Necron Homebrew Fixes/Suggestions for 40kFAQ

[NTaW]

A lot of the chatter here has me thinking about what could change (all the things), what would be reasonable to change (almost all the things), and also what we can do about it (message 40kfaq). This isn't so much about models but strictly rules and maybe by extension point values. I'd like to roll though the Codex and pick through the entries as inspiration hits but please feel free to comment up with your suggestions, maybe with some group conversation (and an updated OP) we can assemble something like an open letter to GW on the topic of Necrons. I'll leave out named characters for now but if someone has ideas don't hesitate. I've included some off the top of my head as I've written it in and look forward to seeing what we come up with as a group.

 

ARMY ABILITIES, WARGEAR

 

Reanimation Protocols

 

Resurrection Orb - Change activation to end of Movement phase, increase range to 6", lower points or allow for multiple uses.

 

Living Metal - Add "weapons targeting this model reduce their AP by 1."

 

Wargear - Make Lightning Field, Gauntlet of the Conflagrator (make back into a flamer-style weapon), and Semptiernal Weave WARGEAR options for HQ units.

 

Gauss - Add "hit rolls of 6+ cause +1 damage against VEHICLE and MONSTER targets."

 

Tesla Destructor - Add "If this weapon hits, roll a D6 for each unit within 3" of the target. On a 5+, 6 for CHARACTERS, that unit takes 1 mortal wound."

 

HQ

 

Catacomb Command Barge  

 

Overlord

 

Lord 

 

Cryptek - boost ability range to 6"

 

Destroyer Lord - United in Hatred loses Shooting phase restriction

 

TROOPS

 

Warriors

 

Immortals

 

ELITES

 

Lychguard

 

Deathmarks

 

Flayed Ones

 

Triarch Praetorians

 

Triarch Stalker - allowed to benefit from its own Targeting Relay or ignore move/fire Heavy weapons

 

C'Tan Shard of the Deceiver

 

C'Tan Shard of the Nightbringer

 

FAST ATTACK

 

Canoptek Wraiths

 

Canoptek Scarabs

 

Tomb Blades

 

Destroyers

 

HEAVY SUPPORT

 

Heavy Destroyers

 

Canoptek Spyders - Allow Fabricator Claw Array to be used multiple times per turn, limit it as equipment to squads of 1 model. Change Scarab Hive to allow for new units of Scarabs to be generated when more than 1 model is in the unit of Spyders.

 

Monolith

 

Annihilation Barge

 

Doomsday Ark - 2d3 shots instead of d6.

 

Transcendent C'Tan

 

TRANSPORTS

 

Ghost Ark - Add "If 10 Warriors are embarked in this model add 1 to hit rolls made in the shooting phase."

 

FLYERS

 

Doom Scythe - Heavy 2 instead of D3.

 

Night Scythe

 

SUPERHEAVY

 

Obelisk 

 

Tesseract Vault

[Tyriks]

Make Gauss better against vehicles. Something like a 6 to hit does more damage or can't be saved by vehicles. We have terrible anti armor because we never needed it. Making gauss at least slightly better would go so far!

[NTaW]

Maybe for gauss hit rolls of 6+ against VEHICLES cause +1 damage? Or wound rolls of 6.

[The great eye]

Make crypteks a bit tougher. Seems they have the same toughness and as a warrior. Which I kinda get, but at least have a 3+ armour.

[Ahzek451]

To preface, my opinions on changes always comes from a base of what makes sense narrative and fair balance first. To gain an advantage is not the point. If the unit entry or fluff says it, I want to see it in action. Which is why scarabs and spiders bug me so much because it seems very clear that the rules writers didn't read the unit entry.... anywho.

 

Living metal: it adapts and repairs. Regaining a wound, cool. How about ignoring 1 ap to represent the adaptation? This would work sooooo well for our vehicles(and incidentally our characters)...which dont seem as though as they should be in game. This would help in situations where it would be best to NOT take the easy route and slap on a 5+ invuln.

 

For example...if a monolith had a 3+ save, and gets hit with a lascannon, then living metal would reduce it to a 5+ save. Seems legit to me.

 

Anhilation barge(and night scythe)and Tesla destructors in general: I know the arc got cut away for an edition made for simplicity but this weapon is boooooring. And deceptive. At a glance, looks ok on paper but this weapon needs a kick to offset the lack of ap and damage. Bring back arc and make it simple. Units in 6" of target get hit with a mortal wound on 5+. This is just an example and could be adjusted.

 

Agreed on doomsday ark. Its alien, its different. Not every blast weapon needs d6 hits.

