PDA

View Full Version : 5th edition codices written for 6th edition?



Vepr
05-07-2012, 23:21
There was a lot of speculation on whether or not certain codices were written with 6th edition in mind. I think it was rather obvious that Necrons were. I also think it is rather obvious that we can finally hang up the notion that Tyranids were written for 6th and that is why they were bad in 5th, it is just not a good codex nothing more or less. That leaves the codices inbetween, do any others appear to be written with 6th in mind?

Spiney Norman
05-07-2012, 23:26
I actually prefer to think of Necrons as a codex that was not written with 6th in mind, that way I can rationalise their ascension into an overpowered monstrosity as an accident.

There are things that were clearly know when Necrons were being developed, the rule about Nightscythe passengers entering ongoing reserves when it is destroyed shows that clearly. But if the Hull point mechanic was known at the time when the codex was written then giving the entire army auto-glancing weapons makes the author a class A jerk.

Judging by the Sisters of Battle "codex" it may also have been written with some of the new rules known, either than or it has just been very lucky from the change, I'd go as far as saying it's borderline competitive now.

Nurgling Chieftain
05-07-2012, 23:28
The "Gauss" rule has been around for a long time. Hardly anything new.

Minsc
05-07-2012, 23:29
But if the Hull point mechanic was known at the time when the codex was written then giving the entire army auto-glancing weapons makes the author a class A jerk.

We already knew Mat Ward is a reknown power-monger when it comes to codex-writing, and I'm fairly sure he knew.

Necrons and Grey Knights seems to be written with 6th Ed. in mind.

Vepr
05-07-2012, 23:29
I actually prefer to think of Necrons as a codex that was not written with 6th in mind, that way I can rationalise their ascension into an overpowered monstrosity as an accident.

There are things that were clearly know when Necrons were being developed, the rule about Nightscythe entering ongog reserves shows that clearly. But if the Hull point mechanic was known at the time when the codex was written then giving the entire army auto-glancing weapons makes the author a class A jerk.

Judging by the Sisters of Battle "codex" it may also have been written with some of the new rules known, either than or it has just been very lucky from the change, I'd go as far as saying it's borderline competitive now.

Well we are talking about Ward here... :p

Iskandar
05-07-2012, 23:30
Honestly, I don't get why there's so much rage about the Necron Gauss rule. Chances are, after 3 glances, your vehicle was pretty messed up anyway. Either your Leman Russ ended up stunlocked or suffered Weapon Destroyed/Immobilised. If anything 3 HPs increases the surviveability of a Leman Russ. Because guess what weapon would be destroyed first on a Russ? Certainly not that sneaky Hunter Killer missile...

Spiney Norman
05-07-2012, 23:33
The "Gauss" rule has been around for a long time. Hardly anything new.

Yep, and the new codex was an excellent opportunity to change it/tone it down if you knew that it was going to become totally game-breaking with the new edition.

I've got to say from the feel of the thing they did a much worse job of 6th edition 40k than they did of 8th edition fantasy. With one or two slight exceptions 8th WFB succeeded in adequetly balancing what was a horribly unbalanced 7th edition, whereas 6th only seems to have made the 5th ed balance issues worse.

Vepr
05-07-2012, 23:34
I actually prefer to think of Necrons as a codex that was not written with 6th in mind, that way I can rationalise their ascension into an overpowered monstrosity as an accident.

There are things that were clearly know when Necrons were being developed, the rule about Nightscythe entering ongog reserves shows that clearly. But if the Hull point mechanic was known at the time when the codex was written then giving the entire army auto-glancing weapons makes the author a class A jerk.

Judging by the Sisters of Battle "codex" it may also have been written with some of the new rules known, either than or it has just been very lucky from the change, I'd go as far as saying it's borderline competitive now.

