PDA

View Full Version : If you can change something.



dragonet111
08-12-2010, 09:12
Hi.

Everybody have issues with their codex and I was wondering if you can change a single thing (Yes a SINGLE thing:)) what would you do?

I would change the BA captain to grant him access to the fancy wargear of the chapter (artificer armour, encarmine blade, ......)

Commandojimbob
08-12-2010, 09:21
One thing - a rule (or maybe tis is adding) - If a unit embarked in a vehicle that has firepoints, shoots out of said vehicle, for the next turn that vehicle counts as being open topped !!!

The Ginger Ninja
08-12-2010, 09:33
I wish I could change the publish date and the edition number on the Necron Codex... :shifty:
Does that count?

ehlijen
08-12-2010, 09:39
I'd change the copyright notes so that I own the IPs used in it.

AlexHolker
08-12-2010, 09:44
The one thing I've been saying needs to be done for my favourite army to become viable is the release of plastic Sisters of Battle.

Apart from that, a reintroduction of Armouries would be my pick.

Gatsby
08-12-2010, 09:58
The first thing id change is the internal balance of all the codex's so that everything is balanced. Then I'd change Commandojimbob's avatar so its different than mine.

MarcoSkoll
08-12-2010, 10:21
Assuming you mean one thing anywhere in the rules, not necessarily somewhere in my own codex, something that makes Fleet worthwhile again.
One of either getting rid of the Run rules completely, or making the run distance of models with fleet "2D6 and pick the highest".

As it is, the new version of fleet is not even close worth what the old one was. They can still do exactly what they did before, but everyone else gets part of that bonus for free now.
My Eldar used to have a mobility advantage that was worth the relatively high points for a frail unit. GW just axed that almost completely with 5th Ed.

I like the models and background too much to change, but their play-style just got diluted.

Hellebore
08-12-2010, 10:25
It's happened to the to eldar twice. Back in 3rd ed their 12" catapults were the only basic weapon that could be fired twice on the move. Then they introduced the double tap rapid fire ability and reduced 'assault' to 'can charge after shooting'. Very useful for guardians...

Hellebore

Toldavf
08-12-2010, 11:02
I would have the webway portal allow you to choose whether to role for reserves or not.

dragonet111
08-12-2010, 11:05
For the IG I would allow infantry sergeant to have lasgun, I really don't understand why they are stuck with laspistol.

DeeKay
08-12-2010, 11:20
Does it have to be just one thing?

Well there's a list. I would like to:

1) Write out the Fire Points rules. Otherwise transport vehicles will continue to be little more than pillboxes. It also forces people to consider different forces, such as all-infantry.

2) Change the Wound allocation rules so that weapons of a higher Str and/or lower AP are allocated first, eliminating the abuse of multi-wound units.

3) Allow Unit Leaders to have bog standard equipment (lasguns for IG sarge for example)

4) Bring back Movement values! M3 for Oblits, M6 or 7 for Eldar units etc. Even if charging had to be redone to be like 8th Ed Fantasy (not ideal but hey) I would appreciate some units being faster on account of actually being faster rather than having a special rule.

5) Write a recombined Chaos Codex. (Does that count?)

6) Do some actual dedicated rules for flyers, especially seeing as how every army since IG has a unit I would classify as a Flyer.

7) Make cover a modifier to hit rather than a flat out cover save, therby making terrain useful to anybody.

8) Change the vehicle damage mechanic to a table ranging from 1-10 1=no effect, 10= big boom. For every point you beat the AV by you add 1 to the dice roll to damage the vehicle. NOTHING is more annoying than getting boxcars to penetrate a vehicle with a meltagun and only forcing it to not shoot for a turn, I do mean nothing.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure if I went into more detail I could find more stuff I'd change.

With regards,
Dan.

Bunnahabhain
08-12-2010, 11:46
Halve the recommended points per area of table. 1500-2000pts now goes on a 8x6.
More space = better games.

Or, failing that

Gw acknowledge that they are a model company, and switch to free online rules, updated regularly, not tied to model release cycle. At least at that point they'd be worth their cost.

Or

All current marine books acknowledged as bad ideas, and replaced with one big book of ALL loyalist marines.

MarcoSkoll
08-12-2010, 11:49
It's happened to the to eldar twice. Back in 3rd ed their 12" catapults were the only basic weapon that could be fired twice on the move.
That I'm not so worried about. The increased range of Avenger Catapults gives them back an edge, particularly in that they don't have to be within charge range to fire. (Yeah, it doesn't help Guardians any, but I use Dire Avengers as my mainstay Troop choice.)

Oh yeah, a small thing I would like to change, if I'm allowed it as well. The damn summary page at the BACK of the codex, not Page 68 of 84.
I "fixed" that by taking a paper guillotine to my copy, cutting the top corner off all the back (mostly colour scheme) pages so I could thumb straight to the right page, but that's something I shouldn't have to do.

carldooley
08-12-2010, 11:54
2) Change the Wound allocation rules so that weapons of a higher Str and/or lower AP are allocated first, eliminating the abuse of multi-wound units.

agreed, though I'm generally happy to be able to put wounds on my buddies nobz with my Armored Sentinels' Plasma Cannons. :D

though to answer the OP, my one wish for years has been for APX weapons to actually be able to modify armor saves -

(examples)


A boltgun (AP 5) fires wounds a power armor (Sv 3+) equipped model. Armor rolls of 5 or six are negated, and only armor saves of 3 or 4 prevent the wound.

