Matched Play Psychic Phase Rule of 1

[Valerian]

Yeah, RD curb-stomped some Dark Angels over in this thread.

[Prot]

 

 

 

Also, if they were so worried about psychic dominance, why is Smite exempt from this? Spamming Mortal wounds at 24" seems far more concerning than multi-casting 'Hammerhand' around, for example. 

 

 

I haven't looked closely at the other high-Psychic factions, but ours at least is a reduced Smite with half the range and only a single mortal wound, so spamming that isn't a big concern at all.

 

 

 

The Power Ratings are arbitrary and meaningless. ... Point costs is still the best balancing factor to the game,...

 

 

The Power Levels are actually derived directly from the Points costs of a unit.  They've taken the lowest cost for a unit (no upgrades) and the highest cost for a unit (fully upgraded) and taken the average, then divided by 20.  For those that have been playing games with them so far, they seem to be working just fine.

 

No idea for Xenos, but it's even worse for Thousand sons, not going to lie tempted to just give up on 40k for a bit due to the psychic rules or 8th essentially making my Grey knights and Thousand armies more likely to self disintegrate then anything.

Trying to be positive, has anyone had any good experiences with GK in 8th yet?

 

 

As you know I play both armies.

 

I think Grey Knights are still better off. I wish I had more time, but I can only get in about 3 games a week.. maybe 4 max. I want Voldus up and running too. But I wouldn't let the psychic phase completely scare you out of Grey Knights. Their close combat prowess and built in support units (NDK's, and Dreads for example) seem to help a lot. 

 

And Darius' batrep isn't against a cakewalk army. Dark Angels look very respectable this edition. 

[Adeptus]

I'd be interested to find out how Matched play can't facilitate the same Narrative games as Narrative or Open Play.

 

Can you not have narrative games in Open Play either?

 

Can you play Narrative games with Points instead of Power Levels?

 

Shouldn't we just simply separate the story from the game?  As the story is what the individual players make of it, no matter which way they play...

 

Well, the two obvious ones are the prevention of null deployment that hurts drop pod and deepstrike armies, and the other one I quoted in my original post (and the reason this thread was created) being that the rule of one prevents a character and his supporting units from all using Gate in the same turn, or doubling up on any psychic abilities except Smite.

[Waking Dreamer]

 

...and the other one I quoted in my original post (and the reason this thread was created) being that the rule of one prevents a character and his supporting units from all using Gate in the same turn, or doubling up on any psychic abilities except Smite.

 

 

 I was thinking a lot about this and thought of a way to make it happen - while making the GK libby more competitive in use. So how about if the Libby like other HQ characters had an aura to buff other GK units as well?

 

eg. Psychic Communion: Friendly GREY KNIGHTS units within 6" of this model can attempt to manifest a psychic power from the Sanctic Discipline, even if it has already been attempted by a unit other than themselves.

 

With strategic positioning, a GK libby near a Paladin unit and GM can have them both Gate at the SAME time. Also, even if by chance there are no other GK units within range of the Libby's aura, they themselves are still guaranteed manifest attempts for their TWO Sanctic powers, after two other units (or say Voldus/Draigo) have already attempted those powers. That, along with their unrestricted Smite could have a GK Librarian competitive in games, while allowing grouped Characters and units psychic cohesion/usefulness but still limits from every GK unit "spamming" their Sanctic powers...?

Edited June 13, 2017 by Waking Dreamer

[Gentlemanloser]

Adeptus, apart from leaving the bodyguarded unit behind, neither of those effect the narrative in any way.

 

Unless you want them too.

 

The whole dp army simply stats with some pods already on board. The first wave down if you will.

 

A narrative, a story, is what the players build it to be. Regardless of rule set used.

[Adeptus]

Adeptus, apart from leaving the bodyguarded unit behind, neither of those effect the narrative in any way.

 

Unless you want them too.

 

The whole dp army simply stats with some pods already on board. The first wave down if you will.

 

A narrative, a story, is what the players build it to be. Regardless of rule set used.

 

The rules deliberately hamstring the abilities of some armies to perform certain feats. You can 'forge a narrative' around those icebergs if you want, or you can just play Narrative Play games where those icebergs don't exist.

[Holier Than Thou]

 

...and the other one I quoted in my original post (and the reason this thread was created) being that the rule of one prevents a character and his supporting units from all using Gate in the same turn, or doubling up on any psychic abilities except Smite.

 

 

 I was thinking a lot about this and thought of a way to make it happen - while making the GK libby more competitive in use. So how about if the Libby like other HQ characters had an aura to buff other GK units as well?