Also hull points are not that bad... Yes I play Tyranids :p

Gaargod
06-07-2012, 01:23
I've got to say from the feel of the thing they did a much worse job of 6th edition 40k than they did of 8th edition fantasy. With one or two slight exceptions 8th WFB succeeded in adequetly balancing what was a horribly unbalanced 7th edition, whereas 6th only seems to have made the 5th ed balance issues worse.


Wait what? Oh hells no. 8th ed Fantasy book is a just a total mess. At times it's really badly written and the Devs have very clearly realised they made mistakes with it (cf. the discrepancies between the BRB lores and the army book lores. Uberspells in particular are worlds apart).
Yes, 8th ed did bring... some balance to fantasy. But then again, Fantasy was incredibly broken, to the extent that the low tier armies had almost no chances versus the best tiers (assuming equal luck and skill). 40k 5th ed was certainly broke, but it wasn't that bad by any means. Unless you were playing Daemons or Nids (sigh), you had good odds of competing. Sure, some armies were stand out better, but not anything like Fantasy levels of broke.

A) I'd say 6th ed did a great job of balancing it and B) even if it did have less of an effect, comparatively speaking it was probably better.



Oh, and yeah, the Nid book just sucked. Cruddace took all the brilliant innovations from IG (seriously, so much stuff there could have worked for nids...), and shoved them into the trash. So not pleased.

Vepr
06-07-2012, 06:25
Oh, and yeah, the Nid book just sucked. Cruddace took all the brilliant innovations from IG (seriously, so much stuff there could have worked for nids...), and shoved them into the trash. So not pleased.

I think Cruddace was the least suited to write the nid codex. I have heard rumors that he has said he does not even like Tyranids but I cannot remember where I read it. If true he made it more than evident in their codex. He is the CS Goto of codex authors, not sure which one of them should be more insulted by that comparison.

Spiney Norman
06-07-2012, 07:21
Wait what? Oh hells no. 8th ed Fantasy book is a just a total mess. At times it's really badly written and the Devs have very clearly realised they made mistakes with it (cf. the discrepancies between the BRB lores and the army book lores. Uberspells in particular are worlds apart).
Yes, 8th ed did bring... some balance to fantasy. But then again, Fantasy was incredibly broken, to the extent that the low tier armies had almost no chances versus the best tiers (assuming equal luck and skill). 40k 5th ed was certainly broke, but it wasn't that bad by any means. Unless you were playing Daemons or Nids (sigh), you had good odds of competing. Sure, some armies were stand out better, but not anything like Fantasy levels of broke.

A) I'd say 6th ed did a great job of balancing it and B) even if it did have less of an effect, comparatively speaking it was probably better.

Oh, and yeah, the Nid book just sucked. Cruddace took all the brilliant innovations from IG (seriously, so much stuff there could have worked for nids...), and shoved them into the trash. So not pleased.

Hmmm, agree to disagree I suppose, 6th ed did nothing about bringing up the flagging codexes, Nids are still terrible, daemons probably are too, Grey Knights are still the overpowered mess they have been and they've now been joined by Necrons.

The hull points system that was probably designed to nerf transport spam, totally failed and only really discourages high value vehicles like monoliths/landraiders.

Best of all they introduce flyers. Way to introduce a class of vehicle that is all but immune to all shooting unless it has an incredibly rare special rule. That was a pretty blatant gimmick to sell as many aegis lines/bastions as they possibly could. You're going to get Necron scythe spam armies that most armies literally won't be able to touch, fun times...

Spell_of_Destruction
06-07-2012, 08:01
Honestly, I don't get why there's so much rage about the Necron Gauss rule. Chances are, after 3 glances, your vehicle was pretty messed up anyway. Either your Leman Russ ended up stunlocked or suffered Weapon Destroyed/Immobilised. If anything 3 HPs increases the surviveability of a Leman Russ. Because guess what weapon would be destroyed first on a Russ? Certainly not that sneaky Hunter Killer missile...

