PDA

View Full Version : No More Partials in 8th edition?



TroyJPerez
17-11-2009, 11:52
Anyone else think with the latest army books having abilities that hit every model under a template without partials that they may just remove rolling for partials in the next edition of the book? I think this would be awsome, making dragon fire, and stone throwers way more powerful than before. Would also be nice if they removed guess range and just place the template and roll scatter. I think you would see stone throwers used a lot more in games if they did that.

EdFireborn
17-11-2009, 11:58
I think this should be in general.... (Edit: This should be in general)

But to answer your question, yes it would make certain units (and thereby certain armies) a bit more powerful...

Whitehorn
17-11-2009, 12:00
I think we can safety assume the rule is 'future proof' to quote a certain someone :)

It's a nice thought and lets us re-examine the worth of a lot of weapons. I seem to have a lot of trouble hitting anything with my Salamanders when the template actually lands, maybe this will help me.

static grass
17-11-2009, 12:47
Well given that under the current rules it is virtually impossible to get a full hit on a cavalry model - for no real reason, I am happy about the change.

I have often felt that it was abit cack-handed that cav got this jink save from a huge rock falling out of the sky or exploding rockets but cant dodge an giant crossbow bolt. Especially because infantry just had to take all of it on the chin

Indreth
17-11-2009, 14:01
That would be great. All of the modells using a template would become a lot more powerful. I would like to see a change like this.

theunwantedbeing
17-11-2009, 14:06
So we do it the same as they do in 40k....yay.
Roll on not bothering with to hit modifiers and armour modifiers, or movement values.

Whitehorn
17-11-2009, 14:39
This may have been a decision to change Warhammer and 40k followed suit, just they had to wait for the release schedule to fall into line.

Deetwo
17-11-2009, 14:46
I've always felt the current partials system was horribly clunky in FB.
On the other hand, makes me rather scared of Hydras and Star Dragons... :D

Lijacote
17-11-2009, 14:48
I never liked partials. Good riddance, I say. It was just another thing I sucked at checking, "oh, is that model inside the template?", not to mention the whole "stick the template in the model's mouth" or whatever shtick that's involved, they should get rid of that too.

Screw templates.

The Red Scourge
17-11-2009, 14:48
Doesn't really sit well with how they changed rattling guns and hellblasters to roll BS in 7th :)

Rogue
17-11-2009, 16:01
Well given that under the current rules it is virtually impossible to get a full hit on a cavalry model - for no real reason, I am happy about the change.

I have often felt that it was abit cack-handed that cav got this jink save from a huge rock falling out of the sky or exploding rockets but cant dodge an giant crossbow bolt. Especially because infantry just had to take all of it on the chin

You are playing the template wrong then. If you have a model with a direct hit on the hole no matter how much is partial the model is HIT.

To everyone else that supports the idea of no more partials please go off and play chess if you cant stand the uncertainty of a template weapon. This whole game is based on statistics of the dice roll, and how you can improve your chances on this dice roll. There is a tactical element by bringing the right combination to get the most favorable result, but there is always an element of uncertainity no matter how you try to get the best combination. If you cant stand the simple uncertainity of a template weapon then how can you stand any of the other dice rolls that you are required to do in the whole game? Really you should start to find a new game to play if this is bothering you that much.

shadow hunter
17-11-2009, 16:56
I wouldn't mind guess ranges gone. I haven't played fantasy for years. I had a game on saturday and was terrible with my WLC. Missed by miles. Lol.

I think some stinking rat had tampered with the scope and range finder.

I actually like the 40K method of placing a template, rolling scatter, and taking off the BS of the firing model. Makes it more to do with the accuracy (and luck) of the actual firing model - rather than the dim witted gamer who only gets to play once in a blue moon.

Keller
17-11-2009, 17:05
You are playing the template wrong then. If you have a model with a direct hit on the hole no matter how much is partial the model is HIT.

