Fixing Daemonhunters

[Aidoneus]

Perhaps some uncontroversial updates, for a change? I looked through the IA2 update and our FAQ, and found these changes:

 

Neural Shredder: against vehicles, rolls on the vehicle damage table with a -4 modifier

 

Bolter should be in the armoury and cost 1pt

 

Hell Pistol should be in the armoury and cost 1pt

 

Heavy Flamer should be assault 1

 

Mystics against drop-podding units work as follows: wait until the pod and unit are on the table, and then choose 1 to try to use your free shot against

 

Rhino costs 35pts

 

Chimera costs 55pts and comes standard with a multi-laser and heavy bolter

 

Chimeras can upgrade the multi-laser to the following:

-autocannon +5pts

-HB free

-linked HB +10pts

 

Chimeras can take the following upgrades:

-Heavy Stubber +10pts

-Camo Netting +20pts

 

Chimeras are amphibious

 

Land Raiders (all versions) have PotMS and Assault Vehicle

 

Any objections? Anything I missed?

[Prathios]

The Officio Assassinorum is not the Inquisition. Inquisitors do have the authority to requisition assassins whenever they need, but they are not the only ones with access to them. So it's not a matter of handing over our assets; it's a matter of they have access to assassins too.

 

This is actually something that bugged me about assassins. There used to be a separate codex: assassins, and any imperial force could take one. Of course, such a codex was a waste, by itself, so assassins got folded in to the DH and WH codices, which already covered inquisition, grey knights (which are simultaneously a chapter of space marines and the chamber militant of the ordo malleus), members of the ecclesiarchy, and sisters of battle (the chambers militant of the ecclesiarchy). We're a very heterogeneous bunch, we are. Anyway, it bothered me that other imperial lists could no longer take assassins without also taking inquisitors. This would be like saying they couldn't get grey knights or sisters of battle or deathwatch kill teams without also taking an inquisitor. It just doesn't fit the fluff, nor previous rules. So on some level, while I think our change helps our own lists (all-GK lists can take assassins without inquisitors), it's also there specifically to allow other imperial forces access to assassins without needing to take inquisitors as well.

 

You've convinced me.

 

What's next on the agenda?

 

Hurray! So many topics so little time. I'm still not convinced on paying some wanton fee for Aegis upgrades on dreadnoughts. I think it should come standard and I don't think it should cost as much as you guys seem to think it should. I need to remind people the most you can ever get out of a turn of shooting with a dread is a las shot and a missile shot. Thats not that dangerous. Its not like we're giving it to a basilisk or a vindicator or a predator annihilator.

 

What this also does is it forces our opponents to bring close range vehicle killing power. You can't approach DH fights the same way as a Nid fight. And a good tourney list will likely include a unit with AT that moves in close. Again this power should come almost free if you add a +12" penalty for it being a larger than troop size unit.

 

You're so deathly afraid of this being OP I think you are overrating it by a large sum. Its awesome make no mistake but its not hard to get around and its a power that doesn't work every time anyway. Three hellfire dreadnoughts with this power would be very nasty, but then again three hellfire dreadys are nasty anyway. Forcing the opponent to move in closer or deep strike that AT team they were going to DS anyway isn't such a drastic change that we should pay out the nose for it. Again I think a bonus of 12" would more than equal this out.

[FunkyEntropy]

Perhaps some uncontroversial updates, for a change? I looked through the IA2 update and our FAQ, and found these changes:

 

Neural Shredder: against vehicles, rolls on the vehicle damage table with a -4 modifier

 

Bolter should be in the armoury and cost 1pt

 

Hell Pistol should be in the armoury and cost 1pt

 

Heavy Flamer should be assault 1

 

Mystics against drop-podding units work as follows: wait until the pod and unit are on the table, and then choose 1 to try to use your free shot against

 

Rhino costs 35pts

 

Chimera costs 55pts and comes standard with a multi-laser and heavy bolter

 

Chimeras can upgrade the multi-laser to the following:

-autocannon +5pts

-HB free

-linked HB +10pts

 

Chimeras can take the following upgrades:

-Heavy Stubber +10pts

-Camo Netting +20pts

 

Chimeras are amphibious

 

Land Raiders (all versions) have PotMS and Assault Vehicle

 

Any objections? Anything I missed?