 

As mentioned previously, spiders and scarabs dont seem to act the way they are described in the unit description. Scarabs need a bonus against units with the vehicle keyword and regain a base if they killed an enemy model in the fight phase since...you know...it says they self replicate if they munch munch. This would be a fun change and make scarabs more aggressive instead of objective campers. Would be nice since they have fly and could munch flyers.

 

 

 

Take away scarab creation from spyders. Spyders are explained to create nanoscarabs and scarabs for the purposes of devouring enemy weapons and repairs. Give spyders a ranged attack that either repairs OR attacks and if a fabricator claw is taken, it boosts repairs. In addition(once more drawing from narrative) grant an aura bonus of some kind to other canoptek units to represent spyder command. Increase bonus if unit has 3 models.

 

And for the love of God...fix the damn obelisk. This model has been a turd since it came out. And utterly fails and what it is supposedly good at. Make it affect ground units or slow them down, and hit fly units on 5+. The unit description also states it is incredibly tough and has canoptek self repair systems. It's not holding a c'tan, give the damn thing a living metal repair of d3. And possibly a 2+ save.

 

Can get on board with death ray change, anything is better than what we have.

 

Let warriors fire out of ghost ark. What other reason would there be to embark warriors on them since logically we like taking units like this at 20.

 

Everyone knows how to systematically stop us from using reanimation protocols for MOST units. Change the useless and CP hungry strategem "enhanced reanimation protocols" to instead allow an infantry, non-character, non canoptek unit to attempt repairs even if wiped out. Costs 2-3cp.

 

Change quantom shields to allow for epic weapons like on titans to wound us. Yeah I know that's a minus, but it truly is silly how this rule works for some of the most insane guns in 40k.

 

Knock warriors down another point.

 

Do something with flayed ones....I'm still not sure. I've heard comments about making them troops, I'm not sure on that. A reduction in pts seems like an option.

[Ahzek451]

Oh and I know were leaving names characters out, but I'm kinda getting tired of random results. I can understand nemesor's transient madness, but how about szerek being allowed to choose the ability? And you have to use all 3 before wrapping around and repeating an ability. I dunno...not super serious about this one. Just tired of certain random abilities.

[Brother Navaer Solaq]

ARMY ABILITIES, WARGEAR

 

Reanimation Protocols

 

Resurrection Orb - lower points

 

Living Metal

 

Wargear - change gauntlet of the conflagrator a heavy flamer with extra - 1 AP (keep it as an artifact, but remove the one time use

 

HQ

Catacomb Command Barge

 

Overlord

 

Lord

 

Cryptek - i agree ability range should be changed to 6" keep it same as lord. easier to remember.

 

Destroyer Lord - United in Hatred loses Shooting phase restriction agreed.

 

 

TROOPS

 

Warriors - lower points. with the new bolter rules warriors have it rough.

 

Immortals

 

ELITES

 

Lychguard

 

Deathmarks

 

Flayed Ones. i really found no use for this unit. i would think 4 A would be better for the points you are paying for flayed ones

 

Triarch Praetorians

 

Triarch Stalker - allowed to benefit from its own Targeting Relay or ignore move/fire Heavy weapons; i agree that it should benefit from its own targeting relay. i am assuming you mean when two of more stalkers are taken?

 

C'Tan Shard of the Deceiver

 

C'Tan Shard of the Nightbringer

 

FAST ATTACK

 

Canoptek Wraiths

 

Canoptek Scarabs - replace FLY with wraith form type of rule OR add ability to either allow it to wound vehicles on 4+ these small critters should be able to get small critical parts on a vehicle.

 

Tomb Blades

 

Destroyers

 

HEAVY SUPPORT

 

Heavy Destroyers

 

Canoptek Spyders - Allow Fabricator Claw Array to be used multiple times per turn, limit it as equipment to squads of 1 model. Change Scarab Hive to allow for new units of Scarabs to be generated when more than 1 model is in the unit of Spyders. disagree. current rules follow most servo-arm (repair vehicle) rules. I suggest giving the model living metal rule. A squad of spyders generating scarabs would be good a unit. Are you thinking of 2 or 3 models per squad?

 

Monolith - drop in points; the damage output is low compared a land raider OR GW can give it quantum shielding. damn it. i have monoliths collecting dust. :p

 

Annihilation Barge

 

Doomsday Ark - 2d3 shots instead of d6. agreed.

 

Transcendent C'Tan

 

TRANSPORTS

 

Ghost Ark - allow models inside ghost ark to shoot as it is open-topped style OR drop the points on the model. It does not really have a great damage output.