To everyone else that supports the idea of no more partials please go off and play chess if you cant stand the uncertainty of a template weapon. This whole game is based on statistics of the dice roll, and how you can improve your chances on this dice roll. There is a tactical element by bringing the right combination to get the most favorable result, but there is always an element of uncertainity no matter how you try to get the best combination. If you cant stand the simple uncertainity of a template weapon then how can you stand any of the other dice rolls that you are required to do in the whole game? Really you should start to find a new game to play if this is bothering you that much.


My complaint is trying to decide whether it constitutes a hit or a partial. Drop the 5" template on a ranked unit of 20mm infantry, there is a lot of room for argument as to how many of those are partials, just because ~1mm is not covered by the template. We, being casual players, tend to round up in favor of full hits [>75% of base = hit] on our circle, just because we are lazy and don't want to worry about such things. Some people are not so lenient, and can really bog the game down and drive tempers hot.

I like the randomness of templates, not the inevitable disputes. The randomness is represented in the scatter/guess aspect fairly well. The only way to add more randomness, but avoid the disputes, would be to assign XD6 hits per template, which would ruin the point of getting solid hits with them.

basher
17-11-2009, 17:06
i like the idea off no partials but guessing the range is have the fun

Cambion Daystar
17-11-2009, 17:12
I also like the idea of partial = hit for ALL armies. Not some hit and some roll for partial (as is the situation now with the new skaven "no-partials").

Malorian
17-11-2009, 17:19
Well you certainly would see a lot more stone throwers if this was to happen.

Orc players might even drop the spear chukkas for them :eek:

CaliforniaGamer
17-11-2009, 17:19
Armies "winning" with no partial hits:
Tomb Kings with dual SSCs+magic, they would win the most from this and win big IMO.
Common dragon builds like HE/DE
Hydra builds, DE win again
Artillery builds: Empire, Dwarves, Chaos Dwarves etc
Skaven of course

Army "losing" due to the impact of no partials:
Vampire counts, potential to lose entire zombie unit in 1 direct hit
Daemons, low toughness 'letters would be great targets, even nurgle PB units hit by SSCs would start to be afraid
Low toughness T3 infantry armies, ie-certain elf builds (DEs lose here and for certain BG deathstar builds, this can be a real loss)

Army minor win/loss/no change depending on builds:
WoC with hellcannons
Brets with trebs

Im sure there are more but that is off the top of my head

Whitehorn
17-11-2009, 17:27
I think a few Orc players are secretly grinning too.

Aratus
17-11-2009, 17:30
Str 6 Dwarf Grudge Thrower with re-roll scatter dice would be nasty (Runes: 2x +1 Str, Accuracy). Or just take 3 of them with Accuracy and make one Str 6, Str 5, Str 4. O the fun we could have.

pointyteeth
17-11-2009, 17:38
two breath weapon chaos dragons ftw!

ZeroTwentythree
17-11-2009, 18:03
It's about time something like this came along. It would help solve the problem of regular blocks of rank & file infantry. They've been stubbornly clinging to the hope of having some use in the game, and this will help put another nail in the coffin.

EvC
17-11-2009, 18:06
While I would appreciate not having to count partials any more, this would benefit all the wrong models in the game- Hydras, Dragons, gunliners... guess ranges on the other hand are great fun and I'd hate to see them go.

What other rules do people think are being forshadowed in the new rulebooks? I think another one that is on the cards is that characters riding monsters will no longer be able to join units at all- no more Engines bumping 10-man skink units up to 3 ranks...

superduperkoopatrooper
17-11-2009, 18:58
Two previous posts QFT! I don't like the sound of this change at all. Personally I'd have preferred it to have been 'any unit that is a single model is hit automatically when touched by a template'. Ranked infantry will get creamed by things like trebs and hellcannons.