No objections from me. I'm pretty sure the stuff about Bolters/Hell Pistols/Flamers has already been FAQ'd, but better safe than sorry IMO.

 

Is the Heavy Stubber upgrade for the Chimera a pintle-mounted option?

[Mutt-Man!]

How about a new B&C official update thread thats separate, and more serious then a questionnaire-style poll -> "What do you want to see changed" non-esque.

 

Current wargear and points changes that match updated codexes IG and Space Marine, even SoB rhinos and so on. Other small changes like having a space marine commander on bike, allowing bikes as troops for the list if you feel its proper. Shrouding streamlining, and partial unit fixes that make them more use-able in 5th edition.

 

This thread is a bit long and has no leading topic rather a blur of them. =P

[Aidoneus]

How about a new B&C official update thread thats separate, and more serious then a questionnaire-style poll -> "What do you want to see changed" non-esque.

 

Current wargear and points changes that match updated codexes IG and Space Marine, even SoB rhinos and so on. Other small changes like having a space marine commander on bike, allowing bikes as troops for the list if you feel its proper. Shrouding streamlining, and partial unit fixes that make them more use-able in 5th edition.

 

This thread is a bit long and has no leading topic rather a blur of them. =P

If you don't like how this project is being run, you're more than welcome to ignore it, or start your own project. This project already has clear goals, and we've come a long way towards achieving them (other than one or two things, we're pretty much just waiting for the IG codex to come out at this point).

 

This thread does have a clear organization. The first post outlines the goals and constraints of the project, and includes a table of contents for the rules changes. Those changes are in the subsequent posts, and go page-by-page through our codex, making alterations. Where those rules changes have been updated due to discussion in this thread, I have made note of which post such updates come from. Really, I have made every effort to make it easy to follow.

 

I'm sorry if I seem overly-defensive, but it's rather insulting to have someone come in, refuse to even read what has been written so far, and then presume to tell us all what we should be doing instead, completely ignoring our goals and efforts to date.

 

Anyway, as I said, you're perfectly welcome to contribute here in accordance with our goals and constraints, you're welcome to ignore us, and you're welcome to start your own project. But please don't tell me how to run my own project.

[FunkyEntropy]

Heck, we managed to take the two assassins that nobody ever took competitively and improve them enough to make them useful while still staying within the fluff, not overpowering them, and even somehow managing to keep everyone happy.

 

That, in and of itself, seems like a pretty big accomplishment to me.

 

---------------------

 

Regarding dreads and shrouding (which seems to be the one thorn in our side), I've got another idea: they get shrouding to reflect the psychic power of the GK stored within it, but the opposing team automatically gets to take that LD test to represent the big clunky target being a little harder to miss? Plus give psykers a free reroll of the LD test?

 

In case I'm not being clear enough, I'll give an example.

 

Devastator Squad A (with Librarian Z attached for some incomprehensible reason) wants to fire at GK Dread C. GK Dread C is 34" away.

 

Dev Squad A rolls for shrouding, fails.

Dev Squad A takes a LD test, fails.

Librarian Z allows Dev Squad A to reroll failed LD test.

They do so, and pass the LD test this time.

Dev Squad A is therefore allowed to reroll for shrouding.

Dev Squad A rerolls shrouding, passes.

Boom goes the dynamite.

 

This would help keep the cost for giving shrouding to DK dreads down (perhaps remove the extra cost entirely). This keeps it from becoming a (slightly) cheaper and (vastly) weaker Land Raider.