I think that's a fair point. In 5th ed, three glances on my Wave Serpent and the odds are in favour of a 5 or 6 on one of those. As long as we get a points reduction in the new codex this won't bother me too much. It's the ease with which vehicles (particularly fast skimmers) can be dispatched in assault that worries me more.

Sami
06-07-2012, 08:20
Psybolt ammo also makes even more sense as it allows GK to glance Av11 to death ;)

theJ
06-07-2012, 08:31
Hm... it'll be interesting to see how Chaos turns out. I'd recon we can expect quite a few changes in layout and style compared to what we got in 5th...

Honestly, my biggest concern right now is complexity. I haven't finished reading through the new rules, but they seem to have a... perverse joy for making rules as numerous and complex as superhumanly possible.
As someone who believes the Ork codex is the best codex they've ever done, not least because it was simple to use and understand, the direction of the Necrons and Grey Knights is.... worrying, to say the least.

owen matthew
06-07-2012, 09:00
Honestly, my biggest concern right now is complexity. I haven't finished reading through the new rules, but they seem to have a... perverse joy for making rules as numerous and complex as superhumanly possible.


And thank goodness, because the trend to simplify in 4th and 5th made the game and the armies fast, dull and boring. 6th is a step in the right direction, IMHO, but it still could be more complex! I'd love it if codeci and the rules were written for adults again, and any steps in that direction are much appreciated.

squeekenator
06-07-2012, 09:23
Yep, and the new codex was an excellent opportunity to change it/tone it down if you knew that it was going to become totally game-breaking with the new edition.

I've got to say from the feel of the thing they did a much worse job of 6th edition 40k than they did of 8th edition fantasy. With one or two slight exceptions 8th WFB succeeded in adequetly balancing what was a horribly unbalanced 7th edition, whereas 6th only seems to have made the 5th ed balance issues worse.

On one hand I agree, but on the other, the 6th ed rulebook is (hopefully) going to be around longer than any 5th ed codex, so perhaps they should just write the best core ruleset possible and then fix any major army imbalances it causes with those armies' codexes. Though perhaps I'm being too optimistic by assuming that GW has any interest in balancing the game at all, let alone through a complex long-term plan like that.

theJ
06-07-2012, 09:39
And thank goodness, because the trend to simplify in 4th and 5th made the game and the armies fast, dull and boring. 6th is a step in the right direction, IMHO, but it still could be more complex! I'd love it if codeci and the rules were written for adults again, and any steps in that direction are much appreciated.

If you consider complexity for the sake of complexity to be "adult"... I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I know some of the late 4th ed. codices were hurt really badly by the minimalistic approach (Dark Angels and Eldar in particular, from what I hear...), but the idea itself is good, and when applied properly, as in the Ork 'dex, it makes the game far more interesting. Mostly because you get to focus on the actual game, as opposed to all the silly special rules you have forced upon you (looking at the Grey Knights in particular here...).

As always, what I'd really like is a bit of balance. There is such a thing as making things too simple. On that, I will happily agree. However, I'll also state that there is such a thing as being FAR too complex, to the point where the game gets annoying and confusing to play. Is 6th on that level? I don't know. As I said, I haven't read through it all yet. What I do know is the bits I have read through, coupled with the precedent laid by the Grey Knight and Necron codices worries me.

Arbedark
06-07-2012, 09:45
I'm going to go against the grain here and say that, personally, I think that Codex's as far back as Space Wolves were, if not specifically written for 6th Ed, at least considering 6th Ed game mechanics.

My reasoning for this supposition is Lukas the Trickster. In 5th Ed the chances of his Doppelgangrel cloak actually being used was literally nil, requiring him to be the sole surviving member of his unit, however with the introduction of challenges it actually makes sense.

Minsc
06-07-2012, 10:06
Hm... it'll be interesting to see how Chaos turns out. I'd recon we can expect quite a few changes in layout and style compared to what we got in 5th...

I wouldn't expect too much really, in terms of powerlevel.
The 8th Ed. books for wfb have all been weaker (more balanced) than those that came in the end of 7th.