 

eg. Psychic Communion: Friendly GREY KNIGHTS units within 6" of this model can attempt to manifest a psychic power from the Sanctic Discipline, even if it has already been attempted by a unit other than themselves.

 

With strategic positioning, a GK libby near a Paladin unit and GM can have them both Gate at the SAME time. Also, even if by chance there are no other GK units within range of the Libby's aura, they themselves are still guaranteed manifest attempts for their TWO Sanctic powers, after two other units (or say Voldus/Draigo) have already attempted those powers. That, along with their unrestricted Smite could have a GK Librarian competitive in games, while allowing grouped Characters and units psychic cohesion/usefulness but still limits from every GK unit "spamming" their Sanctic powers...?

Just make the powers affect the casting unit PLUS a single friendly unit within a certain distance. Means characters can buff and be buffed and avoids the nonsense of gating a squad away from the person they're supposed to be protecting, not just in a narrative sense but from a competitive viewpoint too now that characters can't join units but can't be picked out if they're not the closest unit.

[Gentlemanloser]

Exactly! You *can* forge that Narrative!  However you play.

 

Narrative games aren't exclusive to Narrative Play.

 

(I think it's also obvious I dislike the Match Play rule of 1!  It doesn't scale, and effects some armies more than others.  Conversely, the 1/2 unit reserve rule does scale.  And every army has multiple units that can start in reserves, sure some - Drop Pod armies - are effected more than others, but Drop Pods can still start deployed on board.  With the hilarious rules allowing embarked units to remain hidden inside deployed Drop Pods)

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Like every edition of the game, the player base have to FAQ themselves out of the potholes GW throw in our way. 

 

Psychic phase restrictions are dumb and make ours braindead (I never case anything but Smite with 'cast 1 power' units for example). What is the point of knowing a Sanctic power you cast 1 copy of, when you could just chuck out a Mortal Wound for free? 

 

Reserve restrictions could be handled better. The forced meme of half your army on the board is irritating and gimps our playstyle. It's easier to play around at least, but I'd still house rule it to 'you can null deploy, but at least half your force must come on Turn 1'. This is why Reserve rolls were good, it balanced the null deploy lists by adding an element of acceptable risk to the strategy (which you could lessen with special rules or a Comms Array anyway). I might even consider house ruling in Reserve rolls, everyone is used to it from 7th anyway. 

[Adeptus]

Seems to me if you're having to house rule around those things, you're better just abandoning matched play altogether. Points or power levels, makes no difference because GW don't know how to create and maintain a competitively balanced gaming system, so you may as well just play the one that's the most fun. And if you're getting hung up on the Rule of One and the Only Half in Reserves rules, which aside from points over power levels are the defining features of Matched Play, then it just makes sense from my point of view to abandon matched play altogether.

 

If you're really seeking a competitive gaming experience then I'd suggest leaving GW aside altogether and looking into FFG. GW games are beer and pretzels, not serious competition.

[Gentlemanloser]

Apart from GW crying they've playtested extensively, and have balanced all units. ;)

 

But I agree, using Narative Play with Points over Power Levels seems great.

 

But then I'd probably spam Purge Soul! >;)

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Seems to me if you're having to house rule around those things, you're better just abandoning matched play altogether. Points or power levels, makes no difference because GW don't know how to create and maintain a competitively balanced gaming system, so you may as well just play the one that's the most fun. And if you're getting hung up on the Rule of One and the Only Half in Reserves rules, which aside from points over power levels are the defining features of Matched Play, then it just makes sense from my point of view to abandon matched play altogether.

 

If you're really seeking a competitive gaming experience then I'd suggest leaving GW aside altogether and looking into FFG. GW games are beer and pretzels, not serious competition.

 

False equivalence. Saying one aspect of the game is contrived garbage made by people with no understanding of their own game mechanics, isn't the same as 'lets just throw all balancing factors out the window and throw model collections at eachother'. I like the new detachments, they're actually quite hard to abuse without gimping yourself of Command Points entirely. The HQ taxes stop a lot of shenanigans, and also make sense (actual battlegroups need to be led and commanded, not just shoved into play with free buffs to sell box sets). 