A Krak missile (AP 3) wounds a terminator (Sv 2+); all armor rolls other than 2 fail to prevent the wound.

What does this do? it encourages more armies to rely on saves other than armor (which there are plenty of in this edition) - cover or invul. It also causes heavy infantry to actually fear special weapons again.

Sai-Lauren
08-12-2010, 12:04
Oh yeah, a small thing I would like to change, if I'm allowed it as well. The damn summary page at the BACK of the codex, not Page 68 of 84.

I "fixed" that by taking a paper guillotine to my copy, cutting the top corner off all the back (mostly colour scheme) pages so I could thumb straight to the right page, but that's something I shouldn't have to do.

Personally, I've created a word document that has all the unit stats, special rules and abilities, weapons stats and rules etc for the army list I'm playing on it.

What I'd do.

Bring back ASM - yes Marine players, your precious armour is no longer as effective, but guess what, no one else's is either, and you could load out with things other than las/plas and power weapons.

Introduce Initiative first and last strike, so that you effectively get a +0.5 bonus or -0.5 penalty to your initiative with certain weapons - it doesn't make sense to me that an Eldar Scorpion Exarch with a Scorpions Claw would be slowed to the same speed as an Ork nob with a Power Claw.

Smoke/ blind grenade rules for infantry.

Born Again
08-12-2010, 12:08
Just one thing? Well, a couple.

1) Make Huron a bit more "special", something to show he's half bionic (FnP? Or a better invul. save?), and an army wide rule to show his force's more "modern" equipment (ie; twin linked bolters become storm bolters, reaper autocannons become assault cannons).

That one's very specific to one SC, so for a more general one...

2) Allow Daemons to take an Icon like nearly every other unit in the codex... or even better, a Mark for the whole unit.

MarcoSkoll
08-12-2010, 12:24
Personally, I've created a word document that has all the unit stats, special rules and abilities, weapons stats and rules etc for the army list I'm playing on it.
That's one option, but by now, I know the Eldar's rules back to front, so it's not that I need to see the summary page, it's for when someone else wants to (e.g. "Are you sure Exarchs are WS 5?"). A word printout doesn't have the same convincingness as the actual codex.

The other thing was that it was me who said I'd like the summary page at the back, not Hellebore.

dragonet111
08-12-2010, 12:31
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2290231_FRE_W40K_Eldars_ref.pdf

Do you speak of that?

feintstar
08-12-2010, 12:32
The Edition.

Different editions for different armies: But definitely this one thing would sort a lot of ruined dreams back into existence.

E.g. 4th ed Codex Chaos, with all the different legions and different Gods/powers
All the Index Astartes
Current Eldar Codex, but with Varied builds without use of special characters a la IA equivalents and the craftworld book
Current Guard Codex, but with 4th ed. points values
Current Sisters Codex
Next Deamonhunters Codex but with current points values
next Tau codex, but with current points values

I suppose one interesting thing that happens if I change this one thing (the edition) is that the rules go static/free for subtle rebalances rather than massive overhauls and the nerf/unnerf cycle. That could lead to enough time to make ALL the units balanced through subtle changes gradually over time. Imagine a game where every option in every dex was actually worth taking!

Inquisitor Kallus
08-12-2010, 12:46
agreed, though I'm generally happy to be able to put wounds on my buddies nobz with my Armored Sentinels' Plasma Cannons. :D

though to answer the OP, my one wish for years has been for APX weapons to actually be able to modify armor saves -

(examples)


A boltgun (AP 5) fires wounds a power armor (Sv 3+) equipped model. Armor rolls of 5 or six are negated, and only armor saves of 3 or 4 prevent the wound.

A Krak missile (AP 3) wounds a terminator (Sv 2+); all armor rolls other than 2 fail to prevent the wound.

What does this do? it encourages more armies to rely on saves other than armor (which there are plenty of in this edition) - cover or invul. It also causes heavy infantry to actually fear special weapons again.



So Terminators get a 50/50 chance of saving a single hit from a shuriken catapult!?!?! And i'm an Eldar player,...........as well as marines, guard , orks, chaos, daemons.......;)

Anyway I would like to see a more dedicated small scale ruleset. This is to say that the rules arent like 2nd ed. 40k but utilize the current ruleset but on a smaller scale with rules and missions, scenarios, objectives, advances and such like It could encourage potential sales and would also allow people to start playing quicker, hopefully keeping people in the game longer. I've seen so many kids drop out of the hobby so soon. It would also be something cool for older gamers, slightly stepping more towards a roleplay element used in rogue trader etc, give us more variety, and excuses to collect more varied armys that arent the standard 1500-2000-2250 points.

LonelyPath
08-12-2010, 13:11
agreed, though I'm generally happy to be able to put wounds on my buddies nobz with my Armored Sentinels' Plasma Cannons. :D

though to answer the OP, my one wish for years has been for APX weapons to actually be able to modify armor saves -

(examples)


A boltgun (AP 5) fires wounds a power armor (Sv 3+) equipped model. Armor rolls of 5 or six are negated, and only armor saves of 3 or 4 prevent the wound.

A Krak missile (AP 3) wounds a terminator (Sv 2+); all armor rolls other than 2 fail to prevent the wound.