 

FLYERS

 

Doom Scythe - Heavy 2 instead of D3, ignore move/fire Heavy weapons.. disagree. it should suffer the move/fire heavy weapons. the heavy 2 is a nice touch though, but points would probably increase it as well.

 

Night Scythe

 

SUPERHEAVY

 

i have no experience with any super heavy so no comment on that.

[Daimyo-Phaeron Lenoch]

=][=

 

We have a seperate forum for this, fella's ;) .

 

That said, I've left a link in the tombs so it's still easy to get to.

 

Carry on.

 

=][=

[Brother Navaer Solaq]

*edited* found out what the previous message. meant.

[Tyriks]

Maybe for gauss hit rolls of 6+ against VEHICLES cause +1 damage? Or wound rolls of 6.

Hit rolls has synergy with our major army mechanics so I prefer that. I could see that making it too strong but I find armies more fun when rules work together (even if it's not crazy good).

 

I also think preventing saves would fit the fluff better. It'd also be easier to implement across all Gauss weapons. If we increase the damage on a 6 it'd need to be a different amount for each weapon (d6+1 isn't very compelling, but D6 x 2 would be way too much). It would also bring us closer to what we had in former editions. I would say it should be limited to VEHICLE and maybe MONSTER units since that's what we struggle with.

[Ahzek451]

Am I wrong in thinking this forum does not have a huge necron following? Doesn't feel like this subject is going super far. 

 

 

Maybe for gauss hit rolls of 6+ against VEHICLES cause +1 damage? Or wound rolls of 6.

Hit rolls has synergy with our major army mechanics so I prefer that. I could see that making it too strong but I find armies more fun when rules work together (even if it's not crazy good).

I also think preventing saves would fit the fluff better. It'd also be easier to implement across all Gauss weapons. If we increase the damage on a 6 it'd need to be a different amount for each weapon (d6+1 isn't very compelling, but D6 x 2 would be way too much). It would also bring us closer to what we had in former editions. I would say it should be limited to VEHICLE and maybe MONSTER units since that's what we struggle with.

 

I'm actually ok with what we have for gauss. I realize some of this is harking back to the first edition with glances on 6 or vehicles. But it was a weird rule to begin with. Considering that gauss properties involve flaying an enemy molecule by molecule, no matter the target(flesh, metal, tank). I actually thought having the better AP was great. As it was a catchall for all target types. 

[Daimyo-Phaeron Lenoch]

You'd be correct that we don't have a massive following. By topic count, we are the smallest army forum, and pretty much the smallest forum overall with the exception of the Administratum forums and the beta rules sub. That said, we're pretty tight-knit, and overall do all right (and I'm going to be working on another recruitment post pretty soon, don't worry!).

 

As to gauss, I'd be more ok with the -1AP change if it hadn't eaten our primary method of anti-tank. I'd prefer it if 6's dealt an additional wound, but I highly doubt we'd ever get that. Maybe a mortal wound in place of a regular wound, as that essentially is what we had last edition (we just need a lot more shots now, and it applies to everything).

[Ahzek451]

You'd be correct that we don't have a massive following. By topic count, we are the smallest army forum, and pretty much the smallest forum overall with the exception of the Administratum forums and the beta rules sub. That said, we're pretty tight-knit, and overall do all right (and I'm going to be working on another recruitment post pretty soon, don't worry!).

 

As to gauss, I'd be more ok with the -1AP change if it hadn't eaten our primary method of anti-tank. I'd prefer it if 6's dealt an additional wound, but I highly doubt we'd ever get that. Maybe a mortal wound in place of a regular wound, as that essentially is what we had last edition (we just need a lot more shots now, and it applies to everything).

Honestly, when I formed my opinion I was also taking into account what GW will likely do and not do. I try to keep away from the unrealistic wish listing. emphasis on "try".  Would I complain if it got a boost? Oh heck no, but it does not seem likely to be in GW's scope. That's why I think other areas in the army need to be looked at to fulfill the gaps that we have. Though I do think that gauss weapons of all types are fine, I do feel that the humble necron warrior is missing something......

 

 

I admit that I have taken a break from necron forums for a couple years and only recently woke from my crypt to look around. I don't see many successful popular necron forums or gatherings besides here and the facebook page. I suppose I figured there would be more activity. 

 

IMHO necrons are in an ok spot right now(especially after the points fixes) but like a few other armies there are still some glaring issues. Would like to strike while the iron is hot and GW is open to listening. I'm actually kind of surprised I don't hear more talk about some of the big issue units such as the obelisk.

[NTaW]

Oof there's a lot to respond to here so I'm just going to put out some ideas that have come to me so far. Sorry to be so absent, will try to be better moving forward.

