View Full Version : One-dimensional Warhammer 40k

18-10-2005, 04:55
The title of this thread is not intended as a slur against the official Warhammer 40k edition rules. What I propose to do in this thread is to adapt the rules of Warhammer 40k so that it may be played only with miniatures, rather than on a board or table top. A game that could be played using the armylist alone with some dice.

This is not a collectable card game though. All book-keeping must be done in the traditional Warhammer way, using traditional rules referring to miniatures and dice (for wounds), rather than referring to cards, taps, and so on.

Here's why: Maintain the rule of cool.

Obviously, such a radical change would require that the turn sequence be changed. It must still be Warhammer though, so here's what I suggest as an opening idea:

Warhammer 40k in One Dimension: The Turn
Turn Summary
1. The Movement Phase
The player can move any units that are in play, and one unit that is not in play. The unit not in play may only be moved into play.

2. The Shooting Phase
The player can shoot with any units in play that are capable of shooting, and at any units in play. Whether they can depends on whether they have already moved or will move again. See the shooting rules for more details about how to resolve shooting and when it may be resolved.

3. The Assault Phase
The player can move any unit in play capable of assaulting, and have them fight a unit that had not moved in the previous player's turn. Any units being assaulted by a unit, or that were previously caught in an assault may fight as well.

Warhammer 40k in One Dimension: Movement Phase
Movement Choices
During the movement phase, a player has the following four choices that each unit in play may make in regard to moving. A unit may either (1) Fall Back, (2) Move into shooting range, (3) Move into assault range, or (4) Take Cover.

Essentially units can move into and out of four range bands with other units - out of play, in play, shooting range, assault range.

Unit that are out of play may not be attacked by shooting, or in an assault. If a unit has just entered play then it is out of shooting range and out of assault range of any other units. If it moves into shooting range of an enemy unit, then it may shoot at that unit, and that unit may shoot back in its own turn. They are at shooting range of each other.

If a unit is at shooting range of an enemy unit, then it may move into assault range of that unit, and may shoot that unit, and that unit may shoot back in its own turn. These two units are at assault range of each other. If a unit is at assault range, then it may move in the assault phase depending on how it attacked during the shooting phase.

Units that 'take cover' do not change a range band, up or down, but instead forgo shooting and assaulting to claim a cover save against shooting, and an initiative bonus against assaults. Units can only 'fall back' twice before they move out of play. However, when units 'fall back', they either move out of assault range of a single enemy unit, or of they move out of shooting range of an enemy unit, which is closer.

Warhammer 40k in One Dimension: Shooting Phase
Pistols and Assault weapons may be used to fire at units in assault range. Use of assault weapons does not prevent a unit from assaulting that turn.

Rapid Fire weapons may use two dice if firing at assault range, and a single die if firing at shooting range. Use of rapid fire weapons prevents a unit from assaulting during that turn.

Heavy Weapons: Etc.

If two enemy units are equal proximity to a player's unit, in the same range band as each other, then the player must roll for target priority to see which particular enemy unit that the third unit may shoot at, or shoot at and assault.

Warhammer 40k in One Dimension: Universal Special Rules
Both Fleet and Fast Vehicle now allow a unit to engage in shooting after it first moves into play.

Infiltrator units begin in play.

More to ensue as I suss this out...

Easy E
19-10-2005, 02:24
Hmmmm, I would like to see this develope. I'm not sure if you are completely serious, but this looks like it could be a played on the forum against one another using a dice rolling program and posting the dice by a third party. Similar to the GM in RT era and Inquisitor.

Or I could be full of it.

Commissar von Toussaint
19-10-2005, 02:41
The funny thing is that this really underlines how little tactical thought goes into the game.

Mostly it's who assaults whom and how they get there. Terrain isn't much of an issue.

I designed a card game years ago that was non-random. No draws, no dice, it relied on pure fog of war for combat resolution. It was kind of neat.

This reads a lot like it.

19-10-2005, 05:04
Easy E:

Actually I'm not completely serious, but I think it's interesting to pursue nonetheless. Originally I posted this in the 40k General Discussion forum, hoping to provoke discussion of how positioning affected Warhammer 40k, 4th edition. The idea was to raise awareness of positioning as a facet of the 40k game experience.

The question I wanted to propose was: Does the game fundamentally change if you take away positioning in 40k, or simplify it beyond a certain degree?

As a logical prelude to such as question, I wanted to ask people whether we could actually subtract the element of position from 40k, or simplify it beyond the need for a board. Because if we could, that is to say remove the issue of position, it strikes me that the game does not fundamentally change. Since the latter is an open question of the former, I thought it best if we addressed the former first.

So yeah, I think it would be cool and interesting if we could somehow 'port 40k onto the web and play it as a narrative. I also think it would be cool and interesting to examine why we couldn't not port 40k onto the web.

A neutral shade of black.
19-10-2005, 10:23
I may be going wrong about it, but I honestly think this works - it does underline how unimportant tactics and terrain are in 40k, which we mostly already knew (go play WFB!) ;) but that isn't its primary purpose. I'd definitely be interested in seeing this develop into a full ruleset. The possibility of using this to "play forum 40k" seems too good to pass up on, and I have a feeling that there will be no major kinks in the system.

One question, though - how would the range bands work? Would they be fixed (thus emulating a board to a degree), or would falling back be possible as long as the enemy moves up? Add to that the unit special rules (marine jumppacks, Tau jetpacks, bikes, amongst a few) and it's looking increasingly complicated, which kind of defies its point... Anyway, definitely something I'd like to see fully develop.

19-10-2005, 20:54

In my initial post, under Positioning, I tried to show how range bands would work. Basically range bands are relative to other units. You can either move towards a unit, or away from a unit.

'In play' means that the unit can still move and possibly shoot, but if a unit falls back beyond the 'in play' band - either because it hasn't rallied yet, or the player just wants it out of play - then it is out of play and enemy units cannot move towards or away from it.

Special rules like jump-packs, jet-packs, bikes, jetbikes and so on, I think can be easily stowed under the same system that fleet and fast vehicles can.

Jets, either bikes or packs, allow the user to move again in the assault phase. This may be into an assault, but may also be a regular move (into another range band, or into cover).

Bikes, with their turbo-boost, seem like they would fit nicely into the category of fleet and fast vehicles.

Things like jump-packs, and 12" assault moves, although very different in regular 40k, strike me as working well if they allow the user to assault from shooting range.

16-05-2006, 02:39
I may be going wrong about it, but I honestly think this works - it does underline how unimportant tactics and terrain are in 40k, which we mostly already knew (go play WFB!) ;) but that isn't its primary purpose.

Tactics only appear unimportant in a game of 40K if you don't know how to use them properly.

Come down to Manchester sometime and we'll show you how important tactics and terrain are.

18-05-2006, 20:04
I don't like it because, frankly, it's completely inbalanced. You're completely throwing out very important stats like firing range, movement speed, important pieces of wargear, etc. The armies are balanced around that and removing those elements throws the entire balance of the game completely out of whack.

18-05-2006, 21:07
Oh, your play-testing results have demonstrated this?

Easy E
25-05-2006, 19:02
The final result seems like it would not be "true" 40K, but a close enough approximation for "forum play". Perhaps terrain pieces could allow a unit to take a special bonus such as 'in cover' on a one unit to terrain piece basis.

This sounds like a CCG the more I read it.

Also, wargear might be able to be instituted into the 1d rules, but first the basic mechanics have to be worked out. Then we can move into more army specific derivatives.