PDA

View Full Version : Instant Death mechanic



Gaargod
09-01-2010, 23:57
One might well, looking at the new tyranid warriors for example, wonder if there's something a little screwy with the current mechanic for instant death. Basically, the problems i see are these:

> Eternal warrior. Too many things have it, and therefore don't care (force weapons are designed to gank daemons, but have no effect on them...)

> Ganking multi wound models without a chance, regardless of wounds, who probably don't deserve it (warriors being the best example here, similar with ogryns beforehand).


Now obviously, eternal warrior is needed, for the sense of epic character you try to get across. It would be rather funny to watch Calgar get splatted by a krak missle, but sort of avoid the point. Equally, daemon princes would become the instant S10 target.

So, i'd like to get your opinions on the matter. Basically, does instant death currently work, or would a different mechanic be better.




Personally, i'd recommend two seperate multiwound mechanics. I know a little more complicated, but...

Basically, seperate them into truly instant death things, i.e. zzap guns rolling box cars, force weapons, destroyer strength weapons, and weapons which are merely likely to do a lot of damage. So,

Instant Death: Remove this model from play if it fails all appropriate saves. (and use a clearly defined set of terms!)

Multiwound (X): Some weapons are particularly hard hitting and may do multiple wounds in a single hit. They may do a set multiple of wound, such as Multiwound (2), or a random number, such as Multiwound (D3).
Weapons which have a S value twice or more than the T value of the target automatically do Multiwound (2). If they already have the Multiwound (X) rule, double any of the multiwounds (i.e. a gun may be S8 Multiwound (D3). If it wounds a space marine chapter master, it will do D3x2 wounds to him, not 2D3).
Finally, any model with the Eternal Warrior rule may ignore any and all Multiwound hits. It just won't die that easily!

Feel no pain would probably need a bit of altering, but i think that would work. 2 wound models die from double strength, whereas 3 wound will survive. Just. Also improves force weapons to being useful again, able to instagib anything that gets in their way (fair enough, as its on an IC - if you didn't kill it, its your own lookout).

Lord Malorne
10-01-2010, 00:02
Never really thought of it, high strength weapons doing D3/6 wounds may be better instead.

Wounds are not exactly what a model can take before it dies, I mean it is not as if the carnifex is shambling forward and takes hit after hit of lascannon fire in its head and keeps coming, they just represent how hard it is to kill outright, they could be 'winged' or missing an arm and so on, I am sure like in starship troopers a grenade down a carnies mouth would do the job nicely (I'd hope!) but that can't really be represented in game.

Lord Malorne

Corrode
10-01-2010, 00:39
Instant Death should remain as-is. It's a useful way to threaten characters who might otherwise storm through units, especially since in the current edition the power fist can be hidden on a Sergeant or something. It also gives characters an additional reason to hide in units rather than advancing solo. Eternal Warrior is fine, too - it's almost entirely applied to characters with a strong fluff reason for having it, and to those characters where having them popped as soon as they come within range of a combat would be egregiously bad. It's also a lot rarer than people like to make out - besides Daemons and Space Wolf HQs with Saga of the Bear, it's entirely restricted to special characters as of next week.

That said, I would untie Force Weapons from Instant Death. Instead I would adopt the 'removed from play' language used in JotWW and Vibrocannon - Force Weapons are supposed to be Daemon-killers, after all. They're also a lot rarer than pound-a-penny power fists, which is a balancing factor by itself.

azimaith
10-01-2010, 00:48
The problem with powerfists hiding is that warhammer 40k is a heroic fantasy game where heros are supposed to be leading the charge not cowering in a large unit hoping they don't get splattered by a nameless sergeant.

The simplest way to "fix" instant death would be to reduce the number of strength 8 weapons. IE powerfists give +3 strength, or simply making instant death be a number of wounds (D3+1)

WinglessVT2
10-01-2010, 00:51
It works the way it should, but models with 'eternal warrior' need to be a lot rarer.

Jackmojo
10-01-2010, 01:04
My thought on it are similar to azimaith's, the problem is Instant Death in close combat.

My simplest fix would be to drop Eternal Warrior from the game, and make close combat wound allocation work more like shooting, but treat each side of the combat as if they were one big unit for wound allocation. So Independant Characters would be as 'invisible' as everyone else. This wouldn't help Ogryns or Warriors, but what does really.

Jack

sigur
10-01-2010, 01:06
The instakill mechanism is a crude but efficient way to handle over the top characters which were supposed to be avoided at all costs in 3rd edition (early at least). This eternal warrior thing that's going on is pretty odd but I don't think they overuse it too much. Dunno about codex daemons so.

Corrode
10-01-2010, 01:23
It works the way it should, but models with 'eternal warrior' need to be a lot rarer.

There's a single army (which arguably shouldn't be getting splatted since it's a physical manifestation of Warp energy) and a handful of characters (iirc, Calgar, Lysander, Ghazgkull, Abbadon, Yarrick, Phoenix Lords, SW Lords with Saga of the Bear). I'd call that pretty damn rare.

bigcheese76
10-01-2010, 01:42
The instant kill rules work quite well, and is really quite realistic.

Although too many characters are being given the Eternal Warrior rule.

LonelyPath
10-01-2010, 02:19
The instant kill rules work quite well, and is really quite realistic.

Although too many characters are being given the Eternal Warrior rule.

What that says...

Also, at least for the moment DH FW bypass EW, which makes me happy.

azimaith
10-01-2010, 02:57
The instant kill rules work quite well, and is really quite realistic.

Although too many characters are being given the Eternal Warrior rule.

The problem is its realistic in a way that detracts from 40k fluff. Leaders of armies aren't really supposed to be getting mushed on the first squad they hit with a powerfist hidden away in it.

lordmoon
10-01-2010, 03:10
I do enjoy polls

FailSafe07
10-01-2010, 04:21
What about changing ID to 2xS+1, that way, you would need at least S9 to instagib characters?

I also like the idea of simplifying Force Weapons so that they ignore things like the CD's special rules making them immune to ID.

azimaith
10-01-2010, 04:33
If instant death rules were changed to "Strength more than double their toughness." It would work out alright as well but then things like warriors couldn't manage T5 and the like.

We really need to target specifically, the things that tend to cause ID problems, mainly, powerfists hidden in squads.

Devil Tree
10-01-2010, 04:56
While it does detract some from the heroic fantasy aspect, it adds to the grimdark aspect. It’s also common sense that simple meat and bone won’t survive against something designed to take out main battle tanks. While it’s not a perfect mechanic, you have to draw the line somewhere. It happens to be a lot better for game play than what would happen in real life. Any big shot characters would catch a bullet to the forehead early on, mostly from dressing up in bling and not wearing a helmet.

azimaith
10-01-2010, 05:04
40k is all about heroic fantasy. The "grimdark" is the state of humankind and the galaxy and the *namelss and faceless* billions who die in wars. Its not about Marneus Calgar getting skewered and killed by an avatar, much less a Krak missile or heroic captains, veterans of a thousand battles being smushed by some random sergeant with a glowing hand.

Common sense is not a strong argument for instant death in 40k because sense isn't a major factor in the background. Its not applied to helmets or having giant banners signaling you out to your enemy as important. Its not applied to the idea of flying in on jetpacks with chain saw swords, painting your armor bright blue, or humans strangle twelve foot long snakes with their giant biceps. Heroic fantasy trumps common sense and grimdark combat everywhere else in 40k but in Instant Death which is exacerbated by the high number of instant death weapons available in the form of powerfists compared to the number of instant death weapons available in special forms.

Look at what the sergeant powerfist has done, everyone we want to ID with force weapons and the like is generally immune because they're T4 and thats because random sergeants would cream them. We don't even like to take powerfists on our HQ models because we would then strike at the same time as the dreaded sergeant powerfist which stood a very good chance of just obliterating said HQ flat out.

vladsimpaler
10-01-2010, 05:30
How it used to work: Each weapon had a damage statistic. There was no instant death.

So most weapons were Damage 1, like all weapons are now.

Of course, vehicles had wounds back then so Multi-Meltas did 4d6 damage. Yep. 4d6 wounds. Get hit by one, you are deader than dead.

Of course this was removed with blandtastic 3rd so instant death had to be removed.

My opinion? Remove instant death. Make all weapons have a damage statistic. It's just as easy to know instead of 'vulnerable to blasts' and 'eternal warrior' and all of the exceptions and stuff.

Ork X
10-01-2010, 05:50
Instant death should be changed to above double toughness. Strength 8 weapons are getting cheaper and it's way to easy to instant kill average toughness 4 models.....