What does this do? it encourages more armies to rely on saves other than armor (which there are plenty of in this edition) - cover or invul. It also causes heavy infantry to actually fear special weapons again.

A rule like that would make me want to stop playing the game. It's over complicated and somewhat old hat. If you want armour modifiers, just change the AP to a modifier so AP5 is -2, AP2 is -5, you get the idea ;)

Either way, they removed save modifiers in 3rd edition for good reason, to speed the game up, I doubt they'd return now and I have always loved the fact that they got rid of them!

Sai-Lauren
08-12-2010, 13:15
That's one option, but by now, I know the Eldar's rules back to front, so it's not that I need to see the summary page, it's for when someone else wants to (e.g. "Are you sure Exarchs are WS 5?"). A word printout doesn't have the same convincingness as the actual codex.

The other thing was that it was me who said I'd like the summary page at the back, not Hellebore.
Sorry - changed. :)

And it's always handy as a reminder (or even just to turn the half page of waffle into a couple of sentences of salient points) - and I'm sure you always bring your codex with you anyway, so your opponent can still look through it if they want to.

Bunnahabhain
08-12-2010, 13:25
Ohhh, a good one that nobody has mentioned so far...

The D6.

A D10 or 12 would be so much better....

carldooley
08-12-2010, 13:35
A rule like that would make me want to stop playing the game. It's over complicated and somewhat old hat. If you want armour modifiers, just change the AP to a modifier so AP5 is -2, AP2 is -5, you get the idea ;)

Either way, they removed save modifiers in 3rd edition for good reason, to speed the game up, I doubt they'd return now and I have always loved the fact that they got rid of them!

sorry, I started with third, so I never had a chance to see what makes my proposed change so bad.:(

Usagi3
08-12-2010, 13:38
I'd like rules governing flyers, as already stated.

dragonet111
08-12-2010, 14:07
Another thing.

I would like to see BIG codex. For instance, a codex space marine (not ultramarine) with rules to create alternative list, like the mini dex of the 3ed or the chapter traits. I don't care if my BA are not as detailed as they are now.
Or an big Ork codex with rules for every clans, speed freaks, ....

Also I would get rid of the Special Characters that allow specific built. I don't mean get rid of SC but instead of being forced to filed Vulkan to field a Salamanders army I would much prefer alternative list.

MarcoSkoll
08-12-2010, 14:08
Do you speak of that? (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2290231_FRE_W40K_Eldars_ref.pdf)
Yeah (except for the language). It should have been on the back page of the Codex, not hidden somewhere in the middle.

It's such a simple thing, but so simple it's daft they got it wrong. It should be to hand as quickly as possible, not something you need to hunt through the book to find. That's just going to slow down games.

dragonet111
08-12-2010, 14:14
Those pages are usually downloadable on the GW website

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=3400013

I downloaded it because a friend of mine is strictly unable to remember the statline of his own troops:)

Chucklemoney
08-12-2010, 14:14
Another thing.

I would like to see BIG codex. For instance, a codex space marine (not ultramarine) with rules to create alternative list, like the mini dex of the 3ed or the chapter traits. I don't care if my BA are not as detailed as they are now.
Or an big Ork codex with rules for every clans, speed freaks, ....



This

extra letters

eldargal
08-12-2010, 14:16
I'd improve Eldar weapons, increase their range and give them appropriate prices.

Silent_Moebius
08-12-2010, 14:43
A little less luck based. The only think you can rely on is the movement phase. All others are really luck of dice. Even, when you calculate, that you it should work to 95%, you will fail. (often enough happend).

It is frustating to see a Land Raider been blown away through a single Las-Cannon shot. Or an attacking unit had to go through cover and only get a 1 for distance - whipe out in the next turn by shooting.

A little less luck please, so that you can go with tactics :D

MarcoSkoll
08-12-2010, 14:44
Those pages are usually downloadable on the GW website
Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that it should have been put on page 84 of 84, not page 68 of 84.

I shouldn't have to hunt through the book, I shouldn't have to go to their website to download it and print it out, and I shouldn't have to take a paper cutter to my codex. I shouldn't have to do anything to correct something that should have been so simple to get right in the first place.

Sai-Lauren
08-12-2010, 14:46
Either way, they removed save modifiers in 3rd edition for good reason, to speed the game up, I doubt they'd return now and I have always loved the fact that they got rid of them!

Ah, but ASM would speed the game up - as in later turns, you'd have a lot less figures to move around on the table ;).

The current situation, especially for marine vs marine gunfights, is, as TSOALR put it:

"The firepower of the Battle of Gettysburg!"
"The effectiveness of a blind hog looking for acorns!"

Ask yourself why Marines now have Sternguard, with an AP 3 ammunition type.
Ask yourself why, even in early 3rd edition, Ork choppa rules were created.
What about Rending?

Loads of different rules, each created to work around a rules knot hole that GW themselves created.

I'd say AP wasn't brought in to speed it up, it was that people thought that armour was useless because so many weapons reduced armour saves, especially for Marines.

So we got harder armour - and MEQ-hammer.

Also, don't forget that the vehicle armour rules are effectively a form of ASM - if you think of the penetration roll as an armour save, then the higher the weapons strength, the worse the armour save becomes.

Inquisitor_Tolheim
08-12-2010, 16:09
I would like to see BIG codex. For instance, a codex space marine (not ultramarine) with rules to create alternative list, like the mini dex of the 3ed or the chapter traits. I don't care if my BA are not as detailed as they are now.
Or an big Ork codex with rules for every clans, speed freaks, ....