I'd expect CSM to be balanced and with a plethora of choices - but much weaker than Necrons/GK.

Ruination Drinker
06-07-2012, 11:16
I finally bought the 'Cron codex to see what the fuss was about. Was it written for 6th ed?

Hell yes.

Quantum Shielding is a perfect example of frontloading a nice OP ability for the next edition seeing as AV13 is invulnerable to krak grenades and can only get glanced by S8. That's some pretty obvious **** there Mr. Ward.

Cthell
06-07-2012, 13:01
I finally bought the 'Cron codex to see what the fuss was about. Was it written for 6th ed?

Hell yes.

Quantum Shielding is a perfect example of frontloading a nice OP ability for the next edition seeing as AV13 is invulnerable to krak grenades and can only get glanced by S8. That's some pretty obvious **** there Mr. Ward.

Your maths is a bit screwed up there; I presume you meant "penetrated"? Also, krak grenades hit the rear armour of 11 in assault, so that's no more OP than it was (in fact, given the significantly easier hitting of the vehicle in combat, it's something of a nerf.

I don't dissagree with your assertion though; the biggest proof is them getting a unit type (chariots) that had never existed before.

Balerion
06-07-2012, 13:15
Nothing infuriates me as much as people who claim the Tyranids codex was written for 6th, so I was relieved to see the OP dismiss that notion rather than give it any sort of merit.

I think things like the Spinegaunt vs. Termagant mathhammer and Deathspitters on TMCs controversies proved long ago that it was just a terribly written book, and not some secret font of genius waiting to be unlocked by the new edition.

When I read the new USRs I did see a lot of easy options for salvaging some Tyranid units. Throw Rampage on a Screamer-Killer Carnifex, or Soul Blaze/Blind on a Pyrovore, and suddenly they look a lot better.

Miredorf
06-07-2012, 13:20
I finally bought the 'Cron codex to see what the fuss was about. Was it written for 6th ed?

Hell yes.

Quantum Shielding is a perfect example of frontloading a nice OP ability for the next edition seeing as AV13 is invulnerable to krak grenades and can only get glanced by S8. That's some pretty obvious **** there Mr. Ward.

While at the same time their vehicle upgrade which allows ignore stunned and shaken lost quite a lot of relative usefulness? :rolleyes:

Iskandar
06-07-2012, 13:22
I think that's a fair point. In 5th ed, three glances on my Wave Serpent and the odds are in favour of a 5 or 6 on one of those. As long as we get a points reduction in the new codex this won't bother me too much. It's the ease with which vehicles (particularly fast skimmers) can be dispatched in assault that worries me more.

Now that scares me, especially as a Valk/Vendetta player and Dark Eldar player.


I finally bought the 'Cron codex to see what the fuss was about. Was it written for 6th ed?

Hell yes.

Quantum Shielding is a perfect example of frontloading a nice OP ability for the next edition seeing as AV13 is invulnerable to krak grenades and can only get glanced by S8. That's some pretty obvious **** there Mr. Ward.

And Plasmas, Lances, Autocannons, Assault cannons, Living Lightning, Deffguns...

Chapters Unwritten
06-07-2012, 14:08
A) I'd say 6th ed did a great job of balancing it and B) even if it did have less of an effect, comparatively speaking it was probably better.

Oh, and yeah, the Nid book just sucked. Cruddace took all the brilliant innovations from IG (seriously, so much stuff there could have worked for nids...), and shoved them into the trash. So not pleased.I think SOME of it makes sense in context with 6E. For example, the Carnifex nerf...we see now with squadrons that a Carnifex squad is actually able to take quite a beating, position-wise (plus it got a longer charge range, and the weapons that hurt it most in CC can be challenged out of combat). I also know at least one player whose had a eureka moment with the ripper swarms, where he figured out he could use them as fodder to charge up and hold enemies so his stealers don't take the negatives of charging into cover and overwatch.

