PDA

View Full Version : What would you want to keep?



lanrak
07-09-2008, 13:17
Hi all.
I was just wondering what parts of the 40k rule set , you think are 'unchangable' because they could NOT be improved on?

I have looked at some other GW games, and some are pretty much as good as they can be, IMO.Blood Bowl, Dark Future and Space Hulk for example.

Other SGs have room for improvment in some areas, but basicaly are built on good concepts.

However the more I look at 40k rules and game mechanics ,I find it more difficult to find any thing that could not be replaced or improved upon.

So I ask you fellow Warseerites(?), please point out the parts of the 40k rule set that you think are too good to be replaced.

(I just want opinions , you dont have to write why , just the bits you like best !:D)

TTFN
Lanrak.

Hellebore
07-09-2008, 19:22
I personally like the stat comparison tables. It makes sense to me that if I am Strength X and the opponent is Toughness Y that I would have Z chance of causing injury.

That's about it really. Not even necessarily the actual tables rather the concept of the table comparison I would keep.

Hellebore

Supremearchmarshal
08-09-2008, 09:56
There are some fun, flavorful rules I like, but those are usually the unit specific ones (e.g. many of the Ork special rules). However, the main rules have a lot of room for improvement, and there's very few rules that I'd keep in their current form.

I play 40k for the fluff and the cool models, not the rules. ;)

lanrak
09-09-2008, 20:12
Hi.
Well I think most 40k players apreciate the artwork and narrative FAR more than the rules.:D

So basicaly apart from the core concepts ALL TTGs use, stat comparisons, dice rolls and specific rules for 'special' circumstances/equipment /exceptions.

There is nothing in the 40k game any Warseerite would fight 'tooth and nail' to keep?

Well that just shows the poor state of the 40k rules then doesnt it!:eek:Maybe its time for a complete re -write of the 40k rules then?

TTFN
Lanrak.

Supremearchmarshal
09-09-2008, 21:17
Well TBH there's not all that much that is ground-breaking in the 40k rules is there?

Some examples:
-movement is pretty bad. Half a dozen special rules instead of a simple Move characteristic.
-cover saves are a very poor mechanic, making cover almost useless for some armies
-no rules for flanking or supression
-no reaction mechanic
-anti-tank weapons are useful against infantry
-grenade rules are kinda lacking
-there's way too many dice rolls - even for movement you throw dice most of the time. Shooting and assaults could involve less dice by combining the T and Armour stats into one.
-vehicles use entirely different rules from other models, even from monstrous creatures which function in a similar way (e.g. Wraithlord). Tanks can't shoot on the move, and shooting on the move is the entire point of tanks.

So yes, I think a re-write of the rules would be good, but I just don't see it happening. There's way too much risk involved for GW.

P.S. come to think of it, the psychic power rules are simple and straightforward. I'd probably keep them.