Rules Changes I Would Like to See

[jgascoine011]

With it looking like 9th eddition is probably not to far away I just wanted to give my opinion on what rules I hope to see changes, both to the core rule book and codexs

 

 

1) Transports: You only roll to see if your guys are killed if the transport explodes.

 

2) Vehicles: Any vehicles can move over beasts, infantry, & swarms. Right now its so stupid that the driver of a rhino suddenly develops a concious and wont run over an imperial guards man standing infront of his rhino. Thats not to say you can kill anyone with this, its just assumed the person standing infront of the tank moves the   away.

 

3) Re-rolls: No more re-rolls everything.

Gone is chapter master, daemon forge, vengeance for cadia, Cawl etc. This is supposed to be a dice game and sometimes you get a bad roll, there should be some random element to it. Re-rolls completley negate this.

My only exception would be space marines should keep the re-roll 1s (to hit and wound) but does not effect the character, while for chaos, it should only apply to the indivdual character. I actually like the idea of Space Marines being more about buffing the army, while chaos is more about the indivudal character going after glory and not giving a F about what his army is doing.

 

4) Random D6 Weaponary. e.g. Heavy D6/Assault D3 etc. These should be flat 6 shots (or whatever the random number is) but the random element should apply if the bearer has moved (or possibly advanced for assault weapons)

There would be some rules changes needed as suddenly imperial guard battle tanks are doing 12 S8 shots, but grinding advance should be changed so thay you always do the max number of shots if you moved (which actually fits more of the fluff of you know "advancing"...and not staying still)

Rapid fire battle cannons may need some adjustment however.

 

5) Knights...the chainsword should give them more attacks and not the tap dancing feet. For example knight should have 4 attacks at S8 AP-2 D3 damage, but can use the massive chainsword for either Sx2 and Damage 6 or 3 hit rolls for each attack. This might actually make having a chainsword worthwhile and not being worse than tapdancing 90% of the time.

 

6) To hit modifiers.

My thoughts on this are a bit hard to explain so bare with me.

A model firing a weapon can have as many negative to hit modifiers applied to it 

However the tageted unit can only be at a maximum of -1 to hit

So for example a eldar Alaitoc flyer with lightning fast reflexes would normally be -3 to hit...now its only -1. However if shot at by a predator that has moved the predator would be at -1 to hit and -1 to hit the flyer so this would be -2. If somehow you have cast horrofy on it (from the tyranids)  the predator would be at -2 to hit and -1 to hit the flyer putting it at -3 .

In most cases you are only ever going to be at -1 (or -2 if you have moved) but it stops the rediculious amounts of -ve to hit modifiers.

Also a 6 always succeds and a 1 always fails

 

7) No army should be able to completley ignore a core rule.

The big one that comes to mind is ignores cover. While certain units should be able to or use a stratagem etc, no one army should be able to competley ignore cover (or any core rule)

 

8) NO MORE SIEZE

I have never felt for stress than when i have 1st turn and my opponent rolls for the sieze.

Also, it totaly screws the person going 1st over. If you are going to a tournament or an event then i actually doing mind sieze to much. Sure if the oppoennent deploys for a sieze and he does then great, i have like 5 more games to play so whatever.

If you are a more casual gamer (which i am sure most of us are) and you manage to get a game one a week then its so frustrating to have packed up all your models, driven to the club, layed out all your models only for you opponent to roll a 6 and basically make it a very quick game.

If you roll to go 1st, then you go 1st

 

9) Ghazghkulls only take a 3rd damage/phase rule.

Was really skeptical on this rule at 1st but i absolutly love it now. I think its so cool and should be rolled out to more models.

Things like the swarm lord will no longer die turn 1. And you can have epic duals between ghaz and the swarm lord, or Logan on stormrider. Would be amazing.

Even knights, which are an army i hate, should get something like this

However i think GW needs to be carefull on this to not make it to broken. 

Perhaps only 1 model per army can benefit from this rule and it can only be on models with 12 or more wounds.

And also they need to be careful about healing. I think they already missed the fact Gaz can get D3 wounds back per battle round.

Edited April 13, 2020 by PeteySödes
Don't dodge the swear filter

[Gederas]

Not sure this is in the right section. I don't see how this has to do with Heretic Astartes only?

[Brother Tyler]

I've moved this over to Amicus since the range of suggestions the OP is making are general in nature and not specific to one faction.

[Kain Mor]

So your suggestion for the game is to remove re-roll bubbles and abilities from everyone except space marines?

 

Nah. I think I’ll pass. Thanks.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Letting for example Magnus or Mortarion never suffer more than a low fixed number of wounds per phase is a disaster waiting to happen. Ghaz has to plod which makes a huge difference plus Orks don’t have anywhere near the psychic manipulation available to Chaos.

 

That said I think the OP has some merit. I would like to see no more CP rerolls for example.

[Lexington]

I would like a ranged combat and cover system that wasn't entirely designed around the boxed set for a different game that only had a minor ranged combat element.

[MARK0SIAN]

There’s a few general stuff I’d like to see:

 

1) Less rerolls across the board

 

2) Reduce the lethality of the game overall, too much stuff dies too quickly

 

3) End the bias against FW stuff. I get it’s a hangover from last editions but the stuff is fine now, just overcosted.

 

4) Overhaul morale and avoid giving horde armies immunity to it.

 

5) Remove any rules that outright negate/ignore core game mechanics

 

In terms of specific rules:

 

1) You can disembark any transport AFTER it has moved, restrict charging after disembarking to assault vehicles.