Gorak
10-01-2010, 06:24
I like the idea of going to multiwound instead on instadeath as per fanatasy, ie a cannon does d3wounds ect.

Hakar
10-01-2010, 07:26
The only problem I have with Instant Death is that it ignores certain increases to Toughness (like the Mark of Nurgle) for some reason.

Dangersaurus
10-01-2010, 09:22
I'm fine with the way it is, but also would be fine if it became D6 wounds.

Deetwo
10-01-2010, 09:34
It's fine, though this double + 1 thing could work as well...
It would make T5 instantly a lot tougher, not sure if that's a good or bad thing.

Either way, some sort of mechanic that threatens multiwound models needs to be there really.. Otherwise units like Nobs would get completely out of hand.

But, isn't it a bit silly trying to claim that EW is in some way common?
Or even more that having 2nd ed style damage stat would make things more like FB, considering Fantasy has killing blow as well?

One thing that could be considered is a version of FBs Killing Blow though, so that ID is not automatic but dependant on the wound roll somehow... Similar to how Skulltakers rending works.

LKHERO
10-01-2010, 10:02
Should be D3 wounds.

Murdoch
10-01-2010, 10:08
The single change that is required is required to Force weapons IMHO.

Move the BRB wording to the DH wording and I think most people would be happy.

Cheers

M

azimaith
10-01-2010, 12:03
Should be D3 wounds.

D3+1, you should manage at least 2 wounds from it otherwise its not really "instant death" so to speak.

Earthbeard
10-01-2010, 12:59
It works the way it should, but models with 'eternal warrior' need to be a lot rarer.

Or in the least more balanced between armies.

Poor Typhus and his inate fear of Krak Missiles :(

Finnith
10-01-2010, 13:12
I wouldnt mind a fantasy style "Look Out Sir! Argghhh" rule for shooting/combat for ICs but only for insta death wounds. Against hidden fists most of the time only 1 would will get through to make the kill. If the test is passed then 1 model from the unit is removed so something is still killed.

Niibl
10-01-2010, 13:30
Drop it and bring back those multiple wounds weapons.
Sure, you would have to stay away from the huge number of different dice rolls used in the 2nd edition so it should be d3 and d6 only for a selected number of weapons.
In 2nd edition it really was quite messy and needed streamlining but
IMHO they threw out the bayby with the bath water and now tinker on this system they shouldn't have installed in the first place.
The same goes for fantasy where they actually still have weapons doing multiple wounds.

Yamunori
10-01-2010, 13:41
I like polls.

Threeshades
10-01-2010, 13:55
Instant Death works quite nicely, but there are some problems, like Eternal Warrior spam that comes to such extents, that it makes little sense to spend points on Instant Death effects, because too many models are just going to ignore it.
Also so some units again die too easily from double-strength caused Instant Death, for example most multi-wound tyranid creatures (after Synapse has apparently been changed to not give Eternal Warrior anymore), though the high mortality could have been easily fixed by giving them +1 T instead of +1 Wound compared to the last codex.

nightgant98c
11-01-2010, 20:43
I think the rule could use some improvement. I'm not sure what that would be, but I don't like how it's all or nothing.

Grax
11-01-2010, 20:57
I think there are too many close combat attacks with strength 8 or higher right now. It's too easy to cause instant death against expensive HQs, and no easy way around it.

That said, I think the rule itself works fine, it's just that some armies, especially ones with older codexes, don't seem very well prepared for it. It wasn't a big deal in earlier editions, when powerfists/klaws were rare, but now they're everywhere.

Count de Monet
11-01-2010, 21:18
I think Instant Death on its own is fine, it's the introduction of another mechanic (Eternal Warrior) specifically to counter it that is either overused or simply not needed.

There's already multiple mechanics for avoiding ID, no need to introduce yet another one.

Something is really tough and shouldn't be instakilled by a krak missile or powerfist? Make it T5 and adjust cost accordingly. Something is incredibly tough and shouldn't be instakilled by a Demolisher round? Make it T6 and adjust cost accordingly.

Worried about characters getting sniped from across the field by lascannons? Put them in transports. Put them in squads. Put them in cover. Keep them out of LOS. Kill the stuff than can ID them.

Close combat? Use their usually high initiative and attacks by their escort to do enough wounds that the enemy PF is at least at risk. Don't assault/avoid enemies that you can't do that to. If someone, even Calgar assaults a trio of Carnifexes or a ten-strong meganob squad solo, he *should* get pulled down. Besides, the IC is almost certainly going to have a higher WS than the enemy, so only gets hit on 4+ at best, then still (small, admittedly) chance that fist will fail to wound, then the IC gets an invulnerable save.

If characters still need to be tougher in assaults, improve the invulnerables of those that aren't already at 3++.

Edit: I also find it interesting that when ID comes up, so many of the complaints are about S8 weapons. There are still a number of armies for whom ID comes into play for characters starting at S6...

Plastic Parody
11-01-2010, 21:21
I think the biggest beef people have is the hidden powerfist type attach taking out characters in close combat. In 2nd ed if a character was hit by a lascannon etc it would almost always be toast, even heavy bolters did D4 damage. On the other hand hardly any ccw weapons did multiple wounds.

Simple fix would be leave as is for ranged weapons and change to something like what the op said for close combat?

Treadhead_1st
11-01-2010, 21:21
What about (stealing Khan's weapon for a second) altering Instant Death to something like "Any weapon of Strength greater than or equal to 2x the targets Toughness instantly removes the model from play if a 6 to-wound is rolled, no saves allowed.

That way standard attacks still get deflected by Invulnerable Saves (which most of the "vulnerable to instant-death" characters have), but Captain Bob doesn't get splatted by the first Sergeant unless the owning player gets lucky. This way 1/6 wounds splats the Character outright, regardless of 3++ abuse and so on, making the 1/6 chance slightly easier to take for the owning player compared to the 100% of wounds that it is now (dependant on Inv. naturally).

Alternatively just modify the high-end of the WS chart - WS3 vs WS4 shouldn't be too huge a difference, for balance reasons, but WS4 vs WS6 should be a lot harder to hit than it currently is - even moreso for WS4 vs WS7. That way you are suffering less wounds, and you (usually) still have an Invulnerable Save to fall back on as well.

druchii
11-01-2010, 21:26
Really all these Instant Death Polls devolve into "I don't like Eternal Warrior, WAH!"


There's a single army (which arguably shouldn't be getting splatted since it's a physical manifestation of Warp energy) and a handful of characters (iirc, Calgar, Lysander, Ghazgkull, Abbadon, Yarrick, Phoenix Lords, SW Lords with Saga of the Bear). I'd call that pretty damn rare.

QFT.
Seriously, EW over-saturated? Do people even play the same game I do?


The single change that is required is required to Force weapons IMHO.

Move the BRB wording to the DH wording and I think most people would be happy.

Cheers

M

A lot of people have noted how Force Weapons have relatively little use on demons, and I agree, seems kinda funky. I still think they should function justlike witchblades/runic weapons do against demons: Wound on a 2+ (possibly just against demons).

It'd make force weapons relatively different, and still uphold their "effect" on demons.

Case solved.

d

Deetwo
11-01-2010, 21:31
I still think they should function justlike witchblades/runic weapons do against demons: Wound on a 2+ (possibly just against demons).

Runepriests already went back to that :) Not that they are much use in combat against Daemons, but still.. It might be an indication of an incoming change in that regard.

Shadowfax
11-01-2010, 21:33
While it does detract some from the heroic fantasy aspect, it adds to the grimdark aspect. It’s also common sense that simple meat and bone won’t survive against something designed to take out main battle tanks. While it’s not a perfect mechanic, you have to draw the line somewhere. It happens to be a lot better for game play than what would happen in real life. Any big shot characters would catch a bullet to the forehead early on, mostly from dressing up in bling and not wearing a helmet.
But you're buying into the assumption that every "hit" is a direct hit. This doesn't make a lot of sense, especially when you're imagining an anti-tank weapon (eg. krak missile, lascannon) firing at an infantry model. A real world analogy would be trying to snipe a mobile, cover-hugging enemy with a Javelin missile. In these cases you're not counting on a direct hit to kill the target, it's shrapnel and concussive force that deals the killing blow.

It's less of a problem to reconcile when the weapons in questions are close combat attacks, but even then a "hit" is not necessarily "the best hit possible" or else insta-killing would have nothing to do with the target's T (eg. an Avatar could reasonably insta-kill a Carnifex by lopping it's head off in one magnificent blow).

druchii
11-01-2010, 21:51
Runepriests already went back to that :) Not that they are much use in combat against Daemons, but still.. It might be an indication of an incoming change in that regard.