[Wolf's Bane]

Chimera costs 55pts and comes standard with a multi-laser and heavy bolter

 

Chimeras can upgrade the multi-laser to the following:

-autocannon +5pts

-HB free

-linked HB +10pts

 

Chimeras can take the following upgrades:

-Heavy Stubber +10pts

-Camo Netting +20pts

 

Chimeras are amphibious

 

Any objections? Anything I missed?

 

If I do remember well, Chimeras, can upgrade aither the multi-laser and the heavy bolter to heavy flamer for free.

[Mutt-Man!]

Ah different mindsets collide..

 

I was stating that going through the set of page by page reading, that merely I was not going to enforce my views on every subject and side topic that spins off in my head, rather a compilation of whats been accomplished so far as the standard set. For one, that people can say yes and no to whats been stated and their thoughts (rather then digging up subjects that seem to have been passed by already) and that people are unsure what the standard is set to on a specific level. Like, what should the new storm troopers guns be, they would be broken feeling if used along side the GK's. (Its verified, they ARE ap3 str3 guns, refer to the leaked french reference page - I wont supply a link-illegal by site rules)

 

Lots to poke at, and yes I was reading through a few pages, my first comment that I would not read the whole thing just yet. Perhaps that stuck in mind when I meant to have a separate topic setting the level with someone leading being the one that lays down the whole template for others to view and comment on. If your willing to compile and lay out the whole list of changes, then thats cool. The few changes made in your previous template are commendible.

 

No offence, just like to know where I should start commenting, it feels like I'm hanging around an aging project where Im never on the same page. Templates of the new standard would help.

 

Your OT entry does do good but all that is a part of the codex change?

[FunkyEntropy]

Sorry, I'm going to go back to talking about assassins.

 

Is it just me, or do Death Cult Assassins seem over-costed relative to what else is available currently? Their main competition, GKT, cost only 5 points more.

 

For that extra 5 points you gain...

a 2+ save

Str 6 attacks

A stormbolter

+1 toughness

Many fancy special rules, most notably shrouding and aegis.

 

For that extra 5 points you lose...

-1 initiative

-1 wound

-1 attack (assassins got the extra CCW)*

Lose Infiltrate

 

*We might want to change the DCA weapon loadout to two powerweapons just to insure that it's clear that they get the extra attack from having two CCW. I remember that now you need two powerfists to get the extra attack, and I don't remember offhand if the same applies to vanilla powerweapons.

 

I'm not advocating a huge cost decrease, just dropping a couple points off the price tag (3~5).

[Mutt-Man!]

Infiltrating power weapons with INV saves means outflank. Outflank is a very useful ability especially for small power-units that can ruin an HQ sitting back (like a librarian or master of the forge).

[FunkyEntropy]

So you're saying DCAs are useful enough as is? And don't need any minor tweaks?

 

Hmm. I'm gonna need to work them into my list somehow to try out outflanking.

[Aidoneus]

Infiltrating power weapons with INV saves means outflank. Outflank is a very useful ability especially for small power-units that can ruin an HQ sitting back (like a librarian or master of the forge).

Also, they get frags, defensive grenades, and Stealth, according to our updated rules. They can also operate independently if they want to.

 

Plus, you shouldn't scoff at an extra attack, initiative, and wound. Those are all very useful things, and for being 5pts cheaper well worth losing things like S6 and the 2+ save.

[Ominous Anonymous]

Sorry, I'm going to go back to talking about assassins.

 

Is it just me, or do Death Cult Assassins seem over-costed relative to what else is available currently? Their main competition, GKT, cost only 5 points more.

 

For that extra 5 points you gain...

a 2+ save

Str 6 attacks

A stormbolter

+1 toughness

Many fancy special rules, most notably shrouding and aegis.

 

For that extra 5 points you lose...

-1 initiative

-1 wound

-1 attack (assassins got the extra CCW)*

Lose Infiltrate

 

*We might want to change the DCA weapon loadout to two powerweapons just to insure that it's clear that they get the extra attack from having two CCW. I remember that now you need two powerfists to get the extra attack, and I don't remember offhand if the same applies to vanilla powerweapons.