Also I would get rid of the Special Characters that allow specific built. I don't mean get rid of SC but instead of being forced to filed Vulkan to field a Salamanders army I would much prefer alternative list.

He stole mine! Even the part about making variant armies upgrades rather then forcing everyone to take special characters to play their variant force.

In that case, I guess I would turn all the special characters into apocalypse only. Abaddon, Mephiston, Kharn et al should be upgunned to fit their fluff and dropped out of the basic game proper.

tcklein
08-12-2010, 16:15
Anyway I would like to see a more dedicated small scale ruleset. This is to say that the rules arent like 2nd ed. 40k but utilize the current ruleset but on a smaller scale with rules and missions, scenarios, objectives, advances and such like It could encourage potential sales and would also allow people to start playing quicker, hopefully keeping people in the game longer. I've seen so many kids drop out of the hobby so soon. It would also be something cool for older gamers, slightly stepping more towards a roleplay element used in rogue trader etc, give us more variety, and excuses to collect more varied armys that arent the standard 1500-2000-2250 points.

I second this whole-heartedly.

dragonet111
08-12-2010, 16:40
Anyway I would like to see a more dedicated small scale ruleset. This is to say that the rules arent like 2nd ed. 40k but utilize the current ruleset but on a smaller scale with rules and missions, scenarios, objectives, advances and such like It could encourage potential sales and would also allow people to start playing quicker, hopefully keeping people in the game longer. I've seen so many kids drop out of the hobby so soon. It would also be something cool for older gamers, slightly stepping more towards a roleplay element used in rogue trader etc, give us more variety, and excuses to collect more varied armys that arent the standard 1500-2000-2250 points.


Yes that's also a great thing to do.

Baneboss
08-12-2010, 16:55
Current Guard Codex, but with 4th ed. points values

So you want to make single guardsman cost 6 points exactly like an ork? It already makes it hard for me to play mono footsloggers but that would be a little over the top.

AlphariusOmegon20
08-12-2010, 17:47
One thing huh?

I'd abolish the current Chaos Marine codex and FAQ that the 3.5 one could still be used.

MarcoSkoll
08-12-2010, 17:56
I'd also agree with Inquisitor Kallus. Making it so that the game can be approached more incrementally, rather than implying every game has to be halfway to Apocalypse in scale, would be a great move.

I think the problem with "40k in 40 minutes"/"Combat Patrol" was that 400 points was a little too tight, too little to buy enough unique units to actually make tactics/play interesting, but I'd certainly recommend 500 point games on the same principle.

Gen.Steiner
08-12-2010, 23:17
Guard voxes and the orders system:

Officers issue orders over the vox-net. No vox, no orders!
If you are within 6/12" then you get a re-roll if you fail to represent increased verbal/visual control of the situation.

Friedrich von Offenbach
08-12-2010, 23:38
Possibly give commissars and platoon commanders 2 wounds. I dislike how all the two wounded models seem to be dissapearing

Skarshak
09-12-2010, 01:08
A "Dakka" Banner for the Orkz, which can be taken by a squad of shoota boyz to up their BS by 1. (Similar to the Nobz Waaagh Banner) :D

Bunnahabhain
09-12-2010, 01:16
A "Dakka" Banner for the Orkz, which can be taken by a squad of shoota boyz to up their BS by 1. (Similar to the Nobz Waaagh Banner) :D

Bad idea.

If it's a fixed cost upgrade it's either stupidly cheap for big mobs, or far too expensive for small one.

If it's a points per model choice, then the current points system doesn't allow us to do it right, as a single point is too big a unit.

Starscream24
10-12-2010, 00:08
A little less luck based. The only think you can rely on is the movement phase. All others are really luck of dice. Even, when you calculate, that you it should work to 95%, you will fail. (often enough happend).

It is frustating to see a Land Raider been blown away through a single Las-Cannon shot. Or an attacking unit had to go through cover and only get a 1 for distance - whipe out in the next turn by shooting.

A little less luck please, so that you can go with tactics :D

I don't belive in luck.....

You need another set of dice..... or another pair of hands!!! ;D

Vaktathi
10-12-2010, 00:20
If I could change only one thing about the IG codex, it'd be Stormtroopers.

65pts
Unit Size: 1 Sergeant and 4 Stormtroopers, up to 5 more available at 12pts per model

WS4, BS4, S3 T3 I3 A1 Ld8 Sv4+ (A2 Ld9 for Sergeant)
Carapace Armor
Hellgun
Hellpistol
Close Combat Weapon

Infiltrate
Deep Strike
Scout
Furious Charge

Hellgun: S3 AP5 Assault 3 18"
Hellpistol: S3 Ap5 Pistol.

able to take Valkyrie (not Vendetta) as dedicated transport.

All other options the same.

After that? I'd cut the cost of all Carapace armor upgrades by 15pts for Command Squads and Vets.

WolfGuardChris
10-12-2010, 01:30
I would make blood claws cheaper.

Starscream24
10-12-2010, 01:35
Gw acknowledge that they are a model company...

Ummmm..... they're not a model company (in the same way Microsoft are not a software company).

GW is a 'marketing company', they make a product and hype it up to a level to make us 'need to buy it'.
This is why each new army is better than the last, and it (almost) always wins its introductionary battle report.