That's what I said already. Lately it seems like you've been following me around, trying to out-pedant me, saying the exact same thing I have :(

And four (or is it three? I can't remember if runic weapons are two handed now or not) attacks hitting Blood Crushers on 3s and wounding them on 2s aren't "much use in combat" huh? You know because going from hitting on 4s and wounding on 5s, and giving them a 3+, instead of a 5+ is such a tiny difference.

...

d

Deetwo
11-01-2010, 22:09
Lately it seems like you've been following me around, trying to out-pedant me, saying the exact same thing I have

Duh, busted :D

(Didn't actually notice the runic weapon part there, heh.)


And four (or is it three? I can't remember if runic weapons are two handed now or not) attacks hitting Blood Crushers on 3s and wounding them on 2s aren't "much use in combat" huh? You know because going from hitting on 4s and wounding on 5s, and giving them a 3+, instead of a 5+ is such a tiny difference.

One handed, so four attacks on the charge.. Both WS5, I4.
So you do two wounds (well three if you wasted points on the necklace) on average on the crushers and get slaughtered in return, and that's only assuming the crushers didn't charge and hit first :)

Damage potential is higher, sure. But runepriests are still only 2 wound t4, i4 models with no invulnerable save. Most of the time close combat is suicide.

the_picto
11-01-2010, 22:10
People are aware that there are other races than marines, right? I ask because of all this talk of S=2T+1. The only people affected by this are T4 and 5 models. So marines mostly, with a smattering of other units. IG and eldar would still be just as screwed as they are now.

Anyway, I like the idea of double strength weapons doing D3 wounds. Perhaps triple strength weapons could do D6, yes I know that mostly just lets lascannons gank farseers etc.

druchii
11-01-2010, 22:24
Duh, busted :D

(Didn't actually notice the runic weapon part there, heh.)



One handed, so four attacks on the charge.. Both WS5, I4.
So you do two wounds (well three if you wasted points on the necklace) on average on the crushers and get slaughtered in return, and that's only assuming the crushers didn't charge and hit first :)

Damage potential is higher, sure. But runepriests are still only 2 wound t4, i4 models with no invulnerable save. Most of the time close combat is suicide.


I know this isn't a thread about Rune Priests VS Bloodcrushers...but I can't resist.. (I guess that's my clan weakness!)

"Waste" is a strong word for an item that lets you include two rune priests, both with birds (I tend to use the choosers a lot, since I've always played most RP powers need a roll to hit...but that's another thread! :) ) and hit things on 3s.

Oh, and quit pretending that the RP is by himself, and that the BloodCrushers won't be effected bu Murderous Hurricane (I swear I'm not trying to pick a fight!) and so will strike last.

Kinda On Topic:
Isn't it funny that I just ignored things like IG and Eldar in the whole Instant Death thing? I guess I just assumed they were so sissy that anything witha nasty S was going to paste them anyway...2xt+1 would be really nice for my autarch and farseer though...No more worries about allocating those multilaser/scatter laser/shuriken/whatever s6 on them.

However, I still think the 2xt mechanic works just fine, really the whole force weapon needs to be wiggled a bit, that's all.

d
ps. keep it up, I need the practice! :skull:

brightblade
11-01-2010, 22:26
The only weapon that should instakill anything, including big guns, is a force weapon and then only after both sides have rolled a d6 and added their Ld. If the wielder of said fw's result is higher target dies.

Things like powerfist already have a great bonus, ie; double strength and power weapon, instakill in most cases just makes sniping characters in cc too easy.

Let the hero be a hero, let him have all his wounds. Your general should be able to take some hard hits,even from ordnance. He is a HERO for Hobbes' sake, yet how many times has your gloriously modelled leader died to a common nob with a claw? I am bored of it. It happens nearly every game, unless you take an eternal warrior, then you get called cheesy. For example, marine captain vs warboss, similar points value, should be a great moment in a game. A fight either could win. Instead of being epic it is always; Captain strikes first, causes one, maybe two wounds , Warboss uses powerclaw instakills marine, fight over, no challenge, no contest, no glory..... dull. Same applies to Autarch's, IG commanders, everybody.

Let heroes have the opportunity to be heroes. End the insanity of Instant Death.

The same applies to all multi wound models. They have multiple wounds for a reason and you pay the points for them.

By the way I have no fists in my usual lists (marine or eldar)

squeekenator
11-01-2010, 22:46
The instant death mechanic is fine. The only problem is that GW pays too much attention to the whiny Ultramarine fanboys who throw a tantrum when their supa awsum Marnius Clagar dies because they thought he could charge in and wipe an army by himself. Yes, a hidden powerfist can one-shot your commander. So what? That only happens if you charge him in by himself. Contrary to popular belief, it is possible to prevent the powerfist sergeant from attacking your IC, you just have to stop him from getting into base-to-base contact by having a squad around to shield him. Eternal Warrior is ok on a very small number of models (C'Tan, Pheonix Lords and Abaddon), other than that it's an unnecessary mechanic that just encourages herohammer. Daemon Princes and Greater Daemons should all be T6+, so you can instakill them with force weapons and not much else, other multiwound Daemons should go down to a meltagun as easily as regular multiwound models.

There really isn't any need to introduce a random number of wounds from ID-causing attacks. For starters, it leaves a lot to chance, and there's enough of a random element in the game already, but the main problem is that instant death works fine as it is.

Khorneflakes
11-01-2010, 22:48
the best solution is this:

make ID more than double T and combine multi wound rolls

space marine commander, Darius gets hit by a krak missile (S8). He is (T4). It is not more than double his T, so if he fails his save he takes D3 wounds from the krak.

space marine commander, Darius is then hit by a lascannon (S9). if he fails his save he is instandly killed and removed from play!

space marine commander, Virgilos has EW and is hit by a krak missile (S8). He is T4. It is not more than double his T, so if he fails his save he will take 1 W from the krak.

space marine commander, Virgilos has EW and is hit by a lascannon (S9). if he fails his save he takes d3 wounds

force weapons, on a successful psychic test vs Darius after wounding him will remove him from play if he fails any save he is aloud

force weapons, on a successful psychic test vs Virgilos after wounding him will inflict d3 wounds on him if he fails any save he is aloud

Krovin-Rezh
11-01-2010, 22:51
D3 wounds for every instant death unsaved.

Eternal Warrior causes ID to roll 2D3 and pick the lowest.

That's how it should be.

Interesting that over 75% of the voters here say the rule could use some changes. :)

GrogDaTyrant
11-01-2010, 22:53
Yes, Instant Death works fine... Eternal Warriors just needs to be limited to named HQs of considerable renown... I'd say no more than 1 HQ in any given codex should have it. Developers that are giving it out like candy (*cough* Space Wolves *cough*) should be keel-hauled.

brightblade
11-01-2010, 22:57
The problem with 'hidden' fists is that they remove chance, as do meltaguns and ordnance. They just kill if you fail one inv save. Given the amount of melta, fists or ordnance, the future is no place to be a multi wound model. I find that boring and a little sad :(

Voss
11-01-2010, 23:02
Yes, Instant Death works fine... Eternal Warriors just needs to be limited to named HQs of considerable renown... I'd say no more than 1 HQ in any given codex should have it. Developers that are giving it out like candy (*cough* Space Wolves *cough*) should be keel-hauled.

Agree, mostly. I'd rather eternal warrior went away altogether, but really, Phil Kelly is the only recent codex author who over did it. For all the OTT stuff in the Guard and Tyranid codex, the Cruddace actually went fairly light on EW (just Yarrick, I believe)

Strip in from daemons, and that book is a lot more reasonable too. (Good to excessive invulnerable saves _and_ EW was a bit too much).

naloth
11-01-2010, 23:08
I would do away with EW and just give a higher T to the things that should be able to take the hits. Marine heroes - even legendary ones - really don't deserve the ability to fight after bathing in a melta bath. If the invuln fails, they should be incapacitated. Even so, I probably wouldn't worry about it if it was just restricted to special characters.

The other day my Defiler went 3 rounds with a SW Saga of Bear (EW) on a thunderwolf wielding a Storm Shield. His rending kicked in before I was able to inflict 3 wounds past his 3++.

azimaith
12-01-2010, 00:25
I would do away with EW and just give a higher T to the things that should be able to take the hits. Marine heroes - even legendary ones - really don't deserve the ability to fight after bathing in a melta bath. If the invuln fails, they should be incapacitated. Even so, I probably wouldn't worry about it if it was just restricted to special characters.

