PDA

View Full Version : Your Sacred Cows of 40k



Zustiur
29-07-2015, 01:01
As a companion to the Your Issues with 40K (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?411650-Your-Issues-with-40K) thread, let's discuss the parts of Warhammer 40,000 that we each consider to be unchangeable.
That is, what must stay the same in order to preserve the '40kness' of the game?
As in the other thread, please focus on the core rules, not individual codex/unit rules.

Here is my initial list. I'm sure I'll add to it as the thread progresses:

(M), WS, BS, S, T, W, I, A, Ld. In that order.
D6 as the primary die, although I don't mind having other dice for some things.
To hit = 7-BS as the underlying mechanic, with or without modifiers.
'I go, You go' turn structure (I just don't think the game would feel the same without it)
To hit, To Wound, Saving throw. In that order.
A stat line of 3's representing a fully trained human soldier, with untrained soldiers/civilians having 2's.
4s in a stat line usually representing decades/centuries of experience or alien reflexes etc
Infantry model facing not mattering - because so many models are posed in a way that makes facing difficult to determine
25%+ as the baseline for minimum terrain (why did that get removed from the book??)
I think the CAD/FOC is a sacred cow for me now too, at least in principle. I'd love to see it scale better though.

Chevron_Locked
29-07-2015, 01:55
Ah, refreshing to see a discussion that isn't moaning :)

I'd have to say the movement mechanic is very much a part of the identity of the game and is a set of rules I like.

Geep
29-07-2015, 02:47
I have to agree with the OP's list. All of those things have been core to 40k for ages, and help define the game.

Scribe of Khorne
29-07-2015, 02:58
Ah, refreshing to see a discussion that isn't moaning :)

I'd have to say the movement mechanic is very much a part of the identity of the game and is a set of rules I like.

I hope you are not calling my thread moaning, its been quite productive I feel. ;)

As for my Sacred Cows.

The To Hit/Wound Tables, though some tweaks are in order. AKA: I'm an Avatar of a God, and you are a Grot, I dont hit on 2's yet in CC?
The MEQ Statline, or the Statline in general.
Points.
25% as the Terrain baseline.
D6
FOC

Thats at the highest level, there are things I can probably shift on, but those are the big ones to me.

Chevron_Locked
29-07-2015, 03:14
I hope you are not calling my thread moaning, its been quite productive I feel. ;)

Hehe, no, I do see a lot of moaning/fear mongering (aos etc) that I get a little tired of... but I guess that's the internet for you :p

Vet.Sister
29-07-2015, 03:27
25%+ as the baseline for minimum terrain.
So much stuff depends on terrain and so few people play with enough.

ehlijen
29-07-2015, 04:47
An IGOUGO system where whole squads act as one entity. That's the big one for me.

Poncho160
29-07-2015, 05:34
The to hit/wound tables.
The MEQ statline and the use of statlines in general.
The use of a points system.

aprilmanha
29-07-2015, 10:26
The FOC and the points system are the main ones for me.
I would like to see them move to more of a Warmachine stat line but use the D12 rather then 2D6 to streamline larger numbers of models and the ability to do all models in a unit at once rather then one model at a time.
This gives more scope for fine tuning of abilities between races.

Formerly Wu
29-07-2015, 16:29
My only 40k sacred cow is the background. As long as the game system comes close to representing that on the tabletop, I don't much care how they go about it.

insectum7
29-07-2015, 17:08
Space Marines!

Building an army with points values.

The ability to go into any game store and say, "Hey I've got a 40K army of about 1850(or whatever points). Anyone down for a game?" And people know exactly what I'm talking about, and they'll know how to make a game happen.

skorczeny
29-07-2015, 17:34
Building an army with points.

Troops! Well, the designation units in specific force-organization type categories, where army building requires something like troops (i can accept exceptions - like unbound)

Bases matter. Round or square, large or small, but measuring from the base is a must.

Beppo1234
29-07-2015, 18:00
I wish we had the M characteristic back! Too many stupid named rules for simple movement mechanics.

insectum7
29-07-2015, 18:07
I wish we had the M characteristic back! Too many stupid named rules for simple movement mechanics.

I'm half and half on that. You'd need some of those special rules anyways for Jump Packs, Jet Pack moves, limitations of Cavalry and Bikes etc.

Beppo1234
29-07-2015, 18:29
I'm half and half on that. You'd need some of those special rules anyways for Jump Packs, Jet Pack moves, limitations of Cavalry and Bikes etc.

truth, but those can be really be covered by the rules for those bits of wargear, rather than universal rules. I also miss the differentiation instead of 6" base movement for everything. Movement was simpler, for me atleast, when it was move M+charge/run another M, Bikes 2M +charge M, Cav M+charge 2M. I never understood why they needed more names attached to them.

Poncho160
29-07-2015, 18:39
After a little thought I have changed my mind slightly. The only things about 40k that I would hate to see go are the background (first and foremost) and the use of a point system.

The background is what got us all into 40k and shouldn't be scrapped. The use of a points system just enables you to have a game without lots and lots of discussion before any game takes place.

