HH Rulebook - rules updates discussion

[SixOfOne]

Charlo - I've had too much Christmas pudding...

 

What's the issue with Furious Charge?

 

There's no problem with Furious Charge as far as I can see. It is still +1 S on the charge as long as you're not making a disordered charge. Unless of course Charlo is referring to Furious Assault, which is meant to be Furious Charge anyway.

[Withershadow]

All the optional FoC lost their "needs permission and meant to be narrative, theyre not balanced" blurb.

 

Immobile artillery is explained next to artillery, but it's still not an explicit sub type like jump or jet. In fact it would make more sense in the special rules based on its poor wording.

 

Grav imploders (what myrmidon destructors can have) are listed as having the to-wound mechanic of normal grav weaponry; enemies take a strength test or suffer a wound.

 

Quad launchers still have shell shock for their normal rounds but lack pinning.

 

Deepstrike mishap into ongoing still doesn't grant you the ability to deepstrike back from on going

Immobile clarification not as explicit as I may have liked, but still only strengthens the argument that Pods are not immobile.

 

Ouch, good thing I only made 3 grav imploders, and magnetized them to boot.  So they still have 4 shots, but otherwise work like regular grav weapons?  Because they worked differently against vehicles too.

 

Shame about the launchers (and sniper rifles), I was hopping they would bring back pinning as a rule. In Horus Heresy it would actually matter since leadership actually matters.

 

The latter I think was addressed by the FAQ as just allowing you to try again on subsequent rounds.

[1ncarnadine]

Ouch, good thing I only made 3 grav imploders, and magnetized them to boot.  So they still have 4 shots, but otherwise work like regular grav weapons?  Because they worked differently against vehicles too.

 

Yeah... the entry seems broken in a non-functional sense. As it stands, I'm pretty sure the Imploders no longer have any effect against vehicles at all. They didn't pick up Haywire in exchange for trading their old Graviton rule for Graviton Pulse. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

The only thing this really did was necessitate FAQs even more. I never saved the 7th Ed 40k ones, so who knows how many useful things got thrown out with the move to 8th, and they didn't fix some standing issues like the immobile ambiguity and no pinning on quad launchers. Lots of things like that.

[Gorgoff]

The only thing this really did was necessitate FAQs even more. I never saved the 7th Ed 40k ones, so who knows how many useful things got thrown out with the move to 8th, and they didn't fix some standing issues like the immobile ambiguity and no pinning on quad launchers. Lots of things like that.

What do you mean by immobile ambiguity?

[Withershadow]

 

The only thing this really did was necessitate FAQs even more. I never saved the 7th Ed 40k ones, so who knows how many useful things got thrown out with the move to 8th, and they didn't fix some standing issues like the immobile ambiguity and no pinning on quad launchers. Lots of things like that.

What do you mean by immobile ambiguity?

There are several Rites that do not allow Immobile units.  The only Immobile things in the game is Immobile artillery and the Immobile special rule on Drop Pods that  immobilizes them after they arrive from reserve.  The two sides go as follows:

 

A. These Rites cannot take drop pods, because Artillery (Immobile) is not explicitly called out as a unit subtype. 

 

B. These Rites can usually take drop pods because:

... 1. Artillery (Immobile) is implied to be a unit subtype, and is what is being referred to by "Immobile units" in these rites.

... 2. There are Rites that specifically specify "Units with the Immobile special rule", which unambiguously includes both pods and artillery.

... 3. The Word Bearers have a rite that states "Cannot take Immobile units" and the same Rite allows you to take drop pods.

 

Anyway, most HH events at large cons seem to use the ITC rules/clarifications (which I think are mostly crap because they were written by Word Bearer fanboys butthurt over Thousand Sons), which go with clarification B. 

 

Anyway, this chestnut, the graviton facepalm, and other little things make this a very disappointing release.  FW has gotten even worse at editing and proofreading.  Fires of Cyraxus will probably come out printed in windings. 

[Charlo]

Graviton seems plausible, if only because of how crazy everyone thought the gun was in 7th 40k.

 

Difference is though that they are only on a very expensive unit in Heresy...

 

Also "Graviton" rule says "models caught in the blast".

 

Derp.

[BattleBrotherJohn]

There was talk of a Daemons army list being part of the rule book. Has this been included ? 

[mechadryad]

 

 

Anyway, this chestnut, the graviton facepalm, and other little things make this a very disappointing release.  FW has gotten even worse at editing and proofreading.  Fires of Cyraxus will probably come out printed in windings. 