The other day my Defiler went 3 rounds with a SW Saga of Bear (EW) on a thunderwolf wielding a Storm Shield. His rending kicked in before I was able to inflict 3 wounds past his 3++.

I don't get it, isn't this supposed to be what happens in 40k based on fiction? Heros duking it out against things that should in reality, smush them into a greasy paste, that is if they had not already been shot through the skull because they refused to wear a helmet?

Theres nothing wrong with a heroic fantasy game having heroic fantasy.

Some players don't like kicking immersion in the nuts to place their IC microscopically out of base contact with a powerfist, some want to have their hero lead the charge into the enemy without having to be mortally afraid sgt red shirt has a glowing fist.

D3+1 wounds or something similar works fine for instant death mechanics, the whole all or nothing mechanic doesn't need to be on everything with double strength.

What background we would have if it followed the rules.

"Cato Siccarius, First captain of the Ultramarines barreled into the traitorous Word Bearers his blade raised to strike when he suddenly his heart stopped in his throat. The sergeant of this squad had a glowing fist. As Siccarius locked eyes with the fiendish traitor he felt his armor grow damp "Blast it! I'll have to change my underwear again!" Unfortunately for him, he would get no chance, the traitor marine swung wildly at the terrified Captain scooping him up in his clawed hand and crushing him like a roach. As he died Cato looked over to see his beloved Chapter Master Marneus Calgar sipping some tea as another Traitorous Sergeant bashed him over the head with an even larger, even shinier fist. Somehow, he didn't seem to mind."


The instant death mechanic is fine. The only problem is that GW pays too much attention to the whiny Ultramarine fanboys who throw a tantrum when their supa awsum Marnius Clagar dies because they thought he could charge in and wipe an army by himself.

Nice, fanboy hate and inaccuracy in one paragraph. Marneus Calgar is EW so he doesn't cause anyone to throw tantrums about instant death splattering him.



Yes, a hidden powerfist can one-shot your commander. So what? That only happens if you charge him in by himself.

Or in a group.



Contrary to popular belief, it is possible to prevent the powerfist sergeant from attacking your IC, you just have to stop him from getting into base-to-base contact by having a squad around to shield him.

Hah! If the IC is surrounded by his own troops he can't attack! Is that your solution "If you don't want an IC crushed by a sergeant just make sure he never attacks!" All the enemy needs is a powefist within 2" of any other friendly model in base to base with the character to smush him into paste.

Heres another idea along that idea: If you have a problem with Ethereals being killed because they have no armor just make sure they spend the entire game behind 100% blocking terrain, then you only need to worry about outflanking!

Perhaps instead of giving ogryns toughness 5 we should have just added a little note stating: "If you don't want ogryns to suffer instant death just keep them completely out of los and never charge into combat!"



Eternal Warrior is ok on a very small number of models (C'Tan, Pheonix Lords and Abaddon), other than that it's an unnecessary mechanic that just encourages herohammer. Daemon Princes and Greater Daemons should all be T6+, so you can instakill them with force weapons and not much else, other multiwound Daemons should go down to a meltagun as easily as regular multiwound models.

Other than their invulnerable saves? EW is the least of a daemons concerns.



There really isn't any need to introduce a random number of wounds from ID-causing attacks. For starters, it leaves a lot to chance, and there's enough of a random element in the game already, but the main problem is that instant death works fine as it is.
Uh, this entire game is based on rolling dice, if your worried about random elements you could try chess. Instant death is not fine as it is, it marginalizes the role of HQs and heroic characters in a game based on heroic fantasy thus detracting from the immersion and in my opinion, fun.

Fell
12-01-2010, 17:51
An alternative to the multiwound idea could be to impose some form of toughness test on anybody hit by a ID weapon.

For examble, if hit by a weapon that causes ID roll under your T to avoid ID effect.

That would make SM characters 50% immune to ID and larger creatures progressively more ressiliant.

If this test only applies to double S, then force weapons would work fine. Especially if EW just make you autopass the test.

Lordsaradain
12-01-2010, 18:34
I'm not a fan of the whole instant death mechanic at all, I'd like to see it removed, and monsters that are too hard too kill should have less wounds.

naloth
12-01-2010, 18:41
Some players don't like kicking immersion in the nuts to place their IC microscopically out of base contact with a powerfist, some want to have their hero lead the charge into the enemy without having to be mortally afraid sgt red shirt has a glowing fist.

Why are SW heroes more heroic than SM heroes or even 'Nid Warriors? We all want them to be able to take advantage of the wounds they have. It seems unfair that one army gets to be heroic without regard to realism while other armies are hardly penalized by having to suffer realistic consequences.

Deetwo
12-01-2010, 18:55
Why does everything have to have a damn fluff reason?
Just because SW has more tough guys doesn't mean they are more or less "heroic" than Smurfs.

Some things have EW, most things don't. It's an internal balance more than anything else.

naloth
12-01-2010, 19:05
Why does everything have to have a damn fluff reason?
Just because SW has more tough guys doesn't mean they are more or less "heroic" than Smurfs.

I'm neutral about what the fluff says. You can invent any fluff to support or disregard the rules.



Some things have EW, most things don't. It's an internal balance more than anything else.
Sure, if EW seemed to be applied in a consistent manner or even at a reasonable cost. Right now it seems to be more of a cheap advantage or freebie that GW throws at whatever they want to be "heroic".

druchii
12-01-2010, 19:44
I'm neutral about what the fluff says. You can invent any fluff to support or disregard the rules.


Sure, if EW seemed to be applied in a consistent manner or even at a reasonable cost. Right now it seems to be more of a cheap advantage or freebie that GW throws at whatever they want to be "heroic".

You're joking, right?

How is 35pts cheap or free?

How can you possibly think that things like Eternal Warrior are NOT factored into the costs of models like Logan or Marneus?

Heck, I still think people have an inflated sense of how much EW gets around. Really we're looking at MAYBE one character from each codex, with typically very few things within a codex possessing said mechanic. And we've only got ONE army that's universally EW (rightfully so).

Oh, and whomever said demons need to be "toned down" should get some more games under his belt...That's like saying Eldar need to be more specialized or that Guard need more tanks.

d

squeekenator
12-01-2010, 21:41
Nice, fanboy hate and inaccuracy in one paragraph. Marneus Calgar is EW so he doesn't cause anyone to throw tantrums about instant death splattering him.

Way to miss the point. I'm saying that Calgar was given Eternal Warrior in the first place because people complained that Papa Smurf could go down in a single hit.


Hah! If the IC is surrounded by his own troops he can't attack! Is that your solution "If you don't want an IC crushed by a sergeant just make sure he never attacks!" All the enemy needs is a powefist within 2" of any other friendly model in base to base with the character to smush him into paste.

Have the character in base to base contact with one enemy model, and put a friend on either side of him, also in base to base with that model. The rest of the squad engages the enemy as they normally would. The hidden powerfist has to pile in and get into base to base contact with a squad member, and so he must attack the squad while the commander is free to do some damage.


Heres another idea along that idea: If you have a problem with Ethereals being killed because they have no armor just make sure they spend the entire game behind 100% blocking terrain, then you only need to worry about outflanking!

Well, yeah. Ethereals aren't exactly going to do much by charging into the battle, so that's what I'd do. Then again, I would never take an Ethereal because they're useless, so I haven't done much research into their rules or strategies for their use. Perhaps I'm missing something important here.


Perhaps instead of giving ogryns toughness 5 we should have just added a little note stating: "If you don't want ogryns to suffer instant death just keep them completely out of los and never charge into combat!"

Not really, since Ogryns don't have a squad to hide behind. Characters have nothing to fear from ID-causing shooting unless they're foolish enough to not be in a squad, and if they are in a squad you can either avoid the power fist or, if you're feeling really adventurous, you can keep your commander away from power fists until you've shot up the squad enough for you to kill the sergeant before he attacks. Seriously, it isn't that hard. If you want to field super-powerful characters who can wipe a squad in assault single-handedly, keep them the hell away from the weapon that was designed to counter them.


Other than their invulnerable saves? EW is the least of a daemons concerns.

Fine. They should go down to a meltagun as easily as another multiwound model with an invulnerable save. Now you're just nitpicking. It's obvious what I meant.


Uh, this entire game is based on rolling dice, if your worried about random elements you could try chess. Instant death is not fine as it is, it marginalizes the role of HQs and heroic characters in a game based on heroic fantasy thus detracting from the immersion and in my opinion, fun.