Also, it doesn't solve the dispute issue over who is hit partially, it creates a new one of 'is that guy's base touched by that template?' And since big units of 20mm base infantry will stand to lose so much to these weapons I can imagine arguments being far more heated.

Hugh

Ixquic
17-11-2009, 19:11
I never knew people even had problems with partials until the Skaven book came out and people started celebrating. It's never been an issue where I play.

If this is indeed a new direction points had better increase dramatically. A well placed Hellstorm shot and an entire regiment will be gone and I don't really need that kind of lame one shot stuff since we're finally almost done with auto hitting machine guns. Partials work in 40k since everything is skirmished but when I have a packed group of 20 mm models and a template with strength 4 and no armor save hits 16+ of them that's really way too much. Skaven war machines are mostly low strength or highly fragile but I don't really want to going to every template.


It's about time something like this came along. It would help solve the problem of regular blocks of rank & file infantry. They've been stubbornly clinging to the hope of having some use in the game, and this will help put another nail in the coffin.

Pretty much. If this is game wide I would never field a ranked T3 unit again unless I could raise back in or it had some sort of ward save.

ZeroTwentythree
17-11-2009, 19:20
I never knew people even had problems with partials until the Skaven book came out and people started celebrating. It's never been an issue where I play.


Probably because it's not really rocket science. ;) We've never had much trouble with it, either.





Pretty much. If this is game wide I would never field a ranked T3 unit again unless I could raise back in or it had some sort of ward save.

Even raising them isn't worth it. One of the best games I've ever had with two Helstorm rocket batteries was the one in which I kept forcing my opponent to waste his magic phase resurrecting, which prevented him from casting anything more useful.

marv335
17-11-2009, 19:22
Heh, my stardragon just got a whole lot nastier :D

Einholt
17-11-2009, 19:26
While I would appreciate not having to count partials any more, this would benefit all the wrong models in the game- Hydras, Dragons, gunliners... guess ranges on the other hand are great fun and I'd hate to see them go.

What other rules do people think are being forshadowed in the new rulebooks? I think another one that is on the cards is that characters riding monsters will no longer be able to join units at all- no more Engines bumping 10-man skink units up to 3 ranks...

The stegadons can't actually do that... you do not count the width of the model of rank generating purposes but rather each model. The best you could achieve would be to have 4 Skinks plus steg x 2 and then 3 models in the rear with 2 skinks and the steg.

In other news I'm loving the power creep suggestions being throw around lately.

So far we have a thread that would support a blanket rule to increase effectiveness of template attacks by making them at least x2 as good for no extra points. There has been a suggestion of Powering up magic lores because they suck in relation to ridiculous army book lores. Drop the RiP mechanic because it "doesn't make sense" since there's a lot of powerful spells with set durations and thus all should be as ridiculous as they are.

But yea lets buff those Hydras, Dragons, and gunlines like EvC mentioned they need it oh so badly....

ZeroTwentythree
17-11-2009, 19:56
The stegadons can't actually do that... you do not count the width of the model of rank generating purposes but rather each model. The best you could achieve would be to have 4 Skinks plus steg x 2 and then 3 models in the rear with 2 skinks and the steg.




Unless you're following option 1 in the GW FAQ...




1) Placing the character inside the unit. This
works best when the character’s base is larger than
those of the unit’s and is a multiple of them – for
example a model mounted on a 40mm square base
inside a unit of models with 20mm square bases, or
a character on a 50mm square base inside a unit of
models with 25mm square bases or a cavalry unit.
In these cases, the character will fit in snugly and
look and feel ‘right’. It will also displace a number
of models, which are placed in the rearmost rank as
normal.
When working out the unit’s rank bonus, the
character counts as the same number of models it
has displaced (normally four infantrymen or two
cavalrymen).

sulla
17-11-2009, 20:02
Anyone else think with the latest army books having abilities that hit every model under a template without partials that they may just remove rolling for partials in the next edition of the book? As far as I knew, only a single book applies the rule so far, or have I missed something?

