Matched Play Psychic Phase Rule of 1

[Gentlemanloser]

Yeah Gate screams "This is your Dreadnought Drop Pod - If you don't take a Raven" in it's scope and design. ;)

[Holier Than Thou]

Your are not at more risk of dealing wounds to ourselves than our enemies. You take 1 wound for every 7 the opponent takes, so it is worth casting almost every time.

Is it not a minimum of 1 Mortal Wound for every 7 caused, it's D3 and if it wipes out the unit it's D3 to every unit within 6". So, you could potentially do more to yourself than to the opponent.

[Seizeman]

It's 1 wound for every 7 (6,95 to be precise) to opponents, as the chance of perils is 6%. Please do your math before talking.

 

The only situation in which you should not use it is if the unit has 1-2 remaining wounds AND it's near a friendly unit or contesting an objective AND dealing the mortal wound is not very relevant. In any other situation you should cast it every turn.

 

Overall, casting psychic powers is a lot safer than it was on 7th.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Seizeman

[Gentlemanloser]

Smite is a Target of 5. 

 

Out of the possible 36 results on 2d6, you'll successfully cast Smite on 30 of them.  Or 5/6.  You have a 1/6 chance to not manifest Smite.

 

There are two possibilities to Peril, or 1/18.

 

Chance to successfully Smite = 83.33%

Chance to Peril = 6%

 

You can successfully cast Smite *and* suffer a Peril.  If you roll two 6's and the Peril doesn't kill the Unit.

 

Out of 17 casts and suffering a Perils, 14 would be successful and Deal 14 Mortal Wounds to our opponents and 2 (on average) to us.

 

So 1 to 7.

 

 

Edit: Of course, we'll all get those games where the first Smite is denied.  The second Perils and causes 3 Mortal wounds to your Character that only had 3W left, and you lament the GK ability to even use Psychic Powers. ;)

Edited June 5, 2017 by Gentlemanloser

[LuisMars]

 

Edit: Of course, we'll all get those games where the first Smite is denied.  The second Perils and causes 3 Mortal wounds to your Character that only had 3W left, and you lament the GK ability to even use Psychic Powers.

And then you remember that Stratagem reroll! (and roll again a 1 or a 6)

[Gentlemanloser]

That Command Point reroll is only for a single dice isn't it?

 

So if you roll Peril, you only get to reroll one of those dice, not both?

[Myunch]

I believe this to be the case. I like the odds of not periling by using 1CP to mitigate that.

 

I mean what else would we use our CP for aside from ensuring we land a kill or preventing the removal of our models?

Edited June 6, 2017 by Myunch

[lt051]

Keep in mind everyone's army is more bland now. I actually think we came out better than most. We didn't lose any options, and (imo) more of our units actually became appealing. We even had one model gain options (ancient can take a falcion+sb).

 

I am worried we won't get a codex until way after everyone else, but that could be unfounded, just have to wait and see.

 

I can never remember grey knights being an army that had a ton of options, there have always been a few good units and the rest was useless. While not the most exciting, this seems to be a pretty flexible rule set for us.

 

Just my 2c

[Valerian]

I believe this to be the case. I like the odds of not periling by using 1CP to mitigate that.

 

I mean what else would we use our CP for aside from ensuring we land a kill or preventing the removal of our models?

There are a lot of mission-specific stratagems, and there will be faction-specific stratagems in the codex, that you could also spend command points on.

[Seizeman]

I don't think I will use a CP for a perils ever. I'ts just d3 wounds, it is not that much. We have very few CP and they are really useful. Use them to reroll charges or critical d6 dmg rolls, or have a crucial counter-offensive.

[Captain Coolpants]

Well it's D3 mortal wounds.

It's just something that again, makes our paladins an eeeven better option compared to everything else. Since the maximum is 1 paladin to die, that could then be revived by an apothecary next turn.

[Zamtro]

No exactly related to Psychic rule of 1 but....

 

Gate of infinity - Does it count as moving?

 

The reserves rule in the movement section does state that - Units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved in the movement phase.

 

Gate just relocates and doesn't make a similar statement, and the guys aren't arriving as reinforcements. Could I leave my Purgation squad static in the Movement phase, then gate them and shoot at full BS in the shooting phase?

[Waking Dreamer]

No exactly related to Psychic rule of 1 but....

 

Gate of infinity - Does it count as moving?

 

The reserves rule in the movement section does state that - Units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved in the movement phase.

 

Gate just relocates and doesn't make a similar statement, and the guys aren't arriving as reinforcements. Could I leave my Purgation squad static in the Movement phase, then gate them and shoot at full BS in the shooting phase?

 

 

Yeah, I'd say so, because they didn't actually move in the "movement phase" but in the psychic phase - without statements such as "arriving reinforcements".

Edited June 7, 2017 by Waking Dreamer

[Seizeman]

The rules are clear, any time a unit is set up on the battlefield mid turn, during any phase, it counts as having moved.

[Muaddib]

I don't know about balance but i can see some pretty funny moves to try. Converting my 7thE list to 8thE, I can DP 1 unit of pallys + voldus + pally ancien + DK x2, 9'' from my opponents units (5 units in reserve). Then have 3x5 Interceptors joining the frey with their shunt, and one Strike Squad with GoI. That's 9 units in range for Smith and mid-range rapide fire, and charge if im lucky (and one unit can have hammerhand and use a cp for reroll one charge dice)... And i still have one strike squad in a razorback, with maybe a BroChamp for reinforcement.