Yes, the entire game is based on rolling dice. That doesn't mean that adding more random elements would be an improvement. Do you think the game would be better if you moved a random distance in the open as well as in difficult terrain? Would you prefer that each player use a random number of points to make their army? Or that each model's profile was randomised? I'm not worried that one more minor random element would ruin the game, I just think it's and unnecessary and negative change.

Now, what you find fun is entirely subjective, so I won't argue with that. Nevertheless, 40K is not pure heroic fantasy. It's the mix of heroic Space Marines single-handedly holding off a huge Ork horde for weeks on end and the grimdark 'THEN EVERYONE DIED' that makes it a unique and interesting setting. Regardless of how immersive it may or may not be, which is something we can't argue about, the game itself benefits greatly from the various rules that prevent herohammer. Instant Death! is only one of them. Another is the rule that prevents stacking saves. If you want to see how heroic fantasy works in a game system, play WHFB and take a super-pimped Lord. The only way to stop him and a couple of his buddies from single-handedly wiping your army out is to throw your own super-pimped Lord at him and hope the dice are in your side. If you didn't spend 3/4 of your points on characters and monsters, you lose. It may seem SUPER COOL when Archaeon slaughters regiments single-handedly, but your opponent won't see it the same way, and neither will you after the novelty wears off. Heroic fantasy is good for games like Dungeons and Dragons where all the players are on one team fighting against nameless hordes of baddies. Games where one player has a mighty hero who mercilessly slaughters the other player's army without taking a scratch are terrible games.

naloth
12-01-2010, 21:54
How can you possibly think that things like Eternal Warrior are NOT factored into the costs of models like Logan or Marneus?

Considering Marneus better stats than a 'fex, gets to re-roll hits & wounds, buff his entire army, and can hide in a unit... Well, it's hard to see how he would be cheaper. Logan's much the same deal, if you want the package it's certainly a bargain for what it includes.



And we've only got ONE army that's universally EW (rightfully so).

Now that one army lost it as a universal ability. Note that most of the critters that had the ability actually went up in cost after they lost EW. Go figure.



Oh, and whomever said demons need to be "toned down" should get some more games under his belt...That's like saying Eldar need to be more specialized or that Guard need more tanks.

I dunno who said that. CD are a tier 3 army if you know you're facing them and perhaps a middle weight in an all-comers list.

azimaith
13-01-2010, 00:47
Way to miss the point. I'm saying that Calgar was given Eternal Warrior in the first place because people complained that Papa Smurf could go down in a single hit.

Perhaps you're missing the problem with the chapter master of the ultramarines dropping like a sack of potatos to a nameless sergeant with a glowing fist.



Have the character in base to base contact with one enemy model, and put a friend on either side of him, also in base to base with that model. The rest of the squad engages the enemy as they normally would. The hidden powerfist has to pile in and get into base to base contact with a squad member, and so he must attack the squad while the commander is free to do some damage.

The hidden powerfist merely has to be within 2" of the guy the IC is in base to base with to swing at him. Furthermore since every single model needs to do their best to move into base to base with an enemy model that is not already in base to base with another model you can only be on a side of the IC if you can also contact another enemy model that's not in base to base with any other model. In short, even if you could somehow manage to stay 2" away from the powerfist in a squad some 10 men large you'd need to be assaulting against a flat front to even go on either side of it.

I do not see the return of the "you can only fight models in base to base even if you are engaged with others" from 4th ed.



Well, yeah. Ethereals aren't exactly going to do much by charging into the battle, so that's what I'd do. Then again, I would never take an Ethereal because they're useless, so I haven't done much research into their rules or strategies for their use. Perhaps I'm missing something important here.

If an ethereal is completely out of LOS their special rule to for morale re-rolls doesn't work while their special rule causing the tau army to flee for their lives if he is killed still does. In short it makes them useless, just like surrounding an IC would.



Not really, since Ogryns don't have a squad to hide behind. Characters have nothing to fear from ID-causing shooting unless they're foolish enough to not be in a squad, and if they are in a squad you can either avoid the power fist or, if you're feeling really adventurous, you can keep your commander away from power fists until you've shot up the squad enough for you to kill the sergeant before he attacks.

Except that doesn't work because the attacks only on base to base if possible isn't there.



Seriously, it isn't that hard. If you want to field super-powerful characters who can wipe a squad in assault single-handedly, keep them the hell away from the weapon that was designed to counter them.
What happens when every squad they're made to assault *has* said weapons. Have you ever seen an ork mob *without* a power klaw? What should your sword wielding character do, spend his time chipping the paint on a rhino, skulking in the background so he doesn't get picked out by a mook? The point of a character is not to crap his pants over the mere concept of assaulting one of the myriad powerfist wielding squads.



Fine. They should go down to a meltagun as easily as another multiwound model with an invulnerable save. Now you're just nitpicking. It's obvious what I meant.

Its actually not. Daemons by their very nature are supposed to be hard to kill. Thats their background. Its like claiming a tau should have a weak gun because they kill your lasgun wielding guardsmen or that a monstrous creature should have toughness 1 because your lasguns bounce off them too much. Whether you like it or not background plays a huge part in army design and daemons all have EW because they aren't mortal creatures, they're made out of thoughts and emotions made into solid supernatural incarnations. In short, their freaking magic.



Yes, the entire game is based on rolling dice. That doesn't mean that adding more random elements would be an improvement. Do you think the game would be better if you moved a random distance in the open as well as in difficult terrain?

Depends on the way the game worked and how many dice you rolled. If the game was taking place on a high gravity world, yes, you could of course, reverse it for a low gravity world. Theres a million reasons why it could be used and a million why it shouldn't be. Randomness is not inherently good, as you are trying to claim i'm saying, but its not inherently *bad*.


Would you prefer that each player use a random number of points to make their army? Or that each model's profile was randomised? I'm not worried that one more minor random element would ruin the game, I just think it's and unnecessary and negative change.

Thats fine if you don't think a randomized wound system is not good for the game. I think it is because I see the game as a futuristic fantasy game with insane heroics and legendary warriors and I don't like seeing them squished consistently by sergeant Jenkins and his glowing hand.


Now, what you find fun is entirely subjective, so I won't argue with that. Nevertheless, 40K is not pure heroic fantasy. It's the mix of heroic Space Marines single-handedly holding off a huge Ork horde for weeks on end and the grimdark 'THEN EVERYONE DIED' that makes it a unique and interesting setting.

Theres alot of "and then eveyone died." for characters but not much "Holding off a huge ork horde for weeks in gameplay.



Regardless of how immersive it may or may not be, which is something we can't argue about, the game itself benefits greatly from the various rules that prevent herohammer. Instant Death! is only one of them. Another is the rule that prevents stacking saves.

Instant death is necessarily harsh in solving herohammer. A D3+1 system would be perfectly sufficient in preventing herohammer for mundane double strength instant death while force weapon style instant death would work as advertised.



If you want to see how heroic fantasy works in a game system, play WHFB and take a super-pimped Lord. The only way to stop him and a couple of his buddies from single-handedly wiping your army out is to throw your own super-pimped Lord at him and hope the dice are in your side. If you didn't spend 3/4 of your points on characters and monsters, you lose.

40k doesn't suffer from stacking saves making that nearly impossible.



It may seem SUPER COOL when Archaeon slaughters regiments single-handedly, but your opponent won't see it the same way, and neither will you after the novelty wears off.

I found it "super cool" when my friends deciever and my warboss duked it out necrodermis a powerklaw (back before the new codex) and the warboss against all odds managed to avoid getting splattered. The fight would have been alot lamer had the deciever hit and just cause the warboss to go out with a whimper.



Heroic fantasy is good for games like Dungeons and Dragons where all the players are on one team fighting against nameless hordes of baddies. Games where one player has a mighty hero who mercilessly slaughters the other player's army without taking a scratch are terrible games.
How in the world will a 4 wound hero slaughter an entire army taking D3+1 wounds from Sx2+ from high strength weapons? We can't make a consolidation conga line anymore.

Lets actually look at the suggestion in an actual game format.

Lets say were talking hero hammer and we have a Crazy Chapter Master of the Ultramarines "MARNEUS CAAAALGAR!" charging head first, alone, into a 10 man chaos marine squad. Lets also assume that this is in a situation *without* eternal warrior for both normal instant death as it is now, and d3+1 instant death as suggested.