Spiney Norman
29-07-2015, 19:54
1. Some official method of playing roughly balanced games without having to resort to external comp (preferably keep the points system)
2. The background setting (for example, on absolutely no account should the Emperor ever wake up)
3. The 'shades of grey' feel of the factions - no-one is really the 'good guys', they're just the 'evil guys' and the 'slightly less evil guys'

insectum7
29-07-2015, 20:52
The use of a points system just enables you to have a game without lots and lots of discussion before any game takes place.

Point values also provide a great way to interact with the product without another player. The practice of army building and squeezing utility out of a list has encouraged me to buy more models. Fact.

Althenian Armourlost
29-07-2015, 23:12
The points system.

I have memorised the points of the entire Eldar/Dark Eldar/Harlequin codex spectrum, and when I am running I mentally write/calculate army lists as a 'mantra' to help with focus and breathing.

If they took that out of 40k I'd have to actually listen to music while running, instead of mumbling about striking scorpions.

Orkusmorkus
29-07-2015, 23:19
The points system.

If they took that out of 40k I'd have to actually listen to music while running, instead of mumbling about striking scorpions.

Arrrgh! Get outta my head!

Harbinger
30-07-2015, 00:16
Everything that the original post stated; however, more important in my opinion is the background and feel of the game. What really distinguishes it for me from other settings is that it is humanity's last hour and humanity must resort to the most totalitarian and brutal regimes to stand a chance of seeing tomorrow. It is not Star Wars, Star Trek or any other setting. It is The Dark Millennium.

Ironbone
30-07-2015, 03:40
D6 dice system
Stremlined statline
Mariens beeing a GW posterboys
Guard sucking hard in close combat
War, war everywehre

Some things just never change.....

KurganFr
04-08-2015, 01:12
The background and the army building with points and force org charts, definitely, plus rolling lots of D6s. Oh, and the wackiness of 2nd Edition, where fluoro mohawks were a normal sight.

I like the concept of formations representing "real-world" forces, but I strongly dislike the confusing execution (e.g. my current all-comers Ultramarines army has a Demi-Company plus a small CAD because for some inexplicable reason I cannot attach a scout squad and a terminator squad to my demi-company, but I can attach a dreadnought?!). I would much prefer formations in the style of Flames of War, where you have some core units based on the type of formation plus a selection of support slots. This allows for a variety of armies and also helps balance uneven forces (e.g. infantry vs imperial knights) through the use of different scenarios.

Greavous
05-08-2015, 12:36
FOC - needs some work though.
Points - always adjusted anyway.
BIG THINGS! - its war in the year 40,000 expect to see mostrous mechanical creations.
Aliens - its space not just another country on earth.
Space marines and orks - i dont play either of them but THEY are 40k.
Choices choices choices - none of this AoS wysiwyg
rediculous amounts of D6 - i dont roll alot myself (tau) but i still enjoy seeing orks roll 48 D6 for one attack (and end up with 1 wound).

Banville
05-08-2015, 14:41
Bring the movement characteristic back. Also modifiers rather than cover saves. And finally abstract line of sight. The Psychic phase needs tidying up, as well.

Everything else is perfectly fine. Even the stupid AP system can stay as long as they don't butcher the fluff and introduce "mysterious" terrain to go with the already "mysterious" objectives.

All in all, 40k is in a much better place than WHFB, or whatever they want to call the new abomination. It doesn't need anything else. It doesn't need the timeline to advance. It doesn't need the Emperor to be revealed as Sigmar. It doesn't need Slaanesh to disappear.

My little herd of sacred cows seems to be plodding along the same track as everyone else's. The game is fine, apart from one or two personal tweaks. Everyone, I'm looking at you GW Corporate, should leave it be.

Non Draco Dormiens Titillandus.

lanrak
05-08-2015, 17:12
Hi folks.
I will assume we keep the same inspiring background!

From the game play of 3rd to 5th ed.(I gave up on GW rules before 6th and 7th ed.)

1)Using D6 (in more intuitive ways,)I do not believe using a D10 or D12 is needed .
(And D6 is practical if you want to roll loads of dice, and lots of 40k players like rolling buckets of dice!:D).

2)Using a three stage damage resolution.I would be happy enough with a roll to hit,roll to save then roll to wound though.(As it follows the intuitive order of resolution.)

3)Having clearly defined player turns.
(Not necessarily players taking complete game turns though.)

If the rules deliver clearly defined instructions to play the game, and the game play delivers in game action in synergy with the background.
And there is enough balance for random pick up games, but enough diversity in the F.O.C to allow themed armies.

It would be well received rule set IMO.

EagleWarrior
05-08-2015, 19:45
For me it's all in the fluff and the models rather than the game system. When Epic Armageddon came out, it radically changed the game system but it still felt very 'Epicy' to my mind. I'd rather they didn't, I've spent a long time learning these rules, but I think it's the models and the grimdark setting we all know and love that makes it quintessentially 40k for me.

stainawarjar
06-08-2015, 03:22
Close combat being good. To bad it really isn't this edition.