If it does go this way, it will at least mean cavalry are no longer so resilient to templates. You know it's a poor rule when a dragon breathes on a unit of cav and hits one or two...

Emeraldw
17-11-2009, 20:29
As far as I knew, only a single book applies the rule so far, or have I missed something?

If it does go this way, it will at least mean cavalry are no longer so resilient to templates. You know it's a poor rule when a dragon breathes on a unit of cav and hits one or two...

Your right, only Skaven have this, but we believe it is a hint at a change in 8th ed. Further, there was a tomb kings rumor that said the same thing for them. So there is a decent chance of this full change.

I am not sure how I feel about it as it might make gunlines more powerful for some armies since most units are ranked up but maybe with some scatter and guess range it won't be so bad.

EvC
17-11-2009, 20:59
The only specific template attack in the Dark Elf book also hits every model it touches. (There's also breath attacks, but they will be able to follow the main rule book's new rules, so if it says that breath weapons hit everything they touch, it will apply to Hydra and Dragon. Because they're worth it!) Warriors of Chaos has a magic template attack that only needs to touch units, as does the Hellcannon for its panic check, although there's no template attacks that talks of all partials being hit.


Unless you're following option 1 in the GW FAQ...

That's right, and also that is how the Lizardmen book itself tells you how to play it ;)

Gazak Blacktoof
17-11-2009, 21:01
I think it's a terrible idea, simply because template weapons will be overpowered. I'd be quite happy with- All models touched by a template are hit on an X+ and those under the centre are hit automatically.

Urgat
17-11-2009, 21:03
If it comes to pass, good ridence. And like it'd make such a huge differene anyway. People like to dramatize, don't they? And EVEN in the csae some mathammer fan proves me by x and y that his stardragon breath kills 4 more guys on average or whatever, maybe they might balance things another way, as it may have occured to you... Bouh, I'm sure my rocklobbers would jump right away in the overpowered chease bandwagon if that happened >>

ZeroTwentythree
17-11-2009, 21:47
If it comes to pass, good ridence. And like it'd make such a huge differene anyway. People like to dramatize, don't they? And EVEN in the csae some mathammer fan proves me by x and y that his stardragon breath kills 4 more guys on average or whatever, maybe they might balance things another way, as it may have occured to you... Bouh, I'm sure my rocklobbers would jump right away in the overpowered chease bandwagon if that happened >>


Sure, it might balance something. But that still doesn't change the fact that it impacts the game in other areas as well, like ranked infantry.

It's not really dramatizing, and just because you don't want to hear the mathhammer doesn't mean it's not real. I see templates regularly getting 15-20 partials. Rolling for those means that half are discarded. That can be a considerable difference, especially when you're talking about something that's S5+, possibly with no save allowed.

I've got a fondness for the Helstorm Rocket Battery in my Empire army and I still think this is a bad idea. ;)

Count Zero
17-11-2009, 21:55
certainly this change could hurt ranked infantry. the main problem with the templates is getting cav. maybe if they altered the rules slighty for hits aginst cav, but left the rules vs infanty as is.

Gazak Blacktoof
17-11-2009, 23:19
And like it'd make such a huge differene anyway. People like to dramatize, don't they? And EVEN in the csae some mathammer fan proves me by x and y that his stardragon breath kills 4 more guys on average or whatever, maybe they might balance things another way, as it may have occured to you... Bouh, I'm sure my rocklobbers would jump right away in the overpowered chease bandwagon if that happened >>

Let's cross our fingers and at least hope that the balance problem has occurred to somebody.

You don't need any real mathammer to work out how this will affect the game, just open up page 93 of the BRB. That gives you nice indication of the mess that a rock lobber will make to a ranked up unit of infantry if partials automatically hit.

8 additional hits, so about 6 extra toughness 3 models dead with a good hit.

I think that just as importantly, you're much more likely to inflict sufficient casualties for a panic test even if you just clip a unit.