 

 

I know it was meant as a bad thing but I'd actually love an Imperial Armour in WinDings just for the ridiculous factor

[Riptor]

There was talk of a Daemons army list being part of the rule book. Has this been included ? 

Not a daemons army list, but there are rules for summoned daemons. They are generic statlines for 4 types of daemons (one for each of the malefic summon rules), with an added extra for you to choose from (Rage, FNP, Crusader or Psyker/Brotherhood of Psykers rule). The lesser daemons statline is somewhat like a space marine with a basic invuln instead of an armour save.

 

They are like the 4th edition daemon rules from the CSM codex, if anyone remembers those, but done better as you can give the daemons a special rule to match the models. There is also a rule stating essentially that if you own the 7th edition Daemons Codex then you can use that instead (with opponents permission).

[rendingon1+]

Multiple use combi  grenade launchers. Ha!

[Riptor]

Multiple use combi  grenade launchers. Ha!

I am super excited to try this out. A friend and I were theorying out Combi-Greade Launchers or Volkite on Marksmen Vets. Rending S3 blast templates is gonna cause some harm (even more-so in Zone Mortalis)

[SkimaskMohawk]

Pretttty sure that's a typo. Considering it was only the non standard combis that are missing one use only.

 

@charlo pretty sure the imploder change is a typo too. 35 points for 4 str tests; usually against str 4, no anti tank, and referencing blasts fairly often are all indicators of an accident.

 

Not that the unit couldn't use a nerf, but I think taking away preferred enemy and maybe reducing BS to 4 would be a better work around than nerfing the imploder

[mechadryad]

Not that the unit couldn't use a nerf, but I think taking away preferred enemy and maybe reducing BS to 4 would be a better work around than nerfing the imploder

 

That would make them massively overcosted without the Graviton and dubious with it

[Riptor]

Pretttty sure that's a typo. Considering it was only the non standard combis that are missing one use only.

 

I could honestly see it going either way, as I would have thought that they'd have just copy/pasted the combi-weapon rules across from the red book if they wanted the to be one-use only.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Book is just out and peop already arguing... classic .

 

I heard the alternate rules for SD are gone now.

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

 

Not that the unit couldn't use a nerf, but I think taking away preferred enemy and maybe reducing BS to 4 would be a better work around than nerfing the imploder

That would make them massively overcosted without the Graviton and dubious with it

Not really. The templates still auto hit and wound on 2s, and the lances would still average 4/5 hits depending on if we're talking about bs4 or not; vehicles being their main target means the to wound aspect of PE is usually wasted.

 

Statistically getting almost a 100% translation from amount of shots/hits in the case of templates to saves required isn't really well balanced, especially in the case of non vehicles.

 

And this is coming from a guy with 10 destructors. They're not very fair

[Withershadow]

Graviton seems plausible, if only because of how crazy everyone thought the gun was in 7th 40k.

 

Difference is though that they are only on a very expensive unit in Heresy...

 

Also "Graviton" rule says "models caught in the blast".

 

Derp.

Seems more a copy&paste error.  I will continue using the profile in my Mechanicum book.

[Riptor]

Book is just out and peop already arguing... classic .

 

I heard the alternate rules for SD are gone now.

I'd think to say that people are arguing is not really accurate, more that people are discussing ambiguous writing that has an effect on the game.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

It is polite.

[Withershadow]

Orange is just salty because 8th edition doesn't require any FAQs at all, and everything works just right straight out of the printers.  Please contribute, or start yet another cry thread in Amicus about how the Heresy is dead and we're all doomed.

 

Anyway, I am also skeptical about the newly-included combi-weapons not having that clause.  But is that only in the weapon summary?  Do combi-weapons still have a separate overall rules entry like they do in 7th, that specifies the secondary armament is only once per game?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Turns out they still have rulebooks you can order.

 

8th needs FAQs like any edition but the response time from the development team is amazing... brilliant .

[Riptor]

Reading the section on combi-weapons again, the fluff of the weapons mentions their secondary having a limited charge 'enough for a single destructive shot'.

 

So, as much as I would have liked otherwise, and despite RAW those two secondaries not having one use only, I have to concede that they are still intended to be one shot only.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I would go RAW for now. It is not really game changing.

[Gorgoff]

I would go RAW for now. It is not really game changing.

That.

But I wouldn't go nuts and build lots of combi-grenade launchers either. ;)