It is true that a lot of innovations were ignored for the capacities of the Nid book. Early rumors, for example, had the Carnifex as an AV14 walker while the Tervigon was a skittering MC with fleet that could act as a transport. Nids presented some amazing opportunities for models, too...there was a rumor early on that every unit was constructed entirely of biomorphs.

I was really, deeply shocked to see the Nid Close Combat Weapons get pretty much completely passed over. I thought for sure scytals would have an AP, or that the Crushing Claws on a Fex would make sense.

Corvus Corone
06-07-2012, 14:15
I finally bought the 'Cron codex to see what the fuss was about. Was it written for 6th ed?

Hell yes.

Quantum Shielding is a perfect example of frontloading a nice OP ability for the next edition seeing as AV13 is invulnerable to krak grenades and can only get glanced by S8. That's some pretty obvious **** there Mr. Ward.



See also preferred enemy on destroyers. Necrons saw 6th coming, fact.

Minsc
06-07-2012, 14:38
See also preferred enemy on destroyers. Necrons saw 6th coming, fact.

And Destroyerlords giving preferred enemy to their unit (usually Wraiths.)
Nightfight makes more sense now.
Halving chargedistances (Cryptek ability?) makes more sense.
And my biggest issue with Necrons now: Mindshacklescarabs are just so insanely broken with the introduction of challenges.

Anyone claiming that Necrons weren't written for 6th Ed. (by the very same author) is either just lying to him/herself or an idiot.

DEADMARSH
06-07-2012, 14:54
And Destroyerlords giving preferred enemy to their unit (usually Wraiths.)
Nightfight makes more sense now.
Halving chargedistances (Cryptek ability?) makes more sense.
And my biggest issue with Necrons now: Mindshacklescarabs are just so insanely broken with the introduction of challenges.

Anyone claiming that Necrons weren't written for 6th Ed. (by the very same author) is either just lying to him/herself or an idiot.

Don't MSS go off in I order though? In other words, most likely after the challenging model has already attacked the Necron (Over) Lord?

Cthell
06-07-2012, 15:43
I also know at least one player whose had a eureka moment with the ripper swarms, where he figured out he could use them as fodder to charge up and hold enemies so his stealers don't take the negatives of charging into cover and overwatch.

Just to be a rules-pedant, but the only way that will avoid the Initiative penalty is to charge with the rippers the turn before the 'Fexs, and hope they're still there when the 'Fexs charge (to avoid the Initiative penalty, the unit has to have been engaged at the start of the player's turn). Using expendable units to soak up overwatch on the other hand is an excellent idea (particularly if you have a Tervigon to spawn waves of Termagants for the purpose)

angelofrage
06-07-2012, 16:06
I actually prefer to think of Necrons as a codex that was not written with 6th in mind, that way I can rationalise their ascension into an overpowered monstrosity as an accident.

There are things that were clearly know when Necrons were being developed, the rule about Nightscythe passengers entering ongoing reserves when it is destroyed shows that clearly. But if the Hull point mechanic was known at the time when the codex was written then giving the entire army auto-glancing weapons makes the author a class A jerk.

This, by turn 2 last game I had lost a Predator, 2 rhinos and a LR Achilles to glances. They even had 3+ cover saves and were still glanced to wrecked in 2 turns of shooting. Just in time for destroyer lords, lychguard and wraiths to charge in and mop up the survivors.

As well as mind shackle scarabs being ideal in challenges, the war scythe became the single best CC weapon in the game now, FAQd to be better than any power weapon any actual combat army can take (+2 Str, 2D6 armour pen, AP1 (+2 on vehicle damage charts) and strikes ahead of power fists)

Iskandar
06-07-2012, 16:15
To be fair that's in part down to horrible luck. A ghost ark filled with Warriors churn out 15 shots, 10 hit of which 1 and 2/3 are glancing of which only 5/9 get through.