R Man
17-11-2009, 23:26
Well it helps harm cavalry and Elite Infantry, who are much less likely to be auto hit than a big block anyway. Perhaps we could see how valued and used these weapons really are. Maybe they are underpowered and this could be the boost they need.

Or perhaps not. But lets here some evidence first.

Bloodknight
17-11-2009, 23:35
If it does go this way, it will at least mean cavalry are no longer so resilient to templates. You know it's a poor rule when a dragon breathes on a unit of cav and hits one or two...

Agreed. I always found it a bit silly that you had to stay roughly 6" away from a cavalry unit to score one full hit on a unit of cav due to the teardrop shape of the breath weapon, or that being close to an infantry unit could prevent you from getting full hits.

That said, my Halfling Hotpot and Asarnil will like this.

EvC
17-11-2009, 23:37
Gazak's already provided evidence, P93 of the rulebook. This will hit normal block infantry the greatest, as they are the ones that sit there in chunky blocks 4-deep. Elite infantry and cavalry that are wider and less deep- not so much.

Other rules might help rectify the balance, sure, but it is what it is.

AlmightyNocturnus
17-11-2009, 23:40
Good riddance to partials! Can`t cover cavalry or monster bases now and breath weapons are ultra weak.

Almighty Nocturnus

Bard Harlock
17-11-2009, 23:41
Wouldn't simply making the template smaller and saying partials hit tend to balance out the extra hits?

Urgat
18-11-2009, 08:20
Sure, it might balance something. But that still doesn't change the fact that it impacts the game in other areas as well, like ranked infantry.

It's not really dramatizing, and just because you don't want to hear the mathhammer doesn't mean it's not real. I see templates regularly getting 15-20 partials. Rolling for those means that half are discarded. That can be a considerable difference, especially when you're talking about something that's S5+, possibly with no save allowed.

I've got a fondness for the Helstorm Rocket Battery in my Empire army and I still think this is a bad idea. ;)

Yes it is dramatizing. I'm playing gobs, any kind of template is bad news for me, even with that partial hit removal my rock lobbers won't make crazy damage, yes a hellstorm battery would be horrible for me (if it hits... and it's already horrible for me when it hits anyway), and still I'll welcome the change. It's just a rule that slows things down and, quite franckly, adds absolutly nothing to the game. And I'll certainly accept to pay more if my rocklobbers actually achieve something other than removing three or four state soldiers a turn, because they have about no impact on my battles, and there's not many characters running around on their own in my parts. And for that, we got a (much) better catapult anyway (one that doesn't even use templates, mind :p)...

Let's cross our fingers and at least hope that the balance problem has occurred to somebody.

You don't need any real mathammer to work out how this will affect the game, just open up page 93 of the BRB. That gives you nice indication of the mess that a rock lobber will make to a ranked up unit of infantry if partials automatically hit.

8 additional hits, so about 6 extra toughness 3 models dead with a good hit.

I think that just as importantly, you're much more likely to inflict sufficient casualties for a panic test even if you just clip a unit.

Well, that's how it should be anyway. I'll happily admit I have no idea how good the other template weapons are, but considering the cost the thing and the casualties it does when it hits spot on, my rocklobbers are crap. I sure don't know many people who get worried when I start guessing, even though I'm reasonably good at it.

Lord Solar Plexus
18-11-2009, 08:56
No more partials is not a good idea any way you look at it. Infantry is useless as it is. Taking off that block on turn 1 makes it even more redundant. Guns will dominate the game.

Oh, and while I'm at it - rolling to hit and to wound and to save all slow down the game considerably, and so does moving the units, setting up the terrain, deploying the models.


My complaint is trying to decide whether it constitutes a hit or a partial.

That does not really change when there are no more partials. Now you will have to decide whether the marker is 0.00000001" over the model, touching, not touching....you've just moved the point of reference.