 

Narrative play just demonstrates how little GW understand or even try to. Every game I play, I play to win, but I also like inventing little bits of lore to make the game flow. 'Hey so these Dark Angels found something they shouldn't, gotta get mindwiped/die now'. That's actually the spirit of the game, not leaving the players completely flapping in the wind with no real restrictions or guidance. I agree entirely that if all you want is easy wins, you should play something else. 40k is incredibly expensive, time consuming and often frustrating. You don't really get a good return on your investment, in strictly rational terms. Video games are way better and cheaper, not to mention barriers to entry are practically non-existent. 

 

40k is and always has been a competitive game. It's a game of 2 players in a competition to beat eachother on victory conditions. GW have crafted an amazing game universe, mostly excellent models, and strong themes that resonate with their playerbase. They just can't write rules to save themselves. It's the game itself they keep slipping up with, because nobody apparently playtests, bothers to run stats, or does any kind of internal balancing or even does comparisons between factions. Thus we get lopsided meta shifts every edition, where they swing the nerf bat at the current problem, then allow even worse abominations to arise. I miss 5th edition mech, it was probably the least stupid 'list to beat' of the game thus far. Compare that to Flyer armies of 6th or the xenos dominance of 7th...

 

I'm still gonna do Matched play, because the overall architecture is fine. It's the three restrictions I'd change, as follows:

- Psychic Focus: Gone. It serves no function, and doesn't stop the Psychic phase being abused in the slightest. The additional risk of Perils/failing test more than mitigates spamming same powers. Not to mention casting limits are baked into every unit description now, so outside of GK or Eldar, its rarely an issue. You're gonna spam Smite anyway, and that's already not only possible, but actively encouraged (Psychic Locus is a giant neon sign of 'take as many Strike squads as you can afford'). 

- Strategic Discipline: Gone. It removes a layer of decision making that would otherwise be interesting. Spam all your CP early, or hold them for crucial moments? You're rarely have more than 10 anyway, so if you waste it all on re-rolls early, it will cost you later. 

- Tactical Reserves: Modified. Null deploy is possible, but at least half your army must deploy Turn 1 from Reserve. Remember that the victor of the deployment method gets to choose to go first, so it can go either way. I have other ideas for this part, but I'm happy to playtest this version for now. 

[Gentlemanloser]

How would you then deal with purge soul spam?

 

Is smite spam on steroids!

[Myunch]

How would you then deal with purge soul spam?

 

Is smite spam on steroids!

It really is!! I wiped two squads of 8 Fire Warriors in my last game on successive turns. Purge Soul is easily my favorite of our 3 powers.

[Gentlemanloser]

And without the Rule of 1 from Matched play, all our units could cast it, every turn!

[Adeptus]

40k is and always has been a competitive game.

 

Only in the same way that tiddlywinks or snakes and ladders are competitive games. Sure, there's two players and and they're both using the rules to try and win. But the game isn't suited a highly competitive environment. There's too much fudge, too much imbalance, and too much luck involved to make it a game that showcases player skill. Some games are very highly tuned and constantly adjusted to make sure the competitive metagame remains balanced, but 40K is not one of those games, and approaching it the same way you would approach an X Wing tournament is going to disappoint you. 

 

The game really shines when you decide to throw some dice, have a laugh, and just get weird with it and have fun. Matched Play games are never going to be balanced, but I'd never play 40K if I was looking for a balanced, finely machined competitive game. So if they're never going to be balanced, and the restrictions imposed by Narrative Play games are frustrating (and IMO they are), then why not give Narrative Play a go? You can even use points instead of power levels if you want.

 

But I totally get the idea behind power levels, and I think GW has been very clever in implementing them. It's hard to put into words, but there's something refreshingly simple about power levels. I can just take my Paladin squad, and put it on the board, and everything is WYSIWYG and I don't have to worry about hamstringing myself by not taking all hammers, or all warding staves, or whatever the perfect ratio of weapons is deemed to be. I know I'll only be taking a moderate amount of upgrades because I'll only be using models I actually own, not counting swords as hammers or anything, and I know my opponents will be doing the same, so the relative strength of our units will remain just as balanced as using points, so by using Narrative Play I get as balanced a gaming experience as anyone can ever expect from Games Workshop games, without the hassle of navigating around the reserves and 'rule of one' limitations.

[Gentlemanloser]

I can't find any WYSIWYG rules in 8th. Might have missed them. Pretty sure they were missing in 7th as well. ;)

[Adeptus]

I can't find any WYSIWYG rules in 8th. Might have missed them. Pretty sure they were missing in 7th as well.

 

lol. If you need a rule to make you play wysiwyg, then I think we're approaching the game from wildly different points of view...

[Gentlemanloser]

Indeed.

