PDA

View Full Version : Back to 5th for fun!



lucienyo
24-11-2014, 22:56
We are all going to 5th ed for a change.... but We cannot find templars 5th faq update!!! can anyone help me out with an attachment or ANYTHING!!!

Thanks guys and gals

Grndhog89
24-11-2014, 23:06
Enjoy the horrible wound allocation system and vehicles being nigh unkillable.

Vaktathi
24-11-2014, 23:18
vehicles were perfectly killable, every pen was the equivalent of being AP1 now and AP1 killed on a 4+ or 6+ on a glance, and glances could disable vehicles, while MC's not only hit tanks on rear armor but got 2d6 armor pen on top of strength. They just didn't have HP's.

On topic, here's the one Black Templars FAQ I had on file, but there was another one newer than this that updated all their wargear to the C:SM standard (e.g. 3++ stormshields, Drop Pod Assault rule).

lucienyo
24-11-2014, 23:24
Thanks its a start! hoping to get the new update one too.

It was fun... just different! every edition has issues. Plus you get to use all the stuff that you don't in 6th lol

Scribe of Khorne
25-11-2014, 00:19
Enjoy the horrible wound allocation system and vehicles being nigh unkillable.

This is trolling as an art.

Grndhog89
25-11-2014, 00:36
This is trolling as an art.

Really? I'm not trolling. Those are legitimate lamentations of 5th edition. I hated playing tankhammer 40k.

Scribe of Khorne
25-11-2014, 00:39
Must have been a different game, I killed vehicles allllllllllllll time. 7th actually seems to be getting worse in that regard.

Ozendorph
25-11-2014, 01:17
Here's the only one I've got on file for Black Templars. It has the storm shields/pods/etc

203618

- Oz

Grndhog89
25-11-2014, 01:28
Must have been a different game, I killed vehicles allllllllllllll time. 7th actually seems to be getting worse in that regard.

There was something annoying about seeing an army that was 4 or 5 razorbacks and several longfang squads sitting in the back. Or GKSS and henchmen in Chimeras and psyfleman dreads.

Although, I am on your side when it comes to 7th. But that is a whole different kind of abomination. However just because 5th isn't 7th it doesn't mean 5th wasn't notorious for crazy stuff like I have described above.

Just Tony
25-11-2014, 01:41
I fondly remember 5th for targeting elbows for line of sight, conga line milking cover, and rapid fire transport spam. Past that, I remember glancing hits not doing anything worth mentioning. If I detest 5th for anything, it's for taking away the Ordinance damage chart.

Grndhog89
25-11-2014, 02:24
Am I the only one who loathed 5th's wound allocation system?

Scribe of Khorne
25-11-2014, 02:44
Am I the only one who loathed 5th's wound allocation system?

No, I know your not alone there. A TON of people hated wound allocation in 5th, but I wasnt one of them. I liked that my individual Nobz, all geared differently, acted like the Characters that they should be.

I know a lot of people where unable to process those things, and those same people then stumbled and tripped on 6th "OMG BUT WHO IS CLOSEST" allocation (which I find to be simplicity) but hey you cant solve for everyone. :angel:

Vaktathi
25-11-2014, 02:54
Am I the only one who loathed 5th's wound allocation system?

Not at all, it was simultaneously terrifically abuseable if you had multiple wounds and geared every model differently, and highly punitive otherwise.

T10
25-11-2014, 07:11
No, I know your not alone there. A TON of people hated wound allocation in 5th, but I wasnt one of them. I liked that my individual Nobz, all geared differently, acted like the Characters that they should be.

Heh. The reason those people hated that wound allocation system was due to it being abused the way you describe.

I only played a few games of 5th edition - my bold proclamation that "2009 is the year of 40K!" was duly ignored by my frieds and we kept going with WFB - so I never got to see the worst of this abuse in play. For bog standard tactical marines fighting bog standard space orks it worked just fine.

-T10

A.T.
25-11-2014, 12:54
Here's the only one I've got on file for Black Templars. It has the storm shields/pods/etc1.1 is also the last version I have saved - so this one may have been the last.

Vipoid
25-11-2014, 13:16
Am I the only one who loathed 5th's wound allocation system?

I disliked it at the time.

However, it was much, much better than the current system. At least in 5th the wound allocation system was only really abusable with a few specific units. Now all you need is a durable character and you're good to go.

And, in addition to being more easily abused, the current system is just a massive pain. Why, in a game that allows super-heavies, am I required to micromanage every ******* guardsman in every ******* infantry squad? Oh, and in case it wasn't already time-consuming enough, we also have LoS. So, enjoy frequently having people needing to roll twice as many dice per wound - often one at a time.


Really? I'm not trolling. Those are legitimate lamentations of 5th edition. I hated playing tankhammer 40k.

Yeah, glad we don't have tankhammer any more... oh... wait... no. Because, now vehicles are still difficult to destroy, but are scoring and you can take an entire army of them.