 

I'm not advocating a huge cost decrease, just dropping a couple points off the price tag (3~5).

 

For the record, while weapons like Lightning Claws and Power Fists (and all of their equivalents) require a double to get the additional attack, close combat weapons and power weapons have no qualms about working with each other. :)

 

As for reducing the points cost of DCAs, personally while you are getting something different for 6 points more, DCAs are meant to do things differently. They 'deep strike' with greater reliability and sometimes without regard for things like terrain that most players would keep their Deep Striking units away from. What they lack in individual toughness they make up for in more or less abusing the Independent Character rules for targeting in combat.

 

Personally, I feel like DCAs are adequately priced. Not to mention they make for a good shock troop unit for Radical Inquisitors that don't or won't take Grey Knights due to fluff reasons.

[FunkyEntropy]

All right then. Motion to trim DCA point fails. What's our next order of business? I didn't see anyone object to the last round of proposals made by Aidoneus.

 

Maybe it's time to rest on our laurels and move the project up to higher channels?

[Mani]

It looks as though on the first page the entry for Dreadnoughts says that dreads now get Aegis, but then Aegis is also listed as an upgrade to be purchased for them in the vehicle armory. Did we ever decide whether or not to make that standard?

 

Alright, I think I'm coming around to the idea of PAGKs with jump packs. This is what occurs to me: instead of saying that jump knights always have their storm bolter range reduced to 18", say that their shooting range is reduced to 12" if they move using their jump packs, but they can fire normally if they walk or remain still. This way they retain the functionality of normal footslogging knights and aren't being punished just for having the jump packs on, but if they use the jump movement they get cut down to a shorter effective range, like we'd said before. We could also say that their range drops to 18", as previously, but I think it would be reasonable to take it all the way down to 12", following the lead of the Rapid Fire weapon rules and the fact that jump troops normally carry pistols with a 12" range.

 

Thoughts?

[Aidoneus]

It looks as though on the first page the entry for Dreadnoughts says that dreads now get Aegis, but then Aegis is also listed as an upgrade to be purchased for them in the vehicle armory. Did we ever decide whether or not to make that standard?

No proposal was ever made to give dreads Aegis standard. Perhaps you're looking at the vehicle upgrades post, which simply clarifies rules for those upgrades, but does not change the fact that they are still optional upgrades. Simply put, Aegis is most definitely staying as an option.

 

Alright, I think I'm coming around to the idea of PAGKs with jump packs. This is what occurs to me: instead of saying that jump knights always have their storm bolter range reduced to 18", say that their shooting range is reduced to 12" if they move using their jump packs, but they can fire normally if they walk or remain still. This way they retain the functionality of normal footslogging knights and aren't being punished just for having the jump packs on, but if they use the jump movement they get cut down to a shorter effective range, like we'd said before. We could also say that their range drops to 18", as previously, but I think it would be reasonable to take it all the way down to 12", following the lead of the Rapid Fire weapon rules and the fact that jump troops normally carry pistols with a 12" range.

This is interesting. I'm going to hold off further comment for now, but I'd very much like to hear other people's take on this.

 

Oh, and Funky, I agree that we're pretty close to being done. That is, until the IG codex comes out, but even then it should be a fairly simple task to bring units/wargear into line with that. When I get a chance, in the next few days, I'll go through the whole damn thread and make sure we haven't left any loose ends. Other than Mani's proposal here though, I'm pretty much out of new ideas. That's a good thing though; we should be able to start playtesting very soon. :P

[ferrous]

Oh, i have lots of ideas on things that i think I've posted here and elsewhere... but i just thought of a small one, that I've started to really like.

 

PAGK squads, in addition to being able to choose between incinerators or psycannons, can also choose to take thunder hammers. With the standard 0-2 limit, at the standard point cost.

 

So you could take some combinations like:

2 thunder hammers

1 TH and one psy

1 incinerator, 1 TH

and the other normal combinations they had before.