 

We're more than happy to let one of the guys go "Guys, I'm not redoing my Dreads, but Heavy Flamers suck this edition.  Anyone mind if my Dreads are all actually dual TLLCs?".

 

Or similar.

 

Which is why none of the guys I play with care that all my TDA armoured Grey Knights are Paladins, instead of GKT.

 

As long as it's consistent, and everyone knows what everything is.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

How would you then deal with purge soul spam?

 

Is smite spam on steroids! 

 

It's way less reliable than Smite, ironically. Wouldn't worry me as much. Also, besides Librarians and Voldus, you only get one cast per unit in your army. Due to our elite nature, its unlikely you'll throw out more than 8 casts a turn. At least not at the same target. 

Only in the same way that tiddlywinks or snakes and ladders are competitive games. Sure, there's two players and and they're both using the rules to try and win. But the game isn't suited a highly competitive environment. There's too much fudge, too much imbalance, and too much luck involved to make it a game that showcases player skill. Some games are very highly tuned and constantly adjusted to make sure the competitive metagame remains balanced, but 40K is not one of those games, and approaching it the same way you would approach an X Wing tournament is going to disappoint you. 

 

And they all fail to do so, because the nature of warfare is fundamentally asymmetrical. White goes first in chess. There is no such thing as a balanced wargame. 

The game really shines when you decide to throw some dice, have a laugh, and just get weird with it and have fun. Matched Play games are never going to be balanced, but I'd never play 40K if I was looking for a balanced, finely machined competitive game. So if they're never going to be balanced, and the restrictions imposed by Narrative Play games are frustrating (and IMO they are), then why not give Narrative Play a go? You can even use points instead of power levels if you want.

 

The game is whatever you want it to be, and what you make it. 

 

Narrative play is garbage. 

But I totally get the idea behind power levels, and I think GW has been very clever in implementing them. It's hard to put into words, but there's something refreshingly simple about power levels. I can just take my Paladin squad, and put it on the board, and everything is WYSIWYG and I don't have to worry about hamstringing myself by not taking all hammers, or all warding staves, or whatever the perfect ratio of weapons is deemed to be. I know I'll only be taking a moderate amount of upgrades because I'll only be using models I actually own, not counting swords as hammers or anything, and I know my opponents will be doing the same, so the relative strength of our units will remain just as balanced as using points, so by using Narrative Play I get as balanced a gaming experience as anyone can ever expect from Games Workshop games, without the hassle of navigating around the reserves and 'rule of one' limitations.

 

No, its an arbitrary and easily broken system, as GML pointed out earlier. Points actually do a better job balancing the game, as you pay for upgrades beyond base wargear, and even then you have stuff like storm bolter tax (also mandatory costs like double dreadfist on DK's, for example). When there is a real oppertunity cost to taking certain upgrades or units, you start to evaluate your list more ruthlessly and efficiently. When you can just stack upgrades into the sky, and your 'Power Level' is still the same, how does that balance anything? 

I can't find any WYSIWYG rules in 8th. Might have missed them. Pretty sure they were missing in 7th as well.  

 

I've never had it enforced on me, or enforced it on others. Short of bringing Lego or counting an entire army of something as something else (like Tau as Nids or something), I'm cool for people to proxy or try out different loadouts. I draw the line only at special weapons and characters, simply so its clear where they are in the unit so people don't try and pull fast ones with casualty removal or allocating wounds. 

 

As GML says, most of the time few people have an issue with whether or not you modelled precisely your loadout. I don't magnetise cos I'm a noob at modelling, so I often count-as. Plenty of people do it, I think its more a community tradition that stands apart from whatever GW spells out as sanctioned. 

[Gentlemanloser]

"you only get one cast per army"

 

Not if you get rid of the Rule of 1!  Which is what you were deciding upon doing.

 

Do that, and I cast Purge Soul at you 20 times a round, form an army of GK Apothecaries, backed by Ld9 Inquisitors all casting Terrify for -1Ld on my targets. ;)

 

That's magnitudes of more Mortal Wounds than simple Smite Spam!

[Myunch]

While you're at it, add an Ancient for +1 Ld to all units, and take the Leadership Warlord Trait... how brutal...

[Gentlemanloser]

Ah! Missed those!  Must work on my Army List thread!

[Gentlemanloser]

Ancient isnt as good and is more expensive than using an inquisitor.

[Myunch]

But using both, itd essentially be a Ld 11 Purge soul with a -1 Ld to the enemy. Of course, if you loaded out that way, against some units that would potentially have a devastating amount of mortal wounds.