On top of that GW markets its products further with a chain of stores.
If it were just a games company, they would only use independent retailers to get their models to us.

If it was just a model company, it would make definitave models for each unit and never change it.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-GW.
I love wargaming and the hobby as a whole.

Cheers

Starscream24
10-12-2010, 02:12
Keeping to the topic:

There's only two rules I'd change.

Line of sight rules:
I run a wargames club of mostly kids.
As a result, you get frequent arguements about whther models can be seen, or get cover saves or not.
I've always prefered a 'you can see into terrain, but not through terrain'.... not because it's more realisting, but it simplifies things and reduces arguements.

Vehicle Squadrons:
I personally think that a squadron of vehicles should be allowed to split their fire as if they were seperate vehicles.
So, 3 Leman Russ (or 3 Carnifex) could shoot at 3 targets.
If one is immobilised, then the normal rules would apply (destroyed if you decided to move on and leave a damaged vehicle).

Codex:

Space Marines:
It'd be nice if they'd kept the Traits in the book.
I play Imperial Fists, and I liked the way they used to work.

Also, Space Marine scout snipers are really rubbish now.
In 6 weeks (from the 5th Ed ruleboock coming out and the SM codex release) they went from hitting on 2+ to hitting on their BS, and a few weeks later, needing 4+ to hit!
Additionally, a scout HQ option would give a Scout army a nice theme... imagine a scout combat patrol! :)

Eldar:
It'd be nice of you could theme them a little more like they used to with the Samm-Hann, Ulthwe, etc.
It's also a shame they dropped Ulthwe Strike force element (the Wraithgate portal and Seer council element) from the Eye of Terror campaign.
It'd have been nice if they'd incorporated that into the current codex.

Tau:
Tau skimmers with Multi-trackers and Target Locks used to be able to move 12inches and fire two weapons..... now it's only a 6inch move to fire both weapons.
With only Str4 (or lower) being counted as defensive weapons, the Tau were short-changed.
Hopefully that will be address in a later Codex.

Necrons:
I don't play Necrons, but I hope that a new codex will make them a lot less predictable.
Can you think of any Necron player who doesn't take a Ressurection Orb?! ;)
It's not a bad piece of wargear, it's just that the Necrons are limited in variety.... pretty much if you play one Necron player, you've played them all!
I also hope they make the green glazed parts completely clear so you can colour them as you wish.
Hopefully that will stop most people painting them the same..... silver with green bits.

Orks:
Anyone remember the 2nd Ed Splatter Cannon??!
It was basically a couple of cannon balls with a chain between them.
When fired it would bounce around until it embedded itself in the ground.
To bring it up to date....
Imagine a 36" range weapon.
You pick target point, roll 2D6 to see where it lands.
Then, roll 2D6 and the scatter dice until you get a double on the dice (when it stops).
For an average damage level, lets call it a 'Str5/AP4/Heavy 1' weapon.

Chem-Dog
10-12-2010, 02:25
I downloaded it because a friend of mine is strictly unable to remember the statline of his own troops:)

There was a kid like this at our club....all stats are one (except for Sv, which is "-") unless he can prove otherwise....he picked it up pretty sharpish.



I may be looking at history through rosy tinted magnocculars but I'd un-fire Andy Chambers. I suspect 40K would be better for it.

DuskRaider
10-12-2010, 03:25
ONE thing I would change... Chaos Codex... add an option for Cult Troop Choices to take Terminator armor, which would make them an Elite choice.

Silent_Moebius
10-12-2010, 07:12
I don't belive in luck.....

You need another set of dice..... or another pair of hands!!! ;D

Hey, the double left-hand- Set was cheap. Couldn't resist! ;):D

FabricatorGeneralMike
10-12-2010, 08:03
I may be looking at history through rosy tinted magnocculars but I'd un-fire Andy Chambers. I suspect 40K would be better for it.

Nope your not, I agree 100% with you. Kidnap Andy C, chain him to a desk, MAKE him write a new set of rules for 40k. Lash and deprive him of food until he creates a new masterpiece for us. Repeat beatings until a acceptable version of 40K is produced. Then get him started rewriting the fluff heresys that Mr Ward has brought to us.


Oh, and toss Mat Ward into area 51 or some other place where he can vanish forever. I'm shure most people would deny he ever existed. ;)

Earthbeard
10-12-2010, 09:48
The Author :P

Zinch
10-12-2010, 10:13
As some have mentioned, I'd change the year of publication of the Necron Codex.

For the rules, I'd change the Carnifex cost to 140 points.

SgtTaters
10-12-2010, 10:47
I would have Matt Ward write Necrons 5e

... I just want to see what happens.

Lycannus
10-12-2010, 11:13
Incubi - Tormentors should be a piece of wargear! They sound cool in the background, but do nothing in-game

The Marshel
10-12-2010, 11:45
I cant really pick one thing for the marine codex, so i present my top 5 marine wishlist In no particular order:

5: put the damn baal predator in the vanilla codex or get a better reason for them to be blood angels only.

when it all comes down to it the baal predator is only blood angels unique because they simply do not want to share it. this annoys me greatly because i think this tank really screams "space marines". its fast, its super deadly at close range and (assuming you give it the assault cannons) its very tactically flexible, and it looks damn cool as well. this, and the reason below combines to be the only two reasons why i am seriously considering starting a count as blood angels army.