 

Living Metal: I'm thinking Borg-style adaptation here, where small arms fire is almost instantly useless. Would +1 to save (excluding invulnerable) be too off the wall?

 

Tesla Arc: What if instead of mortal wounds on a 5+ (maybe 6 for CHARACTERS) it's additional hits on that unit? For example D6 S5 AP- hits that still need to roll to wound.

 

Ghost Ark: What if when a full strength unit was embarked it got +1 to hit as the Warriors took control of the flayer array targeting system?

 

Flayed Ones: Becoming Troops would be kinda cool, and having the option of Flayed One HQs could open up a new type of play for Necrons.

 

Canoptek Spyders: I get your point about the claw array. Maybe remove that stipulation for Crypteks since they are the masters of all technology? Just feels like Necrons should also be exceptionally good at repairing things, though maybe it's my love of Dark Crusade showing. As for the amount of scarabs spawned I'd say 3 would be the minimum but maybe a full size unit could be more efficient at making them (+1 to spawn roll?).

 

Gauss: +1 damage is very appealing to me, totally agree against MONSTER/VEHICLE types only. I don't think it needs to be different for every weapon, knowing you're working up from 1 already is wonderful news to me and subtle protection from the insolence of my dice when rolling for damage. I do say this in addition to the current AP stats of gauss weaponry, which I think nicely represents what it does to infantry but not so much when it comes to the big bads.

[Ahzek451]

Oof there's a lot to respond to here so I'm just going to put out some ideas that have come to me so far. Sorry to be so absent, will try to be better moving forward.

 

Living Metal: I'm thinking Borg-style adaptation here, where small arms fire is almost instantly useless. Would +1 to save (excluding invulnerable) be too off the wall?

 

Tesla Arc: What if instead of mortal wounds on a 5+ (maybe 6 for CHARACTERS) it's additional hits on that unit? For example D6 S5 AP- hits that still need to roll to wound.

 

Ghost Ark: What if when a full strength unit was embarked it got +1 to hit as the Warriors took control of the flayer array targeting system?

 

Flayed Ones: Becoming Troops would be kinda cool, and having the option of Flayed One HQs could open up a new type of play for Necrons.

 

Canoptek Spyders: I get your point about the claw array. Maybe remove that stipulation for Crypteks since they are the masters of all technology? Just feels like Necrons should also be exceptionally good at repairing things, though maybe it's my love of Dark Crusade showing. As for the amount of scarabs spawned I'd say 3 would be the minimum but maybe a full size unit could be more efficient at making them (+1 to spawn roll?).

 

Gauss: +1 damage is very appealing to me, totally agree against MONSTER/VEHICLE types only. I don't think it needs to be different for every weapon, knowing you're working up from 1 already is wonderful news to me and subtle protection from the insolence of my dice when rolling for damage. I do say this in addition to the current AP stats of gauss weaponry, which I think nicely represents what it does to infantry but not so much when it comes to the big bads.

 

Your living metal suggestion is basically the same effect as mine, however the fundamental difference is that simply adding +1 to save might be too much coupled with regaining a wound. The reason I suggested -1 to incoming AP, is because this method still allows for ap- weapons to come through without a bonus. Strikes a nice balance as IMHO I already think my suggestion might be too much. Reason being, I playtested it a few times and it is soooo nice. 

 

Yeah, I'm not too picky about how tesla arcs, as long as it adds something. I considered your idea, but the mortal wound thought was to help clear the bloat and game time. Adding more hits just adds more dice rolls, GW has a common theme of just simply causing a mortal wound in these cases for simplicity sake. Mind, I think the arcing ability should be exclusive to tesla destructors and not all tesla weapons. 

 

Like the ghost ark idea.

 

 

Forgive me, but I am stuck on the idea of taking spyders and scarabs back to the drawing board and rebuilding what they do based on the codex unit description. Which is different beast from what they currently do. Let the scarabs rebuild themselves as they consume and become more of a threat in combat(i.e. adjust combat ability) and let the spyders repair and command. In addition, if scarabs reproduce by killing(as the narrative suggests), that's more incentive to fit the narrative and get these guys into combat instead of uncharacteristically hanging back to sit on objectives MSU style. 

 

As far as adjusting scarabs in combat, -1 ap to mandibles, and +1 to wound against units with the "vehicle" keyword. Mostly because they are described as being super effective against them. 

 

I know there is a lot of talk on gauss, but for a long time I think particle weapons are overlooked. I don't see this weapon used regularly and I feel they need a points drop or some kind of adjustment. 

[NTaW]

I thought the Living Metal suggestions were replacing the wound regain, not adding to them.