Because, obviously, the best way to put out a fire is to pour petrol on it. :eyebrows:

Spiney Norman
25-11-2014, 13:29
I disliked it at the time.

However, it was much, much better than the current system. At least in 5th the wound allocation system was only really abusable with a few specific units. Now all you need is a durable character and you're good to go.

And, in addition to being more easily abused, the current system is just a massive pain. Why, in a game that allows super-heavies, am I required to micromanage every ******* guardsman in every ******* infantry squad? Oh, and in case it wasn't already time-consuming enough, we also have LoS. So, enjoy frequently having people needing to roll twice as many dice per wound - often one at a time.



Yeah, glad we don't have tankhammer any more... oh... wait... no. Because, now vehicles are still difficult to destroy, but are scoring and you can take an entire army of them.

Because, obviously, the best way to put out a fire is to pour petrol on it. :eyebrows:

Theres nothing like a cold dose of reality to crack the lenses of theses rose-tinted spectacles
5th wasn't perfect by any means, but it was far better than 7th, I did actually like 6th until the imperial knight codex came out and irreparably broke the game.

HelloKitty
25-11-2014, 13:50
Am I the only one who loathed 5th's wound allocation system?

Hated it. One of the reasons that nobz and draigo were so popular - watching draigo and his paladins walk across a table and take an army's worth of shots and not losing a single model was masterwork trolling lol.

gwarsh41
25-11-2014, 14:16
I disliked it at the time.

However, it was much, much better than the current system. At least in 5th the wound allocation system was only really abusable with a few specific units. Now all you need is a durable character and you're good to go.


Do you mean with "look out sir" rolls? How with rolling LoS before armor saves, all that does is slow down your shooting. If you roll LoS AFTER armor saves, then you will have horrible wound allocation abuse that breaks the game.

Vipoid
25-11-2014, 14:22
Do you mean with "look out sir" rolls? How with rolling LoS before armor saves, all that does is slow down your shooting. If you roll LoS AFTER armor saves, then you will have horrible wound allocation abuse that breaks the game.

I mean positioning a character with a 2+ save (and/or some other durability stuff like FNP) at the front of the unit (or whichever direction is likely to receive the most fire).

Any non-AP2 wounds can be tanked by said character on his 2+ save, whilst any AP2 shots can be allocated to mooks in the squad with LoS.

Ironbone
25-11-2014, 14:30
Enjoy the horrible wound allocation system and vehicles being nigh unkillable
Lol, Vechicles weren't that hard to destroy :p. Especialy in close combat :D. Wound alocation rules indeed were somtimes abysmal.

gwarsh41
25-11-2014, 15:04
I mean positioning a character with a 2+ save (and/or some other durability stuff like FNP) at the front of the unit (or whichever direction is likely to receive the most fire).

Any non-AP2 wounds can be tanked by said character on his 2+ save, whilst any AP2 shots can be allocated to mooks in the squad with LoS.


I wouldn't say that this is really abusing any system though. Putting an expensive character up front also means you risk losing them. In 5th, you didn't need an expensive character. Back in the day, you could just have the +2 save guy tank all the wounds if he was in the back of the unit. TWC and bloodcrushers were just stupid impossible to bring down.

Horus38
25-11-2014, 15:12
I wouldn't say that this is really abusing any system though. Putting an expensive character up front also means you risk losing them. In 5th, you didn't need an expensive character. Back in the day, you could just have the +2 save guy tank all the wounds if he was in the back of the unit. TWC and bloodcrushers were just stupid impossible to bring down.

Quoted for truth! Feel free to put your expensive character up front. I'll gladly hose them with small arms fire and watch with glee as those 1's pop up.

Vipoid
25-11-2014, 15:15
I wouldn't say that this is really abusing any system though. Putting an expensive character up front also means you risk losing them.

But, again, that's what LoS is for. *Maybe* you'll lose them, but a) it's extremely unlikely, b) his squad will survive much longer either way, and c) this can actually help him live longer. If his squad dies and he's left alone, then it's easy to target him with whatever he's weak against (so, if he just has a 2+ save, plasma will melt him). However, if he tanks a lot of shots that would be more damaging to his unit, he can also improve his own survivability by transferring those plasma wounds to them.


Back in the day, you could just have the +2 save guy tank all the wounds if he was in the back of the unit.

How? You had to distribute a wound to every model before any of them could take a second wound.

Nowadays, you can hit a squad with a blast or flamer, but still have the character take all the wounds.

Ozendorph
25-11-2014, 19:49
5th ed wound allocation was bad. 6/7th is bad and slow. TLOS was a poor decision, IMO - the more abstract 4th ed cover system was quicker and allowed for area terrain pieces that blocked LOS yet weren't so dense as to not allow models to be placed easily.

It's so odd to me that GW has worked to reduce abstraction in their game while simultaneously advocating for ever larger armies. It's like how they require you to keep track of whether the pintle-mounted stubber on your transport is operational, but then blow off any sort of detail on the damage sustained by titans. Baffling to me.