4: make predators fast vehicles.

blood angels getting all fast vehicles in certainly and interesting idea, but generally a lot the vehicles dont benefit to much from it. whirlwinds usually dont move. vindicators dont need it and are a tad expensive with it and rhinos didnt need to fire on the move anyway and a 12" move is normally sufficient. interesting on razorbacks, but the tank that really needs this imo is the predator. i really wish ALL marine predators were fast. they actually do what they are meant to do with the fast vehicle tag. they function perfectly fluff wise. as it stands a lemen russ is more mobile then a predator, which i find kinda stupid.

3: more weapon options for the attack bike.

heavy bolter and mm are a good bread and butter and i dont see any new additions seriously replacing them, but it would add a bit of variety to the unit if they could take heavy flamers and plasma cannons. perhaps marines dont really need the option for such things but its more of a thing i want to do cause i think it would be fun

2:Improved scouts.

one way or another i would like scouts to be worth taking. I think making the bs 4 would be sufficient in this case and perhaps giving them the option to take a single special weapon, or pistol special weapon beyond the sarg. between all the special rules they get like move through cover and scout they only really lack decent hitting power imo. so scouts with bs 4 would really make my day.

1: squadron-able predators, whirlwinds and i suppose for the sake of completeness, vindicators.

often times i have considered taking a whirlwind. its pretty cheap after all. but the problem i find is that its not alot for that heavy support slot and i like using devs, preads and raiders more. on top of this i would rather have 2 whirlwinds then one so i can focus fire and really hit units hard. again though, thats now 2 heavy support slots i spend on it. 2 whirlwinds for a single slot does appeal to me however, even with the dodgy squadron rules.

dakka preads are in a similar position. usually if you're taking one your taking 2 or even 3. and you're often focusing fire from 2 or 3 at one target. they are so cheap that again i would happily use the squadron rules to save heavy support slots (and kill points).

AC LC preds not so much, but then these are effective enough in single units that i dont mind so much. full las isnt really worth mentioning separately to ac lc

as for the vindicator, again people often take multiples but tbh i wouldnt ever squadron them, its more a case of if the other 2 get squadrons as an option then vindicators will too.

dragonet111
10-12-2010, 11:54
I would also try to stop people from writing Blood Angles instead of Blood angels :D they are marines not math nerds

The Marshel
10-12-2010, 11:59
oh dear, best be editing that post :angel:

dragonet111
10-12-2010, 18:02
GW should stop putting a single dude in charge of a codex, I know they are not really alone but the name on the first page is the guy responsible for the product.

The codex should be written by at least 2 guys, that what they did for the Dark Eldars and the codex is really good

ColShaw
10-12-2010, 18:18
For my beloved IG:

1) Fix the point imbalances in the codex:
-Cut 2 points off Stormtroopers' cost.
-Conscripts should be 3 points apiece now, or should go up to 5 and come with Send in the Next Wave automatically (now THAT would be interesting...)
-Add 10 points to Chimeras.
-Add 20 points to Vendettas.
-Make the Leman Russ Punisher cost the same as a basic Russ (and it'd still be overpriced); it's not a good tank. Why does it cost so much?!
-Carapace Armor should be a 15 point upgrade for a unit.
-If you don't make Chimeras more expensive, shave 10 points off the Sentinels; Armored Sentinels are so much worse than Chimeras, for the same cost, it's not even funny.

2) A few rules adjustments.
-Make Nork not suck somehow, or just put the big guy out of his misery.
-Have Mogul Kamir be useful, instead of making his Rough Riders actively worse.
-Let Rough Riders outflank! As it stands now, even Creed can't make them do it!

ReveredChaplainDrake
10-12-2010, 18:28
For Tyranids, I would change just one thing: ...the author. Anyone who takes their own Codex, commonly regarded as the best one around, and loses against Necrons, commonly regarded as the worst one around, just... just... come on!!! Batreps involving Robin Cruddace simply embolden my position that the guy simply doesn't know how to play the game, which explains so very much as to how he could have written possibly the single strongest and single weakest codecies this edition. When you actually see him play, he gets stomped by everybody, with the one exception when he had enough wherewithal to bring Fuegan and Holoprism spam to a Spearhead game. I miss when Tyranids had authors like Chambers and Kelly, who could actually write decent books and win some games every once and a while, some things I feel that should go hand-in-hand with any decent designer.

jt.glass
10-12-2010, 20:22
[Abridged version:]Baal predators for vanilla. Fast predators for everybody. Attack bike weapon options. Better scouts. Squadrons for preds/whirlwinds/vindicators.While I continue to try to narrow down my thoughts to a single change, I'll say that I endorse The Marshel's list (except BA should probably keep their unique stuff unless they move to a unified codex, which I wouldn't object to).

EDIT: BTW, TM, I hope you don't mind my abreviation of your pot, but I thought it was a bit long to post in its entirely.


jt.

Mánagarmr
10-12-2010, 20:34
I would put a rule on the number of Rune Priests who can be fielded; one Priest for every two-thousand points worth of Space Wolves fielded.

It would stop any shady list building, and be much more fitting lore-wise. To me, anyways.

Arvendragon
10-12-2010, 22:29
Right now, take the freaking technological differences between Space Marines out.

Give us and the BT 3++ SSs, bad smoke, 2-shot Cyclones, costlier equipment, etc.
Take things like Fast away from Blood Angels vehicles.
*Casually* strike out Ultramarines.