 

Note: this is just the two handed TH, not the TH + storm shield.

 

Fluffy? Yeah, they're ordo malleus, they should have thunder hammers. Does it give new functionality to the PAGK? A little bit, they will be slightly better in combat, but not much better than a standard hidden powerfist, and they give up a special weapon slot. And i think modelling it would be fun.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

PAGK squads, in addition to being able to choose between incinerators or psycannons, can also choose to take thunder hammers. With the standard 0-2 limit, at the standard point cost.

 

I disagree. Whilst DH should retain their points break on Thunder Hammers, Justicars and the like should still adhere to the spirit of the rule that bars them from taking additional weapons, ie "lesser items".

[Ominous Anonymous]

Alright, I think I'm coming around to the idea of PAGKs with jump packs. This is what occurs to me: instead of saying that jump knights always have their storm bolter range reduced to 18", say that their shooting range is reduced to 12" if they move using their jump packs, but they can fire normally if they walk or remain still. This way they retain the functionality of normal footslogging knights and aren't being punished just for having the jump packs on, but if they use the jump movement they get cut down to a shorter effective range, like we'd said before. We could also say that their range drops to 18", as previously, but I think it would be reasonable to take it all the way down to 12", following the lead of the Rapid Fire weapon rules and the fact that jump troops normally carry pistols with a 12" range.

This is interesting. I'm going to hold off further comment for now, but I'd very much like to hear other people's take on this.

 

On one hand, I feel like this is a bit of wishlisting as we'll be adding an entirely new unit (with or without jump packs), but on the other hand it's fun to bring up ideas like these anyways. :blink:

 

Personally, while I understand the need for Grey Knights to have both viability and variability in their Fast Attack options, I don't believe that we have to go with Jump Packs. They fit (in my opinion) neither the look of the army nor the fluff. Yes, the Grey Knights are supposed to, fluff-wise, have some of the best equipment in the Imperium for dealing with threats, and while that doesn't rule out jet packs I don't think they should be a standard piece of equipment.

 

What if we were to allow the Justicar to purchase a psychic power like Quickening, or a unit of Grey Knights that are psychically trained/conditioned before a battle to have a form of Quickening up at all times, giving them Furious Charge/Fleet and counting as Jump Infantry and replacing their Stormbolters for something else (an Executioner's Pistol, perhaps?). I think there's a lot of room for us to explore here. We could even borrow a unit idea from the Warp Spiders and their own personal teleporation generators. Let's please just stay away from Jump Packs altogether for now. :P

[Aidoneus]

We could even borrow a unit idea from the Warp Spiders and their own personal teleporation generators.

Nothing personal, but can we please avoid this topic! Perhaps you haven't read over this entire thread; we've actually had quite a lengthy debate over this. In the end, it was decided (I'll admit, more or less by executive decision on my part) that nothing like this will be included in this particular project, because it violates the policy of minimalism. If you want to hear more on the subject, feel free to peruse the earlier pages of this thread. If you want to explore the idea further, I ask that you start a new thread about it, as I don't want to get side tracked by it after we've already put it to rest.

 

Let's please just stay away from Jump Packs altogether for now. -_-

Again, it seems like perhaps you're not familiar with what's already been done in this project. The jump pack unit (as well as bikers) were added in my original proposal, and although opinions range greatly on the matter, no one has yet been able to give a convincing reason why they should not be allowed. Mani's proposal was not to add this unit, but to take the unit that I already added and tweak their rules to perhaps make them more balanced and/or fit the fluff better.

[Ominous Anonymous]

You're right, I had forgotten about the Warp Spider discussion. My mistake.

 

Let's please just stay away from Jump Packs altogether for now. :)

Again, it seems like perhaps you're not familiar with what's already been done in this project. The jump pack unit (as well as bikers) were added in my original proposal, and although opinions range greatly on the matter, no one has yet been able to give a convincing reason why they should not be allowed. Mani's proposal was not to add this unit, but to take the unit that I already added and tweak their rules to perhaps make them more balanced and/or fit the fluff better.