Einholt
18-11-2009, 11:27
Yes it is dramatizing. I'm playing gobs, any kind of template is bad news for me, even with that partial hit removal my rock lobbers won't make crazy damage, yes a hellstorm battery would be horrible for me (if it hits... and it's already horrible for me when it hits anyway), and still I'll welcome the change. It's just a rule that slows things down and, quite franckly, adds absolutly nothing to the game. And I'll certainly accept to pay more if my rocklobbers actually achieve something other than removing three or four state soldiers a turn, because they have about no impact on my battles, and there's not many characters running around on their own in my parts. And for that, we got a (much) better catapult anyway (one that doesn't even use templates, mind :p)...


Well, that's how it should be anyway. I'll happily admit I have no idea how good the other template weapons are, but considering the cost the thing and the casualties it does when it hits spot on, my rocklobbers are crap. I sure don't know many people who get worried when I start guessing, even though I'm reasonably good at it.

If you are so admittedly uninformed about other weapons and their potential with the removal of partials then why are you even posting in support of a rule that has a rather significant impact on those other weapons.

It's basically like having no idea what a political party is all about but endorsing and voting for them.

We can only hope that such support will not result in them being elected just as much as we can hope that uninformed sentiments won't come to fruition about rules that are important in game balance.

Stumpy
18-11-2009, 11:45
If the given rules for these templates get toned down, I'm happy. Breath weapons are the biggest thing- it could be that models down the 'line' of the breath template get hit at full str, ones to the side at -1 str. This would prevent breath weapons being too much more powerful than now.

Stone throwers are fine- not worried about them.

Skaven have the most templates, but now their army doesn't have partials and is (hopefully) only slightly undercosted.
Empire have large templates but seeing as they'll likely get a new book just as 8th comes out, I don't see it being a bother.

Certainly will need to buff infantry in 8th... bog-standard infantry are largely useless currently. No partials would hurt them a lot.

wilsongrahams
18-11-2009, 11:49
Why do breath weapons need toning down? A Sun Dragon is only S2 anyway, which most infantry will survive. The partial hit rule was awkward, but the most likely solution would be to say 50% or more = hit, 49% or less, miss. This means no rolling, but prevents people arguing over what may be slightly touching a base. 50% of a model is easy to determine due to a square base being easily divided visually into quarters either horizontally or diagonally for example.

Stumpy
18-11-2009, 11:53
Nah, I'm quite happy with the removal of partials. Its just breath weapons appear to be the ones with the most potential for overpowering immediately after edition change, before new books. Breath weapons are actually very strong currently, due to functioning after marching/flying.

You've fought a sun dragon? Someone used something other than a star dragon?!
Yeah, I know you mean a dragon mage ;)

Gazak Blacktoof
18-11-2009, 11:53
my rocklobbers are crap.

Mine are awesome, they crush everything dead. They're currently well worth the 70 points, as they're likely to inflict at least one panic test and crush about 10 infantry models, even if they can only fire for 3 turns.

theunwantedbeing
18-11-2009, 12:00
While it a useful change from the point of view of the person who is forever fluffing their partial rolls, its not a fun change for anyone on the recieving end.

You can hit a LOT of models with a template.
Page 91 of the rulebook shows this from the 3" template, hitting almost everyone in a unit of 25.

If this is indeed a rules change, I will expect it came from people with the mindset of some of the 40k players, in that they place a template as in page 91 and get 6 hits and 3 partials (seen it done numerous times....makes no sense at all to me how they get those numbers).
So if you work out templates hit like that, ignoring partials is such a minor change that it's not a problem.

No doubt 8th will change a lot of things though.
So while it may seem horribly brutal for our current rules, it may well be quite reasonable with a new ruleset. Presumably with smaller templates.
2" and 4" respectively no doubt, the Flame template hopefully wont shrink the same proportion it did from 5th to 6th though....

wilsongrahams
18-11-2009, 12:09
Nah, I'm quite happy with the removal of partials. Its just breath weapons appear to be the ones with the most potential for overpowering immediately after edition change, before new books. Breath weapons are actually very strong currently, due to functioning after marching/flying.

