new or it may be from one of the Chapter Approved I missed. The main differences will be a few stat-lines, and Anti-Fly - especially on a handful of likely to be popular Primaris Marine stuff. Outside of the Primaris tanks/Dreads anti-fly is pretty sparse and usually only on the dedicated AA or aircraft models themselves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Racerguy180 wrote:
They're not freakin daemons, so yeah they wouldn't be monsters. They'd just be bulky.

For those missing the context involved: This is a discussion revolving around the scarcity of Anti-Monster compared to many of the other ANTI-s- Anti-Monster is likely rare because most of the Faction Centerpiece "Face of the Franchise" models are MONSTER keyworded, and for gameplay as well as sales based reasons GW is unlikely to want a shortcut system like Anti-X to reliably delete any faction HQ's, especially the "Face of the Franchise" famous ones.

Primarchs already ARE MONSTERs. They (and the Daemon Primarchs) and some/most/all of the Nid "HQ", the Avatar, and some/most/all of any other MONSTER keyworded HQ's I can't think of shouldn't be MONSTER's, so that GW can roll out ANTI-MONSTER keywords as easily as they rolled out ANTI-Infantry, ANTI-VEHICLE and so on. The Winged Hive Tyrant can get neither. The Tervigon can get neither. Anti-INFANTRY works because almost all the INFANTRY CHARACTERS are LEADERs, LONE OPERATIVEs, or both. Many of the MONSTER HQ's cannot be LEADERs and may or may not get LONE OPERATIVEs - in fact none of the three DAEMON PRIMARCHs can get either protection, so an Anti-Monster Drop Pod Bomb would absolutely pulp them at will becoming a no-brainer God forbid you get an Anti-Monster Devastating Wounds bomb.

I suggested that when GW rolls out Anti-Monster, that would also be the time to replace MONSTER on those types of Monster-HQ-Character models with something else like BRUTE, and then add BRUTE to all the rules next to MONSTER thus making them MONSTERS without vulnerability to ANTI-Monster. Someone else for some inexplicable reason thought that adding a third keyword to a list in the four or five already existing rules would "add more rules" and when I pointed out MONSTER as a generic categoy keyword is where these models get most of the rules about their movement thought we should just change these monsters to INFANTRY so Primarchs could just use those rules - thus someone understandingly laughing at the idea of Angron riding in a Rhino being something that would be mocked had GW done it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
But a Grav-Gun isn't a Plasma Gun, and a Power Axe is still a power weapon.

What you're actually arguing is to make the Plasma Gun and the Grav-Gun into "Generic Anti-Monster Gun". That's more consolidationist nonsense.

Breton wrote:
So you're saying delete MONSTER from the Primarchs, the Hive Tyrants, etc so there's next to no rules for them in the movement phase?

I said removing Monster from things that aren't Monsters. A Hive Tyrant is a Monster. How did you miss that? I was talking about Primarchs, and that sort of thing - the Epic heroes that have been saddled with 'Monster' in this edition for no reason. Monsters would keep Monster, because that makes sense.

And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

Yay! Angron as Infantry!

Not using the ANTI-MONSTER keyword because Timmy will be sad if Guilliman gets yeeted by a plasma cannon seems like a really artificial problem.

Question is, why would you leave Bobby out in open to get a face full o plasma???

Seems like a mistake little Timmy would make once....if they don't learn from that, there is absolutely zero anyone can do to help them!

 catbarf wrote:
Not using the ANTI-MONSTER keyword because Timmy will be sad if Guilliman gets yeeted by a plasma cannon seems like a really artificial problem.

It's a multi-stage made up problem, if the problem is Guillimangron Lion El'Mortarithrakka dying too easily then put adequate saves, abilities and protections on these models instead of artifically restricting design space.

 catbarf wrote:
Not using the ANTI-MONSTER keyword because Timmy will be sad if Guilliman gets yeeted by a plasma cannon seems like a really artificial problem.

Except it's not just Guilliman. Its many/most of the MONSTER CHARACTERs that would throw the entire balance of Warlord/Character based objectives, let alone the general play value of these models and such out of whack. INFANTRY CHARACTERS are generally protected by LEADER or LONE OPERATIVE, giving them massed target protection and ablative bodies. Many/Most Monters get neither, just the protection of increased durabiltiy. ANTI-MONSTER pretty much ignores that increased durability leaving them no real protection.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And of course I wouldn't leave them without a rule. They'd be Infantry. Duh!

God can you imagine how much ridicule GW would get if Angron's datasheet had "infantry" in its keywords

Except he wouldn't be. He'd be a Monster. Because he's a giant, fething winged daemon.

Ah, so this is just privilege for loyalist primarchs specifically then.

I wasn't the one who said Primarchs shouldn't be Monsters.

 catbarf wrote:
Not using the ANTI-MONSTER keyword because Timmy will be sad if Guilliman gets yeeted by a plasma cannon seems like a really artificial problem.

Agreed.

That was Arachnofiend, not myself... Vipoid