 

**will add more**

[Ahzek451]

I wouldnt think it would be out of the question to have two effects. It does in the narrative. It repairs and adapts. Regaining and wound and a mechanic that affects AP strikes a nice defensive bonus to necron vehicles (and characters), that IMHO is needed. Obviously we wouldnt want necrons to be a pain in the neck defensively, but our defensive rules are extremely deceptive. Quantom shielding is nice, but it typically lives in units with T6 and 4+ save. However, units like monoliths, obelisks, etc. Dont have much going for them defensively. Not to mention that I wouldnt say it would be unfair to add a bit more defense since these units are slow as hell.

[Tyriks]

I think we need to have a stratagem to bring back extinct units like Tide of Traitors of the Ork one. We have more reason than anyone to have that kind of rule and it would help RP so much. Not bring it back at full strength, though, I mean something we can use more than once per game but just brings back a few models in a unit that has the RP rule (so no canopteks or vehicles). Maybe different quantities (or CP cost) based on the unit, which could be added in to the unit entry or just based on the FOC slot they use. RP just so rarely ends up being useful since most armies aren't struggling to kill ten T4/3-4+ models.

 

Here's an idea - make the stratagem be used when the unit dies. One CP, use when a Necron infantry unit with RP is fully destroyed - still make RP rolls for that unit next turn as if it was still on the table. Maybe put a marker down where they were or have it be anywhere within 6" of a Cryptek or Ghost Ark or Rez Orb. The usage is flexible but the timing is not and you still have to roll RP so it's not a free recycle.

[NTaW]

I've roughly updated the OP with some of our work so far.

 

I like that stratagem idea. Almost sounds like it could be a Resurrection Orb stratagem that builds on the effect of the wargear selection in a way.

 

EDIT: Maybe Tesla Spheres get the Tesla Arc ability but it increases the range and/or ease of access to the mortal wound as well? It would buff our superheavies but not overly. I guess it could get pretty hectic if you split each sphere at a different unit in range, could you overlap the arcs? The Scythes at least have two destructors each, could a stipulation be in order to prevent the electrical field being more effective than the shots?

 

Lot of questions in that edit. I'll leave it to you all to think this one out :lol:

[Ahzek451]

I wa as thinking about this one lately and I'm a little fiddly on it. But I like the basic concept that it fits what a ghost ark does plus boosts it and warriors viability.

 

What I'd we had a strat that works like: if a necron warrior unit is destroyed within say...6". For 2-3cp you can place a fresh unit of 10 onboard at the start of the next turn. Represents the ghost ark gathering the pieces up. Also.makes losing a unit of warriors less painful.

[Tyriks]

That cost is way out of line. For 3cp other armies can get a full squad back AND place it anywhere on the board. If we are limited to what fits in a Ghost Ark and it has to start in the Ghost Ark, it really should be 1cp.

[Ahzek451]

That's why I left it adjustable. But 1cp seems too little, too strong the other way. 2cp might seem like a nice middle ground. Agreed, it's not the same as others get, however free units should not be given lightly.

[NTaW]

What do you think of this stratagem? I would like this to work into resurrection orbs somehow as well. Maybe ResOrbs can pull a unit to them via this as an alternate set up option to the one I've offered.

 

Resurrection Protocols 2CP

 

Use this stratagem when a NECRONS INFANTRY unit is completely destroyed. Immediately make Reanimation Protocols rolls equal to the number of models at starting strength regardless of how many casualties the unit had suffered throughout the game (models lost to Morale remain lost). Models recovered from this roll are placed as close as possible to their previous position but more than 1" away from enemy models.

[Ahzek451]

What do you think of this stratagem? I would like this to work into resurrection orbs somehow as well. Maybe ResOrbs can pull a unit to them via this as an alternate set up option to the one I've offered.

 

Resurrection Protocols 2CP

 

Use this stratagem when a NECRONS INFANTRY unit is completely destroyed. Immediately make Reanimation Protocols rolls equal to the number of models at starting strength regardless of how many casualties the unit had suffered throughout the game (models lost to Morale remain lost). Models recovered from this roll are placed as close as possible to their previous position but more than 1" away from enemy models.

Slap it, wrap it, make it so.

 

I assume you intended for it to work to where an enemy unit can attempt to wipe it away once more in the same phase?

 

Eg. Unit A shoots and wipes unit. Immediately employ strat and recover half of the unit. Unit B shoots at unit again and wipes once more.

[NTaW]

Hmm. Good catch. Think it's worth marking the unit's place and rolling/placing models at the end of the phase? They may yet get wrecked, but only if the timing is a bit better.