As a note, Thunder Hammers, while incapable of gibbing Destroyer Lords with Scythes, do reduce him to I1 upon taking a wound.

angelofrage
06-07-2012, 16:24
As a note, Thunder Hammers, while incapable of gibbing Destroyer Lords with Scythes, do reduce him to I1 upon taking a wound.

That's assuming i pass a 3D6 leadership test and don't get killed before I can strike at all. Yeah the vehicle thing was partly down to bad luck, but it just confirmed how little point taking anything beyond cheap 35pt rhinos there is if you can face Necrons.

Nurgling Chieftain
06-07-2012, 16:26
...the 6th ed rulebook is (hopefully) going to be around longer than any 5th ed codex...You must be new to this hobby? It's entirely possible that 6th edition will become 7th edition before any of the codexes released during 5th edition are updated. (Normally we'd expect an update to the Space Marine codex every edition, but this time with Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels coming first and second, I'm not so sure.) Consider the 5th edition codexes: Necrons, Grey Knights, Dark Eldar, Imperial Guard, and Space Wolves were all 3rd edition codexes. Blood Angels last non-White Dwarf codex was 3rd edition (they also had a White Dwarf list). Sisters' White Dwarf updated their 3rd edition rules. Only the Tyranids and Space Marine codexes were updated from 4th edition, the latter their then-habitual first codex for each edition from 3rd to 5th.


Quantum Shielding is a perfect example of frontloading a nice OP ability for the next edition seeing as AV13 is invulnerable to krak grenades and can only get glanced by S8.:wtf: Just keep on drinking, laddy. :D

Iskandar
06-07-2012, 16:30
That's assuming i pass a 3D6 leadership test and don't get killed before I can strike at all. Yeah the vehicle thing was partly down to bad luck, but it just confirmed how little point taking anything beyond cheap 35pt rhinos there is if you can face Necrons.

Which rule is that? I don't remember a 3d6 forced Ld test.

Chapters Unwritten
06-07-2012, 16:38
That's those god awful mindshackle scarabs. Those things are way busted; they basically now make it so any Lord in a challenge is nigh invincible.

I guess strategically you'd accept the challenge just to keep your well-equipped model from killing others besides himself. But ultimately you can only shoot them to pieces before hand. On the upside they should be in base a little less as Necrons try to keep their Lords back a bit to avoid wound allocation.

Sami
06-07-2012, 17:49
Don't MSS go off in I order though? In other words, most likely after the challenging model has already attacked the Necron (Over) Lord?

No, otherwise people wouldn't be complaining about it. The whole point that you take the test before blows are struck, and if you fail then you hit your own unit instead of the Necron one.

Vepr
06-07-2012, 18:12
I thought that maybe they would take the errata as a chance to make some sense of trygon holes, lictor pheremones, pyrovores, and a lot of goofy biomorph options etc. Nonsensical rules like those is what made people think that nids were written for 6th but I think we can safely say it was just a rushed book that was and still is a bit of a mess. The only use I can see for a pyrovore is maybe podding in a brood to try and burn troops out of a fortification but it even sucks at that especially for the price.

squeekenator
06-07-2012, 23:01
You must be new to this hobby? It's entirely possible that 6th edition will become 7th edition before any of the codexes released during 5th edition are updated. (Normally we'd expect an update to the Space Marine codex every edition, but this time with Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels coming first and second, I'm not so sure.) Consider the 5th edition codexes: Necrons, Grey Knights, Dark Eldar, Imperial Guard, and Space Wolves were all 3rd edition codexes. Blood Angels last non-White Dwarf codex was 3rd edition (they also had a White Dwarf list). Sisters' White Dwarf updated their 3rd edition rules. Only the Tyranids and Space Marine codexes were updated from 4th edition, the latter their then-habitual first codex for each edition from 3rd to 5th.

Not new, just relentlessly optimistic.