Normal instant death, he charges in screaming, the 10 chaos marines get 10 attacks 18 attacks get leveled against calgar, causing 9 hits, 3-4 wounds, and one actual failed save. Then the powefist from the champion swings, hits once, wounds once, and now marneus calgar has a 50% chance of being killed outright due to his invulnerable save. Marneus Calgar is swinging at the same time making 6 attacks, 4 hits, and around 3 dead chaos marines.
Now theres 6 chaos marines and a aspiring champion and Marneus Calgar is 50% likely flat out *dead*.

This is basically an Epic fail.

Now do the same thing and use d3+1 wounds. Same as before except when the powerfist hits and deals 2-4 wounds, most likely dealing around 3 unless he makes his invulnerable save. Now Marneus Calgar is 50% likely to be gravely wounded and likely to die without support but isn't just smushed like a pathetic ant by a random chaos champion.
In both cases the chance of Marneus Calgar "herohammering" his way through another squad is nearly nill except in one if Marneus Calgar is with another squad he may well *live* through a fight with a powerfist while in the other, if the powerfist gets to swing its about a 50% chance hes dead on the ground.

With D3+1 wounds you don't even need Eternal Warrior for anything. You'll still ID normal mooks like nob bikers (only 2 wounds so you get no chance to not) and warriors (3 wounds, you're still pretty likely to drop one) but characters by dint of often having 4 wounds are likely to barely scrape by instead of face planting into a powerfist.

AFnord
13-01-2010, 01:03
I have not read the entire thread, so sorry if I repeat something that someone else has already said.
The changes I would like to see are:
-Force weapons: removes the model from the game (as a person suggested above)
-Eternal warrior: Takes 2 wounds instead of instantly getting killed instantly killed.

Simple and calgar & co won't die from the first powerfist guy they run into, but they will feel the pain.

druchii
13-01-2010, 04:48
Considering Marneus better stats than a 'fex, gets to re-roll hits & wounds, buff his entire army, and can hide in a unit... Well, it's hard to see how he would be cheaper. Logan's much the same deal, if you want the package it's certainly a bargain for what it includes.


Now that one army lost it as a universal ability. Note that most of the critters that had the ability actually went up in cost after they lost EW. Go figure.


I dunno who said that. CD are a tier 3 army if you know you're facing them and perhaps a middle weight in an all-comers list.

Marneus also cost a ton more than a carnifex (at the time he was created) and haven't 'fexes changed signifigantly since? And oldshcool implant attacks made a mockery of Marneus. I wish I could be more eloquent on the new 'nid book-there was a crowd around the FLGS's copy last night.

Oh, and marneus "buffs" his entire army with fearless, essentially. Oh wait, that's a completely different thread that completely misses the point...

I doubt anyone with a sane mind would call Marneus a "bargain" and Logan really only gets taken for his wolf-wing ability, I doubt you'll see such a "bargain" being included in many other armies.

Tyranid MCs went up in cost because ALL MCs are going up in cost. Compare a Chaos Demon Demon Prince to the same Chaos Space Marine Demon Prince. Heck, I'll do it for you:

Chaos Demon Prince: 130 with wings.

Chaos DEMONS Demon Prince:190.

60 points more for the EXACT same thing. Now obviously Demons get deep strike (would YOU say that it's worth that much?) and a bunch of other things, but the point stands:

MCs are just going up in price. Period.

Eternal Warrior is a trap argument, people say it's over-used, but it really isn't. It makes me miss the days people complained too many armies were getting rending.

d

PS:If you can't be bothered to read every post in a thread, or do it thorougly I can give you a hint about where this was said:


Agree, mostly. I'd rather eternal warrior went away altogether, but really, Phil Kelly is the only recent codex author who over did it. For all the OTT stuff in the Guard and Tyranid codex, the Cruddace actually went fairly light on EW (just Yarrick, I believe)

Strip in from daemons, and that book is a lot more reasonable too. (Good to excessive invulnerable saves _and_ EW was a bit too much).
On page 3.

naloth
13-01-2010, 05:24
<snip>
I doubt anyone with a sane mind would call Marneus a "bargain" and Logan really only gets taken for his wolf-wing ability, I doubt you'll see such a "bargain" being included in many other armies.

Having seen both on the table, I can safely say that neither are bad package deals. They tend to define your army but they are cheaper than you would expect for the abilities they bring. Marneus is effective a MC with his 4+ invul and 5 S8 attacks that re-roll any failed wounds. His army buff isn't just fearless either. His SMs can choose the result of any morale check they want.



Tyranid MCs went up in cost because ALL MCs are going up in cost. Compare a Chaos Demon Demon Prince to the same Chaos Space Marine Demon Prince. Heck, I'll do it for you:

Chaos Demon Prince: 130 with wings.

Chaos DEMONS Demon Prince:190.

Perhaps you have a different CD codex? The heavy support DP is 80 points base (30 cheaper than the CSM DP) and only 150 with wings. The winged DP from either book costs less than the base cost of any of the MCs in the 'Nid book.



PS:If you can't be bothered to read every post in a thread, or do it thorougly I can give you a hint about where this was said:

I agreed that CD wasn't overpowered with or without EW. Why would I go back to look up something *you* didn't care enough to properly attribute that I really didn't care about or disagree with?

druchii
13-01-2010, 06:31
Having seen both on the table, I can safely say that neither are bad package deals. They tend to define your army but they are cheaper than you would expect for the abilities they bring. Marneus is effective a MC with his 4+ invul and 5 S8 attacks that re-roll any failed wounds. His army buff isn't just fearless either. His SMs can choose the result of any morale check they want.


Perhaps you have a different CD codex? The heavy support DP is 80 points base (30 cheaper than the CSM DP) and only 150 with wings. The winged DP from either book costs less than the base cost of any of the MCs in the 'Nid book.


I agreed that CD wasn't overpowered with or without EW. Why would I go back to look up something *you* didn't care enough to properly attribute that I really didn't care about or disagree with?

A few things:

I wouldn't call either Calgar or Logan a "bargain" and keep in mind Calgar doesn't get a bonus for having two power fists (if you want to get technical he's got a power sword that denies him that extra attack) and as an "MC" he's remarkably not tough (4 vs 6) and still relatively slow (although there are a lot of "slow" MCs). Don't forget he strikes at I1.

While Calgar's ability does grant squads virtual immunity to Ld based tests outside of combat, I don't see that as that big a deal, as most marine squads will be rolling on 9s and ATSKNF is pretty boss...

I think you DO have a completely different codex than I do:
A "base" Chaos Demons Demon Prince is indeed 30 pts cheaper than the "base" Chaos Space Marine Demon Prince, but is actually 140pts with wings, not 150 as you attribute. You're also obviously forgetting both Iron Hide and Unholy Might which bring the Chaos Demons Demon Prince up to equal stats as the Chaos Space Marine Demon Prince. My origional calculations (it'll be hard for you to double check, though, since you have a different codex than I) stand correct. It was apparently my fault for not explicitly stating I was comparing both units DIRECTLY, on an equal stat-line.

Finally: you obviously DO care who said "that" because of this:

I dunno who said that. CD are a tier 3 army if you know you're facing them and perhaps a middle weight in an all-comers list.

I was merely giving you a chance to satisfy your own question, giving you a moment to be proactive.

d

ps. I thought a Tervigon was about 150pts, isn't that the same cost as "your" codex demons' demon prince with wings?

Fell
13-01-2010, 12:33
Tyranid MCs went up in cost because ALL MCs are going up in cost. Compare a Chaos Demon Demon Prince to the same Chaos Space Marine Demon Prince. Heck, I'll do it for you:

Chaos Demon Prince: 130 with wings.

Chaos DEMONS Demon Prince:190.

60 points more for the EXACT same thing. Now obviously Demons get deep strike (would YOU say that it's worth that much?) and a bunch of other things, but the point stands:

MCs are just going up in price. Period.

There are still other factors you need to consider when talking points value from two different codexes.
A daemon prince have a lot of different uses in a chaos marine army, with are not nececarily the same in the daemon army.

naloth
13-01-2010, 13:00
I think you DO have a completely different codex than I do:
<snip> It was apparently my fault for not explicitly stating I was comparing both units DIRECTLY, on an equal stat-line.

So your argument about the MC price increasing revolves around buying a bunch of options to jack up the price? If that were only the case with 'Nids.



Finally: you obviously DO care who said "that" because of this:

I'm a good source for my own opinions.

FWIW, my statement (not even a question) was a reply to your statement about "whomever" said the daemons needed "toned down."