You've fought a sun dragon? Someone used something other than a star dragon?!
Yeah, I know you mean a dragon mage ;)

Yes, I field a Dragon Mage! Even when taking an Archmage he goes on a Moon Dragon. No Star Dragons for me because my Prince walks to battle with the lowly foot infantry (Swordmasters).

Back on topic, Even a Star Dragon only has a Strength of 4 and for the cost of the dragon, this is nothing compared to a volley of handguns or crossbows also at strength 4 and inflicting just as much damage overall. I think this change would effect stone throwers etc a lot more as there is a larger number of models that will be hit by the template overall. This is just my opinion, and I guess it would have to be tested and if needed adjust points values - but dragon breath should be a potent weapon even if the cost does shoot up - it's supposed to melt stone etc, not give a gentle tan to the skin.

Commodus Leitdorf
18-11-2009, 12:16
If this change is implemented in 8th...my god...the horror....My Helstorms will make their triumphant return and my opponents will beg me to start using my Stank again.

They already hate what the I can do with them now. You probably only get one good hit a game with them...but making that hit more devastatiing? Awesome!

EvC
18-11-2009, 13:25
Why do breath weapons need toning down? A Sun Dragon is only S2 anyway, which most infantry will survive.

Why would you ask this question and then reference the weakest breath weapon in the entire game? You might as well be asking why everyone says Daemons are so strong and then quote the initiative of a Plaguebearer. The Sun Dragon's breath weapon doesn't need toning down. However the breath weapons of things like Star Dragons, Hydras and Chaos Dragons would definitely be OTT without partials... Hell, remember we're not even talking about toning them down- we're talking about leaving them how they already are!


The partial hit rule was awkward, but the most likely solution would be to say 50% or more = hit, 49% or less, miss. This means no rolling, but prevents people arguing over what may be slightly touching a base. 50% of a model is easy to determine due to a square base being easily divided visually into quarters either horizontally or diagonally for example.

Not easy at all with a curved template- it would create just as much argument as we have now (Although most arguments concerning templates tend to be "You count!", "No, you count, I can't be bothered!" these days :) ).

Other rules might come into play to change the effects though (No more marching and breathing with Hydras would be a start)- I'm not complaining that no partials is a bad thing, but if the entirety of the rules change means that partials are always hit and these items become so devastating, then that would be bad. Plus I do wuv my Orc Rock lobber :)

ZeroTwentythree
18-11-2009, 14:27
It's just a rule that slows things down and, quite franckly, adds absolutly nothing to the game.


Slows down? Really?

Like I said before, it's not really rocket science. You count guys fully under the template, then you count guys partially under the template and roll the dice for them. Takes maybe an additional 60 seconds.

And what it "adds" to the game is that it keeps templates from wiping out units so easily.





Well, that's how it should be anyway. I'll happily admit I have no idea how good the other template weapons are, but considering the cost the thing and the casualties it does when it hits spot on, my rocklobbers are crap. I sure don't know many people who get worried when I start guessing, even though I'm reasonably good at it.


Helstorms come to mind. Not only will they be even more devastating on a fairly accurate hit, but their built-in penalty -- being inaccurate -- is lessened by the fact that it no longer has to worry about rolling for partials. So if it only goes a little off target, it's got less to lose.

I think some of the new Skaven weapons, which already get this template rule, can get a bit ugly. Like the Warp Firethrower, also S5, and capable of wiping out most of a rank & file unit on a reasonably accurate hit.

The Plagueclaw catapult is balanced off by having a low strength. But high S templates, like the ones mentioned above are what will really cause a lot of damage.