Remedy the three things that have angered me (yes, very personal, but oh well):
1 - Ultramarines are the best, and every chapter wants to be like them. Even successors of the Ultramarines were better than the other Legions. Everyone else sucks. No wonder why Guilliman died from Fulgrim...
2 - Blood Angels are the biggest snobs of the universe. They manage to find something, and doesn't share with the Imperium. Hmm... well, hope the Blood Angels die from those Ork and Daemon fleets, so we can just "find" some STCs on their planet.
3 - Loganwing. No fluff precedent, so now there are two Terminator armored forces... Technically, the Lion beat Russ, so Azrael should go over there and slap Grimnar in the face.

AlexHolker
11-12-2010, 06:51
Take things like Fast away from Blood Angels vehicles.
I'd be inclined to make all Rhino chassis vehicles fast, and fix the rules for normal speed vehicles, too.


3 - Loganwing. No fluff precedent, so now there are two Terminator armored forces...
Of course there's a fluff precedent. Every first founding chapter can field all-Terminator forces, and a number of them have done so in the fluff. Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Imperial Fists have done so when boarding space hulks, and the Ultramarines have done so when rooting out a Genestealer cult. There is no justification at all for the Dark Angels being the only ones capable of doing so.

ooglatjama
11-12-2010, 07:08
I would add some more god-specific entries to chaos daemons.

Bunnahabhain
11-12-2010, 14:52
I'd be inclined to make all Rhino chassis vehicles fast, and fix the rules for normal speed vehicles, too.


Don't be so specific. How about:

Fix the vehicle rules. All of them, they're all blooming useless.

I'd settle for rules which are either more realistic ( I know it's heroic fantasy (in space!) but even so, I'll use my big glowing fist to down the skimmer 30 foot in the air. Willing suspension of disbelief and all that.... :cries:) or promote better game play. Compared to the current set, almost anything would manage to improve one or the other, if not both.

Szalik
11-12-2010, 16:12
A little less luck based. The only think you can rely on is the movement phase. All others are really luck of dice. Even, when you calculate, that you it should work to 95%, you will fail. (often enough happend).

It is frustating to see a Land Raider been blown away through a single Las-Cannon shot. Or an attacking unit had to go through cover and only get a 1 for distance - whipe out in the next turn by shooting.

A little less luck please, so that you can go with tactics :D

I'll second that and even add not little but much less dice based ruleset. To be honest I'm currently redoing ruleset for 40k to be much more predictable...maybe one day gonna show it in the rules development.

Sgt John Keel
11-12-2010, 16:31
New Tyranid invasion of the Ultramar Empire: Calgar is revealed to be a worshipper of the Chaos Gods, and summons Dĉmon support to counter the threat (he's getting weary of doing all the fighting himself). Guilliman rotates in his stasis field. The Ultramarines declare against the Imperium and become the poster boys for the next Chaos Space Marine codex.

The Imperial Fists ("the other Codex chapter", it's time for their 15 minutes) take the stage and become the focus of the new Codex: Space Marines. Vast numbers of "how do I paint yellow" threads all over the Internet are predicted.

SgtTaters
11-12-2010, 22:31
- if a vehicle is successfully stunned, any further instance of stunned being rolled in the same turn will count as Weapon Destroyed.
*now glancing hits have a chance of destroying a vehicle, or crippling it faster.

The vehicle rules are what need the most changes.

-if using a firing point, that vehicle now counts as open topped
*makes firing out of vehicles a little riskier
-change the definition of defensive weapons from s4 and below to "rapid fire or assault". *Tau now have defensive wagons.
*Orks can now fire all those big shootas (& rokkits!) on their battlewagon as it rumbles along, very orky. You'd lose 'defensive' plasma/frag missiles though.
-passengers of a Fast vehicle may fire when it moves 12"

Mcbruce
11-12-2010, 22:49
Pyrovores.

Geep
12-12-2010, 04:40
For the rules in general (not just 1 codex)-

Remove 'Instant Death' and 'Remove from Play' and replace them with things which do multiple wounds (what's so wrong with things doing D3 or D6 wounds in 40K?). This means it'll still seriously hurt if a Leman Russ shot hits and wounds 6 Tyranid Warriors, causing 6xD3 wounds (D3's rolled seperately), but it won't be completely devastating.

Eternal Warrior would then have to be changed as well- you could have different levels of Eternal Warrior, shown as a number in brackets (1, 2 or 3). When wounded by a multi-wound hit, the model loses 1 less wound for each level of Eternal Warrior it has, to a minimum of 1. For example, A T4 character with Eternal Warrior (1) takes a Strength 8 wound- they lose D3 wounds as it's double their toughness or more. A roll of 1 or 2 on the D3 sees the model lose 1 wound (1-1, min 1, 2-1). A roll of 3 on the D3 causes 2 wounds (3-1).

This could then easily be expanded into Apocalypse, and would make a lot more sense than the awful 'Strength D' mechanic.

(Edit- I should thank Ehlijen for the idea of how to modify 'Eternal Warrior' to fit with the multi-wound idea)

As for:

Maybe it should be completely devastating. Isn't that the whole point of having a Chunky Salsa rule like ID?
There needs to be limits. For an IG squad or similar with only 1 multi-wound model suffering ID from a big hit it's not too bad. For units of multi-wound relatively low toughness creatures with lots of wounds (Tyranid warriors fit the bill perfectly)- it's just too much. The very fact Eternal Warrior exists shows that the game designers have realised that ID has problems.