Oh, and whomever said demons need to be "toned down" should get some more games under his belt...That's like saying Eldar need to be more specialized or that Guard need more tanks.


I was merely giving you a chance to satisfy your own question, giving you a moment to be proactive.

I neither had a question nor a disagreement about the power level of CD.



ps. I thought a Tervigon was about 150pts, isn't that the same cost as "your" codex demons' demon prince with wings?
160 base. You'll also end up buying a few upgrades for perhaps a total ~195ish.

jt.glass
13-01-2010, 13:30
I don't mind the current rules, although it could be improved. I wouldn't mind the OP's solution either.

Whatever the system, thought, Force weapons really should work on daemons!

EDIT: One thing I'd prefer not to see though is rolled multi-wounds though, at least not as a matter of course. I'd be very happy with fixed multi-wounds.


The problem with powerfists hiding is that warhammer 40k is a heroic fantasy game where heros are supposed to be leading the charge not cowering in a large unit hoping they don't get splattered by a nameless sergeant.I've been wondering for a while, what does "hidden" mean in this context?


jt.

azimaith
13-01-2010, 13:46
They're called hidden powerfists as a hold over from the previous edition where you wound allocation allowed you to roll them allocate failed wounds which meant powerfist sergeants almost never took saves unless the unit was about to be destroyed.

Now its similar except you only need to inflict as many wounds as there are models in the squad which are then rolled for and wounds are allocated to the models they fall on.

Typically the effect is little different as most players utilized the "Torrent of fire" rule from the shooting phase in the close combat phase as well.

Basically, its the typical status where a marine squad will put as few wounds as possible onto a powerfist wielding sergeant by allocating it to the other marines in the squad (he's hiding behind them) but still swinging away into combat because he's within 2" of the ones he's hiding behind (metaphorically.)

Basically, Hidden powerfist is a powerfist sergeant hiding behind some nine ablative wounds you have to kill your way through before you get a shot at said sergeant at all. This means that in the three or so combat phases you're trying to kill enough marines to get a good chance at the sergeant (who when he takes wounds is going to definitely be taking non-power ones first). As such he's not only the bane of monstrous creatures (in fact he's similar to a ten wound 9 regular attack, s8 a Init 1 two attack monstrous creature in this respect) as monstrous creatures typically enter combat alone thus can't kill their way through the squad fast enough to avoid getting badly maimed (not so bad in this edition) and characters.

Independent characters, by dint of their rule act as a single separate squad in assaults thus the powerfist sergeant merely needs one model within 2" of him to be in base to base combat with said character(who needs to be in base to base if he can make it by the rules and can't attack if he isn't). Since the character has to kill his way through the sergeants ablative wounds while the character, who counts as a separate squad, can be targeted freely by the powerfist sergeant, he typically the character dies horribly as the sergeant just allocates all his attacks off his buddy in base to base into the character. To make matters worse if this character is toughness 4 hes not only having to kill his way through 9 wounds before he can attack the sergeant, he can't be fail a single invulnerable save from said sergeant or he dies instantly (and the sergeant can swing at him specifically every turn with his weapon).

Without a "look out sir!" style rule allowing models the characters unit to intercept attacks for him its basically a "Sergeant hits you with instant death attacks and you can't hit him back unless you kill all nine of his buddies first."

jt.glass
13-01-2010, 13:56
-good stuff-Thank you. That makes sense.


jt.

druchii
13-01-2010, 21:53
So your argument about the MC price increasing revolves around buying a bunch of options to jack up the price? If that were only the case with 'Nids.


I'm a good source for my own opinions.

FWIW, my statement (not even a question) was a reply to your statement about "whomever" said the daemons needed "toned down."


I neither had a question nor a disagreement about the power level of CD.


160 base. You'll also end up buying a few upgrades for perhaps a total ~195ish.

Either you're ignoring my post, or not understanding:
Taking the SAME unit un a "newer" codex (ie a comparable DP from the CSM book/a DP from the CD book) results in an upswing of cost for the MC. This is natural, and of course 'Nid MCs increased in price-that's the current trend in WH40k, as I've demonstrated.

Again, I don't know if you're willingfully misinterpreting my statements, or inentionally ignoring your own quote where you ask "Who said that" (which I've answered for you multipletimes) but obviously you DID have a question about the statement, I don't know why that is such an issue.

d

ps. You might be a good source for your own opinions, but it does not mean your opinions are good.

nightgant98c
14-01-2010, 14:39
I think that monstrous creatures, particularly the nids, were too cheap anyway.

naloth
14-01-2010, 17:00
Taking the SAME unit un a "newer" codex (ie a comparable DP from the CSM book/a DP from the CD book) results in an upswing of cost for the MC. This is natural, and of course 'Nid MCs increased in price-that's the current trend in WH40k, as I've demonstrated.

Actually, you didn't. You compared an efficiently built CSM: DP to a DP that few CD players would want or take. Going from 110->80 isn't an increase in base cost. Moving wings from 20->60 demonstrates that the upgrade is probably overpriced and not worth taking. Giving both a 3+ save makes them both 110 points with pretty similar stats. The CSM: DP has +1 S where as the CD: DP has +1 BS and DP. The CSM: DP is better suited for CC but the CD: DP is better suited to be a heavy support ranged guy - perhaps that's a good trade off since he's a heavy support choice and the army has plenty of other MCs with good CC abilities. Both fulfill a (different) niche in their respective army well for ~150 points.

If you could take a 'fex for 100ish points, ignore all the overpriced upgrades, take a few of the decent ones and end up running something that fills a heavy support niche for well for ~150, I don't think there would be complaints about the new 'fex.



Again, I don't know if you're willingfully misinterpreting my statements, or inentionally ignoring your own quote where you ask "Who said that" (which I've answered for you multipletimes) but obviously you DID have a question about the statement, I don't know why that is such an issue.

Neither. "I dunno who said that" isn't a question. It's a statement. It's not even something that implies curiosity. I was clarifying (since you had quoted me) that what you had referenced wasn't anything I had said.

The following snark about not being willing to read the thread was humorous the first time since you hadn't bothered to go back and properly attribute your statement.

druchii
14-01-2010, 19:19
Actually, you didn't. You compared an efficiently built CSM: DP to a DP that few CD players would want or take. Going from 110->80 isn't an increase in base cost. Moving wings from 20->60 demonstrates that the upgrade is probably overpriced and not worth taking. Giving both a 3+ save makes them both 110 points with pretty similar stats. The CSM: DP has +1 S where as the CD: DP has +1 BS and DP. The CSM: DP is better suited for CC but the CD: DP is better suited to be a heavy support ranged guy - perhaps that's a good trade off since he's a heavy support choice and the army has plenty of other MCs with good CC abilities. Both fulfill a (different) niche in their respective army well for ~150 points.

If you could take a 'fex for 100ish points, ignore all the overpriced upgrades, take a few of the decent ones and end up running something that fills a heavy support niche for well for ~150, I don't think there would be complaints about the new 'fex.


Neither. "I dunno who said that" isn't a question. It's a statement. It's not even something that implies curiosity. I was clarifying (since you had quoted me) that what you had referenced wasn't anything I had said.

The following snark about not being willing to read the thread was humorous the first time since you hadn't bothered to go back and properly attribute your statement.

I'm sorry. If you don't believe that comparing two units, with the exact same stats (aside from Deep Strike, which, again, is an ability NOT worth the difference in points) and unarguably seeing that the two are widly different in points cost is indicative of the increase in price of MCs then you and I have nothing to talk about.

Again, you must have a completely different CSM or CD book, both DPs have equal BS.

Did you just tell me having an onverpriced HS MC is worthwhile because the book is filled with "plenty (try 2) other MCs with amazing CC abilities?". Sound like any other sort of army? Maybe one with a BUNCH of MCs, a lot of which are amazing at CC? Ironic?

I think a creature with t6, 4w and 4a (with rerolls to hit) is ******* amazing for 160pts. Add in some Tl devourers and you trade the rerolls for a gribbly that's spitting out 12 s6 shots a turn (twin linked!) AND still retains his massive close combat edge.

"I dunno who said that" IS a specific sort of question, as why one would say that without wanting to know the answer is beyond reason for saying it. So either it was a question disguised as a statement, or a useless statement. Either way.

naloth
14-01-2010, 20:02
I'm sorry. If you don't believe that comparing two units, with the exact same stats (aside from Deep Strike, which, again, is an ability NOT worth the difference in points) and unarguably seeing that the two are widly different in points cost is indicative of the increase in price of MCs then you and I have nothing to talk about.