Ruination Drinker
07-07-2012, 02:40
Your maths is a bit screwed up there; I presume you meant "penetrated"? Also, krak grenades hit the rear armour of 11 in assault, so that's no more OP than it was (in fact, given the significantly easier hitting of the vehicle in combat, it's something of a nerf.

I don't dissagree with your assertion though; the biggest proof is them getting a unit type (chariots) that had never existed before.

Math? I take in moderation where I can. But yes, S8 can indeed pen AV13, and as for nade's getting AV11 against QS there's no indication that QS can only be taken against shooting attacks. But don't ask me, I've never seen the rule in action.

That LoL'riot is pretty funny, though. Get vector attacked by 3 S7 AP1 hits!

I just bought the Codex the other day and I gotta say, it's some of the best comedy I've read in years.

DEADMARSH
07-07-2012, 04:41
No, otherwise people wouldn't be complaining about it. The whole point that you take the test before blows are struck, and if you fail then you hit your own unit instead of the Necron one.

My bad. I was under the impression it was an "attack."

In my own defense though, some folks do complain about things they've read wrong around here... :)

Nurgling Chieftain
07-07-2012, 07:26
...as for nade's getting AV11 against QS there's no indication that QS can only be taken against shooting attacks.Close combat attacks against non-WS vehicles strike rear armor, where QS doesn't work. So, yes, QS can work against melee attacks, but in practical terms only the Triarch Stalker is likely to get it.

Shamana
07-07-2012, 10:09
See also preferred enemy on destroyers. Necrons saw 6th coming, fact.

The rulebook giving the arcs 4 hps didn't hurt either. I mean, good grief, talk about the perfect storm.

Casper Hawser
07-07-2012, 10:32
I only got the rulebook yesterday but I don't think the Blood Angels codex was written with 6th in mind with feel no pain and furious charge been toned down the Sanguinary priests are nowhere near as good or the Death Company. Also Mephistons high toughness is no good against the Instant death rule now. I suppose it's just stopped the BA from being one of the top tier armies which isn't a bad thing bearing in mind I don't use tank spam (only own 2 baal preds and 2 rhinos).

lantzkev
07-07-2012, 10:38
how is mephistons high toughness no longer good against instant death now? It's exactly as good as it was prior.

Minsc
07-07-2012, 11:14
Also Mephistons high toughness is no good against the Instant death rule now

Mephiston had and still has T6. Nothing has changed for him in regards of instant death.

I don't think BA is written with 6th Ed. in mind. It's too far off, and didn't really gain any huge bonuses with the jump to 6th. Considering that it's a Ward-dex, the absence of buffs makes it clear for me that they are foremost a 5th Ed. codex.

Casper Hawser
07-07-2012, 11:59
Instant Death: Unsaved wounds with this special rule automatically inflict Instant death regardless of the victims toughness. Thats why I think Mephiston is slightly weaker than before.

Leth Shyish'phak
07-07-2012, 12:07
That's exactly the same as in 5th edition.

Athlan na Dyr
07-07-2012, 12:26
I don't think the Blood Angels codex was written with 6th in mind with feel no pain and furious charge been toned down the Sanguinary priests are nowhere near as good or the Death Company.


Sanguinary priests are nowhere near as good or the Death Company.


Death Company.

Considering how rage has changed, can't agree with you on Death Company being worse.
I do agree that Blood Angels weren't written for 6th though

Casper Hawser
07-07-2012, 13:00
I suppose I never come across a situation where Mephiston could suffer instant death and when read the wording thought a Libraian or Sorcerer in a squad could kill him straight off and thought thats changed but obviously it hasn't.
I hadn't got to the rage rule but yes thats better for the Death Company but I thought a Chaplain nullified the old rage rule oh hang on thats the old BA codex.

lantzkev
07-07-2012, 13:03
Instant Death: Unsaved wounds with this special rule automatically inflict Instant death regardless of the victims toughness. Thats why I think Mephiston is slightly weaker than before.