 

Again, my mistake for not thoroughly checking with the rest of the thread to see if I had overlooked anything the first time. 10 pages of discussion can melt together after a while.

 

As for jump packs...(EDIT) we've been able to fix more or less any faults we've found with the codex so far by adding a rule that simplifies things, without having to add in entirely new units.

 

We have an army wherein every unit can deep strike. Having Grey Knights with jump packs seems odd because we already have ways of getting up in the enemy's face if we want. Why not give the army a form of Heroic Intervention that can only be used past turn 2 to prevent turn 1 assaults from deep striking (however an army with Shrike can already do this, and it hasn't broken the game over its knee like Batman). Bikes make sense in that you can give them a Teleport Beacon with better movement, so I'll allow that (but I'd prefer just giving Grey Knights a type of Land Speeder with psycannons to make up for their lack of anti-armor instead).

 

EDIT: There, came up with a reason. :)

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Nothing personal, but can we please avoid this topic! Perhaps you haven't read over this entire thread; we've actually had quite a lengthy debate over this. In the end, it was decided (I'll admit, more or less by executive decision on my part) that nothing like this will be included in this particular project, because it violates the policy of minimalism.

 

How does dreaming up a Jump Pack unit or a Bike unit not violate the minimalism policy? :)

[FunkyEntropy]

Instead of restricting the firing range of GK w/ jump packs, an alternative would be to impose a hit modifier whenever the unit moves over 6". Using a hit modifier instead of a distance reduction allows us greater control over how much we want to reduce the effectiveness of the units shooting (when moving).

 

There's no reason a unit of jpGK should be any less effective than their normal brethren at shooting when standing still or while moving at normal speeds. Similarly, it doesn't make sense for them to not be able to target units within the normal stormbolter range. Easier to just say that the vibration from the jump packs makes it hard for even elite space marines to aim a stormbolter properly.

[Aidoneus]

How does dreaming up a Jump Pack unit or a Bike unit not violate the minimalism policy? :D

Tyrak, you of all people should remember this being discussed before. It will not be discussed again. Feel free to go back and read my answers earlier.

[Aidoneus]

Super-quick update.

 

1) I incorporated the proposals from post #226 into the official changes on the first page of the thread

 

2) I'm also making the Vindicare BS7. It's an incredibly small change in power, but I feel the need to make him actually the best marksman in 40k, and to actually use that high-BS table GW so graciously put in the BBB.

 

3) I've written up the first army list using these new rules! You can find it here. Please take a look and comment, either on army composition in and of itself, or on how it incorporates and makes use of our new rules.

 

4) I've also asked the PCA community about modeling the dodge tomahawk for our lancers. That thread can be found here.

 

5) At the moment, we have 3 unresolved issues (yes, I re-read all 10 pages... again!):

 

A) Dreadnoughts with shrouding: in my list, I assumed this was an option worth 40pts. I plan to playtest it that way, but that doesn't mean we should stop discussing here in the meantime. Unless, of course, no one has anything more to say until we see it in action.

 

B} Preferred Enemy - Daemons: This sort of got dropped without having actually been officially rejected. It would not involve a point increase at all, but would instead mean either that Daemonic Infestation would get more powerful, or that we would get another pro-daemon special rule. I'm not pushing this idea, but I'd at least like to resolve it properly.

 

C) Jump Packer Storm Bolters: Altering BS while moving is unprecedented, so I'm not a fan. Granted, I personally have always thought that all weapons should be allowed to be fired on the move, with a -BS modifier replacing the assault/heavy/rapid fire distinctions. But that's not minimalistic, so it's a discussion for another time. For the time being, it's a question of whether their storm bolters should have different ranges depending on whether or not they use their jump packs that turn, and if so, how much should the range be decreased?

 

Other than those three issues, I think we're just waiting on Codex: IG.