So you believe that 110 points is greater than 110? The difference is that the DP in CSM is +1 S and HQ while CD has Deep Strike and is Heavy Support unless you buy an unnecessary upgrade for the CD: DP.



Again, you must have a completely different CSM or CD book, both DPs have equal BS.

Checked, guess they do. For some reason I though the CSM: DP has BS4.



Did you just tell me having an onverpriced HS MC is worthwhile because the book is filled with "plenty (try 2) other MCs with amazing CC abilities?". Sound like any other sort of army? Maybe one with a BUNCH of MCs, a lot of which are amazing at CC? Ironic?

No, that's not what I said. I said a MC w/CC abilities isn't what Chaos Daemons really needs as Heavy Support. I also never said the CD: DP is overpriced. At 80 points it's a pretty good bargain even if you don't kit it out with to act as a heavy weapon w/a 4++ for ~150 points.


I think a creature with t6, 4w and 4a (with rerolls to hit) is ******* amazing for 160pts.

Not really. The 4 wounds come off really fast to plasma or missile launchers. It also has a really low I making it pretty easy for some models to come in an insta-kill the beast (JotWW, Force Weapons) with nothing the 'Fex can do about it. It really doesn't matter how many attacks or re-rolls the fex gets if it never gets to CC.

In contrast the 80 point DP you're considering so "overpriced" is immune to insta-kill, has a high I (basically ignores JotWW, kills models before they can attack), and has a 5++ (effectively like +2 wounds) that can be upgraded to a 4++ or backed with a 3+. Oh, and the 4++ guy can also get a S8 AP1 weapon that hits on 2+ which is usually how I see him fielded 'cause CD lack anti-AV ranged weapons. DP also has a high WS making the re-rolls less important (66% hits vs the 75% for the re-rolled 'fex) and the same number of attacks.



"I dunno who said that" IS a specific sort of question, as why one would say that without wanting to know the answer is beyond reason for saying it. So either it was a question disguised as a statement, or a useless statement. Either way.
"I dunno who said that but it wasn't me" isn't any sort of question or even useless. I've even explained why I put it there: so you and others wouldn't confuse your unattributed ramblings to be related to anything you quoted from me. It's remarkable that armed with two clarification and and explanation you insist on disagreeing with what *I* meant and why.

druchii
14-01-2010, 23:18
So you believe that 110 points is greater than 110? The difference is that the DP in CSM is +1 S and HQ while CD has Deep Strike and is Heavy Support unless you buy an unnecessary upgrade for the CD: DP.


Checked, guess they do. For some reason I though the CSM: DP has BS4.


No, that's not what I said. I said a MC w/CC abilities isn't what Chaos Daemons really needs as Heavy Support. I also never said the CD: DP is overpriced. At 80 points it's a pretty good bargain even if you don't kit it out with to act as a heavy weapon w/a 4++ for ~150 points.


Not really. The 4 wounds come off really fast to plasma or missile launchers. It also has a really low I making it pretty easy for some models to come in an insta-kill the beast (JotWW, Force Weapons) with nothing the 'Fex can do about it. It really doesn't matter how many attacks or re-rolls the fex gets if it never gets to CC.

In contrast the 80 point DP you're considering so "overpriced" is immune to insta-kill, has a high I (basically ignores JotWW, kills models before they can attack), and has a 5++ (effectively like +2 wounds) that can be upgraded to a 4++ or backed with a 3+. Oh, and the 4++ guy can also get a S8 AP1 weapon that hits on 2+ which is usually how I see him fielded 'cause CD lack anti-AV ranged weapons. DP also has a high WS making the re-rolls less important (66% hits vs the 75% for the re-rolled 'fex) and the same number of attacks.


"I dunno who said that but it wasn't me" isn't any sort of question or even useless. I've even explained why I put it there: so you and others wouldn't confuse your unattributed ramblings to be related to anything you quoted from me. It's remarkable that armed with two clarification and and explanation you insist on disagreeing with what *I* meant and why.

First off, you must, again, be ignoring either the points listed in respective books, or immune to reason:
The Base CD demon prince is inferior to the CSM demon prince in multiple ways:
1 less S. No 3+ Save. It's wings are tripple the cost.

Now, you've been having trouble adding up points and stats corretly, I know, but I'll do it again:
An equal geared and statted demon prince from the Chaos Space Marines Codex is substantially cheaper than the same Demon Prince from the Chaos Demons book.

Arguing about which "slot" the demon prince comes from is irrelevant because there are a billion other factors to debate about (nevermind the CD demon prince being HQ would be amazing, because it would no longer compete with the MUCH BETTER and efficient Soul Grinder).

The same arguments you use against a carnifex are easily applied to a demon prince, but moreso because of the t5 and lack of a 3+ save.

I can tell you that this will be my last post on this subject matter as you continually, intentionally and willfully dodge logic and sense.

d

Skyros
14-01-2010, 23:31
Instant Death should remain as-is. It's a useful way to threaten characters who might otherwise storm through units, especially since in the current edition the power fist can be hidden on a Sergeant or something. It also gives characters an additional reason to hide in units rather than advancing solo. Eternal Warrior is fine, too - it's almost entirely applied to characters with a strong fluff reason for having it, and to those characters where having them popped as soon as they come within range of a combat would be egregiously bad. It's also a lot rarer than people like to make out - besides Daemons and Space Wolf HQs with Saga of the Bear, it's entirely restricted to special characters as of next week.

That said, I would untie Force Weapons from Instant Death. Instead I would adopt the 'removed from play' language used in JotWW and Vibrocannon - Force Weapons are supposed to be Daemon-killers, after all. They're also a lot rarer than pound-a-penny power fists, which is a balancing factor by itself.

I agree that special characters having Eternal Warrior is fine, and also that force weapons, which are supposed to work against daemons, are unduly hampered.

Skyros
14-01-2010, 23:34
The problem is its realistic in a way that detracts from 40k fluff. Leaders of armies aren't really supposed to be getting mushed on the first squad they hit with a powerfist hidden away in it.

Fluff is subordinate to gameplay. Herohammer where single guys around slaughtering entire armies is a vastly less entertaining and challenging form of game, and should be discouraged. To the extent instant death helps prevent herohammer from happening, it's a good rule. The 'really' powerful characters are immune to it anyway. The 'leaders of armies' have eternal warrior.



Without a "look out sir!" style rule allowing models the characters unit to intercept attacks for him its basically a "Sergeant hits you with instant death attacks and you can't hit him back unless you kill all nine of his buddies first."

I do think it's silly that the sergeant can direct attacks specifically at the IC while the IC can't direct attacks specifically at the sergeant. I think reverting to the rule where you can only direct attacks against people with whom you are in base to base contact is better. Anything else just gets directed 'at the unit'.

Pushkin
15-01-2010, 00:23
Maybe just have a table that says how many wounds weapons of each strength do?

Something like:

Strength Wounds
1-7 = 1
8 = 2
9 = 3
10 = 4

rough idea but could be developed.

naloth
15-01-2010, 01:52
An equal geared and statted demon prince from the Chaos Space Marines Codex is substantially cheaper than the same Demon Prince from the Chaos Demons book.

Sure, but only if you include triple cost wings. Other than that, they are pretty close in point value. Now, if the trend you want to show is that GW has been increasing the cost of wings on MCs by insane amounts, I agree. Otherwise, the big difference is FOC, deployment, and a +1 S for about the same cost.



The same arguments you use against a carnifex are easily applied to a demon prince, but moreso because of the t5 and lack of a 3+ save.

Not really. High base cost doesn't apply. The lack of a ++ save doesn't apply. Vulnerable to ID doesn't apply. Really, none of it does. 'Fex are 40/wound without any upgrades or an invul save or an option to improve their save. Both DPs are pretty cheap, come with a 5++, and can improve their save.



I can tell you that this will be my last post on this subject matter as you continually, intentionally and willfully dodge logic and sense.

Given the snark and general lack of comprehension (it's really hard to tell which is which), I'm guessing it's just as well to agree to disagree.

Devil Tree
15-01-2010, 09:50
In defense of “hidden powerfists”, I remember the days when they were targetable. The first round usually involved a MC, IC or Dreadnaught splattering the sergeant in the first round. Following that, subsequent rounds involved the wholesale slaughter of the now helpless squad. While I'll admit the current rules aren't perfect, they are a definite improvement.

azimaith
15-01-2010, 11:37
Why not just hedge the bets and give ICs a "look out sir!" rule that lets a squad member leap in front of said IC and take the wound. Then the game advantage of unit upgrade vs joined character disappears.