Like we've been telling you, that's exactly how it was in 5th, and 4th... and probably 3rd... most weapons do not have that ability except for force weapons with a psyker and a few other nasty things.

He still doesn't have to worry about things doubling his toughness (and thus having instant death) because nothing can have a str of 12. Now if he gets hit by radiation grenades and then hit with a hammerhanded hammer... that's a different story.

All the methods of instant killing mephiston are the exact same as they were in 5th.

Casper Hawser
07-07-2012, 13:27
Yeah I think I already said I got it wrong cheers for pointing it out again

theJ
07-07-2012, 18:40
He still doesn't have to worry about things doubling his toughness (and thus having instant death) because nothing can have a str of 12. Now if he gets hit by radiation grenades and then hit with a hammerhanded hammer... that's a different story.

The 6th ed. rules (pg.2) notes that modifiers are always applied in a certain order. To wit; first you apply multipliers, then additions and subtractions, and finally, set numbers override everything. Therefore, a hammerhanded hammer would only reach strength 9, not 10, and thus be insufficient for causing instant death to toughness 5.
That said, if you've got hammerhand, then you've also got an unbalanced amount of force weapons, and don't really need to bother with doubled strength anyway :p

Yes, I have, in fact, been reading the new rules WAY too closely.

Leth Shyish'phak
07-07-2012, 18:42
The 6th ed. rules (pg.2) notes that modifiers are always applied in a certain order. To wit; first you apply multipliers, then additions and subtractions, and finally, set numbers override everything. Therefore, a hammerhanded hammer would only reach strength 9, not 10, and thus be insufficient for causing instant death to toughness 5.
That said, if you've got hammerhand, then you've also got an unbalanced amount of force weapons, and don't really need to bother with doubled strength anyway :p

Yes, I have, in fact, been reading the new rules WAY too closely.

The Hammerhand rules specifically say that the +1 comes before the doubling from the daemonhammer.

Yay Grey Knights! :shifty:

Bergen Beerbelly
08-07-2012, 07:14
My personal opinion is that they were not written to be 6th edition rulebooks. After looking through all of the FAQ's on the GW website for every Codex, they all say that all of the books were written for a different version of the game than 6th edition.

However, even though GW says they weren't, I do believe there is some influence from the new rules set in both the Grey Knight codex, and the Necron codex. In the Grey Knight codex we have the Ulumaethi plasma siphon. I think they knew plasma weapons were going to become strong again in 6th because of the way Rapid Fire works now.

And I believe many things in the Necron codex were influenced by the rules. So close to an edition change usually does that for their codexes.

lantzkev
08-07-2012, 07:43
I wouldn't look to the plasma siphon as an indicator for 6th or not =P

Plasma by the way has not really got that much better in this edition, while you can move and fire at full range, you now overheat on vehicles...

Sami
08-07-2012, 08:48
The Hammerhand rules specifically say that the +1 comes before the doubling from the daemonhammer.

Yay Grey Knights! :shifty:

You know, I'd never noticed that before. Yet another -1 to Ward for needlessly changing basic rules in his codex (much like the -1T from grenades counting towards ID, although that is now actually valid in 6th IIRC).

orlando davion
08-07-2012, 09:54
This, by turn 2 last game I had lost a Predator, 2 rhinos and a LR Achilles to glances. They even had 3+ cover saves and were still glanced to wrecked in 2 turns of shooting. Just in time for destroyer lords, lychguard and wraiths to charge in and mop up the survivors.

As well as mind shackle scarabs being ideal in challenges, the war scythe became the single best CC weapon in the game now, FAQd to be better than any power weapon any actual combat army can take (+2 Str, 2D6 armour pen, AP1 (+2 on vehicle damage charts) and strikes ahead of power fists)

Just to comment on the war scythe; nothing has changed; it always has been the best CC weapon in the game and in the new necron codex it actually got a nerf! Try it with the stat line above and no saves of any kind able to be taken (including invulnerable saves).

GW keeping iconic weapons for armies is to be expected.