Luisjoey
18-11-2009, 14:37
remove partials as in 40k ;)

wilsongrahams
18-11-2009, 15:32
Why would you ask this question and then reference the weakest breath weapon in the entire game? You might as well be asking why everyone says Daemons are so strong and then quote the initiative of a Plaguebearer. The Sun Dragon's breath weapon doesn't need toning down. However the breath weapons of things like Star Dragons, Hydras and Chaos Dragons would definitely be OTT without partials... Hell, remember we're not even talking about toning them down- we're talking about leaving them how they already are!

Lol, well okay bad example, but my main army is High Elves... but even a Star Dragon is only S4, which is the same as a crossbow. Maybe Chaos Dragons and Hydras are too powerful, but I would say they are just the higher ones of the scale. If I pay 300pts for a dragon it should be able to kill more than a handful of T3 infantry per turn. I find breath weapons less intimidating than other templates such as artillery etc. For a dragon to breath on me, it's close enough to fight back, so there has always been a penalty of breath weapons to justify any strengths.

DarkTerror
18-11-2009, 17:02
Simple answer:

There are no partials on models > 25x25mm

Count Zero
18-11-2009, 17:15
Simple answer:

There are no partials on models > 25x25mm

yeah i thought something similar:

vs US1 partials hit on 4+
vs US2 and over partials auto hit.

ZeroTwentythree
18-11-2009, 18:08
Simple answer:

There are no partials on models > 25x25mm



Not a bad compromise. :)

TheDarkDuke
18-11-2009, 18:15
Anyone else think with the latest army books having abilities that hit every model under a template without partials that they may just remove rolling for partials in the next edition of the book? I think this would be awsome, making dragon fire, and stone throwers way more powerful than before. Would also be nice if they removed guess range and just place the template and roll scatter. I think you would see stone throwers used a lot more in games if they did that.

I like it. I won't say everything that uses templates in fantasy are overpriced, but I certainly would say 90%+ certainly are. It also makes using the templates quicker and easier. No arguments on whether model A is actually fully covered/model B is partially covered.

In this case streamlined = better imo.

DarkAngelsG
18-11-2009, 18:31
I actually would miss partials, for these reasons:
1. Dragons are already cheesy, they don't need to be cheesiER.
2. It adds realism. A fireball, or a rock, comes hurtling towards you. You'd try and dodge it, yeah? So you have a 50/50 chance of dodging it(on a partial) or getting hit.

My gaming group is VERY relaxed about partials(relaxed about almost anything), which is nice. When I use my Salamanders, we just both look at it, agree how many models are hit, and agree how many models are partials. I have NEVER been in an argument on which models are partials.

Count Zero
18-11-2009, 18:34
if they made the templates square it may be easier....

Darkduke - you're still have some arguments tho, if a models base is finely clipped it a hit!! as it is its only 4+ so i doubt people argue over the finer details there.

Fjoergyn
19-11-2009, 02:50
My group would have applauded if they did it some years ago. We had some looooong and looooong battles about how a Brass Orb was only able to make 3 full hits and 4 partials when it landed in the middle of a 50 Ironbreakers unit.

Then our Dwarf player got angry because we didn´t agree when his Grudge throwers got 8 full hits AND 9 partials in a 15 Chaos Warriors unit.

Yep, he is a little idiot, but it his house...
We eventually made (I don´t know if it is the correct word) some grids (two A-4 folios with 2cm and 2,5 cm grids) that we now use to resolve the hits. I think it is an easy (and cheap) solution.

P.D: I´m getting used to say this: Sorry for my bad engrish:(

ChaosVC
19-11-2009, 03:12
Becareful what you wish for. I can almost hear all the future whinning ie; 200++ points of cavalry and infantry destroyed by a 120 pts stone thrower in the first turn "Oooh Stupid dwarfs!". Maybe we can all start wishing that every model should be able move in skirmish formation max 2 inch apart and have 360 degree line of sight wearing 3+ unmodified power armour to justify the auto hits with no partials?