And i'll probably start to play because of the small number of units i have to deploy (6-7 top).

That's not so bad all in all, and worse trying before getting too mad. We maybe won't be the best faction but probably not the worst either...

Edited June 7, 2017 by Muaddib

[Seizeman]

You must deploy on the table at least half your units, so with 9 units you can only reserve 4. Also, it does not matter how many units you want to reserve, you still make 9 deployments, teleporting units just deploy "on the teleporter", but you are probably getting first turn anyway.

[Valerian]

His count is correct. He's got 5 units in reserve and 6 (7 if he does at that BroChamp) on the table. It's just that he can have 9 units at just over 9" away in the first turn because 4 of those deployed on the table can hop over, too.

[Aethernitas]

For the record: I for one don't believe that GW will grant us some special snowflake rule to ignore the 'rule of one' overall when they just released the new core-rulebook for 8th - though I sure as hell still hope something like this will happen. It's probably a slightly different story with rules only mentioned in the indices - those are only stopgaps to bring every army up to speed so there may be a real chance that they already included something in there from the get-go.

I really REALLY have a problem with that because I think not only is the 'rule of one' cutting into the way GKs and other psychic armies can/should be played and making those pay a lot of points for things that can't even be used properly - it's also the only thing totally ruining the scaling of the psychic rules when it comes to bigger games. Just to be clear - with bigger games I mean 1500+ points and with some armies (GKs, TS, Eldar, Nids...) you hit that soft cap with even less points.

The way I see it is that they have to react to the upcoming FAQs and all the other feedback they hopefully get regarding this issue and change how the 'rule of one' works in general, because otherwise every army that can in any way, shape or form cast psychic powers would need their own set of codex-specific special rules to circumvent the issue.

I'd personally prefer something like: "each attempt to cast a specific power adds one to the powers warp charge value for subsequent casts this turn". There - a sufficiently elegant way to allow multiple casts while also making them harder to cast each time and makeing sure that you can cast less powerful stuff more often than the high warpcharge stuff. It's still not perfect when it comes to the really big games but it's worlds ahead of the 'rule of one'.

Edited June 9, 2017 by Aethernitas

[Valerian]

If they just expand the Psychic power table in the upcoming codex from three powers back up to 6 or 7, or re-introduce squad-specific powers, then the Rule of 1 pretty much won't be an issue.

 

Anybody who plays AoS know how many magic spells their factions typically get in their battle tomes?

[Happy-inquisitor]

If they just expand the Psychic power table in the upcoming codex from three powers back up to 6 or 7, or re-introduce squad-specific powers, then the Rule of 1 pretty much won't be an issue.

 

Anybody who plays AoS know how many magic spells their factions typically get in their battle tomes?

 

It obviously varies but both Sylvaneth and Tzeentch got a fair amount of additional spells when their battle tomes came out. Seraphon are currently the main magic-heavy faction lacking additional spells and that is because their battle tome came out well before the Generals Handbook.

[Aethernitas]

If they just expand the Psychic power table in the upcoming codex from three powers back up to 6 or 7, or re-introduce squad-specific powers, then the Rule of 1 pretty much won't be an issue.

Imo it really doesn't. Yes it raises the soft-cap on psychic armies a little higher but it doesn't change the fact that the 'rule of one' is just lazy design. As far as I'm concerned psykers are an integral part of the 40K lore and that should be reflected in the ruleset.

Good design would be if very psyker heavy factions are somehow dependent on building around their psychic abilities to achieve their full potential. It's after all very much part of their identity as a faction when you look at Eldar and Tyranids as broader factions and GKs, TS, Tzeentch etc as narrower examples.

 

Balance shouldn't come by straight up cutting the power of one of their defining strengths. Thats not fun so thats bad design. It would be much better to give other factions tools within their own strengths to work around those of others, give them the opportunity to outsmart their opponents and find weakspots the the enemies strategy.

 

For those who play Moba's and are familiar with the balancing-philosophies of League of Legends compared to Dota 2 this will probably sound familiar.

[Holier Than Thou]

If they just expand the Psychic power table in the upcoming codex from three powers back up to 6 or 7, or re-introduce squad-specific powers, then the Rule of 1 pretty much won't be an issue.

 

Anybody who plays AoS know how many magic spells their factions typically get in their battle tomes?

I disagree and point to the example I gave earlier of a Grand Master using a squad of Paladins as bodyguards. They need to redeploy to deal with a major threat. The Paladins cast Gate to quickly close with the Greater Daemon that has just arrived. The Grand Master sits down, pulls out a newspaper and has a quick five minutes to himself because he can't follow his squad of bodyguards. All because of the Psychic Focus rule.

[Soder]

Ya, even if they gave non psyker heavy armies more deny chances or something to that effect and that's just off the top of my head! I'm not a fan of this rule and when discussing with my gaming group even my non psyker opponents think it is a lame/lazily thought out rule..

[Happy-inquisitor]

 

Imo it really doesn't. Yes it raises the soft-cap on psychic armies a little higher but it doesn't change the fact that the 'rule of one' is just lazy design. As far as I'm concerned psykers are an integral part of the 40K lore and that should be reflected in the ruleset.

 

 

If you want to focus on the lore play narrative games. No problem.

[Seizeman]

The only chage I would make, maybe, is not being able to cast again a spell you have SUCCESSFULLY cast this turn, instead of attempted. But in general the rule is good.