AlexHolker
12-12-2010, 04:52
Remove 'Instant Death' and 'Remove from Play' and replace them with things which do multiple wounds (what's so wrong with things doing D3 or D6 wounds in 40K?). This means it'll still seriously hurt if a Leman Russ shot hits and wounds 6 Tyranid Warriors, causing 6xD3 wounds (D3's rolled seperately), but it won't be completely devastating.
Maybe it should be completely devastating. Isn't that the whole point of having a Chunky Salsa rule like ID?

Vepr
12-12-2010, 09:16
For Tyranids, I would change just one thing: ...the author. Anyone who takes their own Codex, commonly regarded as the best one around, and loses against Necrons, commonly regarded as the worst one around, just... just... come on!!! Batreps involving Robin Cruddace simply embolden my position that the guy simply doesn't know how to play the game, which explains so very much as to how he could have written possibly the single strongest and single weakest codecies this edition. When you actually see him play, he gets stomped by everybody, with the one exception when he had enough wherewithal to bring Fuegan and Holoprism spam to a Spearhead game. I miss when Tyranids had authors like Chambers and Kelly, who could actually write decent books and win some games every once and a while, some things I feel that should go hand-in-hand with any decent designer.

Amen. The more I see with other 5th edition books the more I think Cruddace is terrible at his job.

Melion
12-12-2010, 16:34
Make Necrons atleast on-par with other armies. :/

kane40k
12-12-2010, 16:50
Make the range to an actual 28mm size, and have everything then in true scale, Bigger marines, Man Sized Guardsmen, You get the pic :) then apply stats/ to make them more Fluff like :)

Boomstikk
12-12-2010, 17:41
I'd look long and hard at how to expand the number of armies in 40K, maybe consolidate some and add a new one. I really like the choices you have in FB, even if you really don't have it that much different when you look at a game, but from a fluff standpoint it's kind of annoying to have such a huge number of imperial armies and so few true xenos ones.

We know there are more races out there besides Eldar, Orks, Nids and Necrons.

Earthbeard
12-12-2010, 17:45
I'd streamline equipment and USR's if anythign really, a stormshield should be the same no matter who uses it etc, barring special rules etc.

But A Boltgun should have the same stats in every army list for example.

Notanoob
12-12-2010, 19:00
Reduce the number of codexes published by making it Codex:SM (Ultra's, traits a la 4th ed, Bangles, Dangles, BT, SW, Renegades), Codex:Chaos (LatD, Legions, Beastmen and daemons), Codex: Imperium (Arbites, Guard and rules to represent various regiments, Sisters, Inq, Ecclesiarchy), Codex: Eldar (all Craftworlds, Harlequins, Dark Eldar, Corsairs and Exodites), Codex: Orks (Klanz and as many strange things as were ever created for the Orkz), and Codex Xenos: (Necrons, Tau, Tyranids and Zoats, Genestealer cults, minor races).

Then update the rules to make more sense, i.e. cover becomes BS mod, ASM, D8 or D10 to compensate, inflate BS and saves to compensate, movement stats, vehicle rules totally redone, shaken/stunned mostly gone bar EMP.

I realize that some of these idea's seem strange, Renegades with loyalists, but really, Renegades are just recent traitors, unlikly to function much different from normal Space Marines. They'd use all the same equipment and wouldn't have the kind of crazy mutations and such that other Traitors would have, so putting them in with the rest of the normal marines would be the best way to represent them.

Others may also dislike their codecies getting compacted with others. However, this allows for smaller army list sections. For instance, the SM lists would have a little box that said "x unit identical to SM" in the appropriate slot, and a list of minor changes if any. So Space wolves could eliminate most of the HS slot, Bangles would have Death Company, the AM box in the troops slot, Sang. guard, special rules, cost tweaks mentioned where they need to be (identical to x unit except it has y rule and thus costs z points) and then their own characters and psychic powers. This would also allow us to eliminate the strange stuff, ie why do only BA and their successors have Baal preds? The Inq could just order them into a trap and steal their stuff if they wanted to. Heck, BA are more friendly to the Inq. than the Black Templars yet they handed over their special toy. Similarly, why can't the other tech marines figure out how to put on two DCCWs on a dread? Or put a Librarian corpse in a Dread? These nonsensical difference could be eliminated.

Other people may be mad that their xeno dex got shoved in with some other xenos. Well the reason for this is that there aren't enough big differences in each force from tomb world to tomb world or sept to sept that can't be represented one list. And I am not some imperial fanboy who's dumping on Xenos, I'm a Tyranid player. I just recognize that we don't have big internal factions differences like Chaos does.

Finally, it would also allow for easy integration of allies in smaller games. If you want to play IG with some local arbites, no problem! You want your Chaos liutenant to lead a force of traitor guard with the local beastmen/mutants? No problem!

Emeraldw
12-12-2010, 19:24
the lists get longer the more this thread goes on.

If I could change one thing, I would like GW to work on some of their older specialist games. I would love to see BFG, Necromunda, or Epic make a reappearance.

UberBeast
12-12-2010, 20:20
I'd get rid of the "no retreat" rule. It's a crappy rule and I'm sick of paying good points for something that is supposed to be a benefit, but that is actually a major disadvantage.