[Dark Shepherd]

Agree on less re rolls, feeds into game being too killy too

Agree big time on no more seize

[Bryan Blaire]

I too agree with throwing the rule book out the window and starting over - completely over, fundamentally, and having the rules authors determine from the get-go: “Are we playing a simulation or an abstraction” and writing all of the rules from exclusively that view.

 

I just don’t think it’s going to happen.

[Schlitzaf]

There’s a few general stuff I’d like to see:

 

1) Less rerolls across the board

 

2) Reduce the lethality of the game overall, too much stuff dies too quickly

 

3) End the bias against FW stuff. I get it’s a hangover from last editions but the stuff is fine now, just overcosted.

 

4) Overhaul morale and avoid giving horde armies immunity to it.

 

5) Remove any rules that outright negate/ignore core game mechanics

 

In terms of specific rules:

 

1) You can disembark any transport AFTER it has moved, restrict charging after disembarking to assault vehicles.

1) Agree but less full rerolls. Reroll’s 1’s are fine but full rerolls are a bit much

 

2) This goes into aomething else. But really fixing the cover system is whay we need more than anytjing which would help a ton. For example a unit can have up 3 instances of cover drawing from 5 cover types

1) Being in Cover

2) Intervening Models

3) Intervening Pieces of Terrain

4) Special Rules

5) Strategem

 

Which would help lethality of cover alot. Something like this would go along way.

 

3) Agreed

 

4) Morale as it is fine. Like there isn’t an army in 40k with true non-negatable immunity. Except for Nids w/ Tyranid Prime and Broodlords. Even then snipers. Most horde immunity is vastly overstated and misrepresented.

 

5) Eh not sure this is possible.

 

6) Bring back Assault Vehicles rules but this be worst idea. Anyone else remember back in 6th-7th where in transport, disembarking = no bueno charging? 8th edition is acyually closer to the golden age of Rhino Rush in 4th-5th. Which had similar transport restrictions of modern 8th edition.

 

But yeah my suggestion turn down lethality, reiterate in core rules rules about “True LoS” and define as Chassis only.

 

Also weirdest thing ever; give us rules with corresponding images. I had an issue one day trying to find what model was what or what wargear corresponded to what, having an image with those models next to actual rules be a god send.

[Beta galactosidase]

I would like a ranged combat and cover system that wasn't entirely designed around the boxed set for a different game that only had a minor ranged combat element.

 

Yeah BS used to mean "bow skill" and it was just a peripheral part of the game for a few units. Veteran and high skill units should be harder to hit, because this is a shooting game and there needs to be more than one characteristic on the unit profile for ranged combat.

 

 

I too agree with throwing the rule book out the window and starting over - completely over, fundamentally, and having the rules authors determine from the get-go: “Are we playing a simulation or an abstraction” and writing all of the rules from exclusively that view.

 

I just don’t think it’s going to happen.

It seems like there'd have to be different business model at GW. The rules atm are like the human spine. They function just well enough to keep going despite huge structural flaws. They were adapted from a very different use fantasy/quadrupedalism and there'd need to be a catastrophe level disruption to change it to something more fit for purpose.

 

This is supposed to be a dice game and sometimes you get a bad roll, there should be some random element to it. Re-rolls completely negate this. My only exception would be space marines should keep the re-roll 1s (to hit and wound)

This was such a different take. Re-roll auras are a strange way for space marines to play, clustered together like that when they're usually pretty independent units. It's true though, re-rolls a pretty superfluous when you should just be able to fail or succeed without much of a fuss.

[Noserenda]

I mean the whole point of seize is to reduced first turn advantage a bit and mean you cant just deploy fully in the open knowing you are safe. Put some effort into mitigating it and suddenly its fine. I mean unless you want to gamble, but then thats your choice.

[MegaVolt87]

A return to older terrain and LOS rules where you can't do things like shoot from a tank airel or hit a character because of a top knot or banner. Either the aura castle style needs to go or we need a return of templete weapons as a factor to add risk vs reward to castleing up.

 

Return of vechicle facings to bring back positioning and manouver to the game. Re-balance of AT for factions so we don't have over reliance on chip/ plink dmg. Its ok to have bigger units like LR's and knights immune to AP-1 and S4< style weapons.

 

Psychic phase re-work, its too cut back from the older ones, somehow reach a middle ground. Wind back core rule subversion from being faction wide to being select unit specific, to make unit choices more meaningful. Also overal balance to work at tbe 2k pts minimum like we have now, instead of raising it again.

 

Shooting is currently pretty strong (with or without templete weapons), so if that stays the same, adding back locked in combat and sweeping advances would buff melee to even the two out again.

[Bryan Blaire]

A return to older terrain and LOS rules where you can't do things like shoot from a tank airel or hit a character because of a top knot or banner. Either the aura castle style needs to go or we need a return of templete weapons as a factor to add risk vs reward to castleing up.

 

Return of vechicle facings to bring back positioning and manouver to the game.

See, that's what I was talking about right there - even older versions of the game couldn't figure out if they were abstractions (terrain rules, not TLoS) or simulations (vehicle facings, template weapons).

[MegaVolt87]

 

A return to older terrain and LOS rules where you can't do things like shoot from a tank airel or hit a character because of a top knot or banner. Either the aura castle style needs to go or we need a return of templete weapons as a factor to add risk vs reward to castleing up.

Return of vechicle facings to bring back positioning and manouver to the game.

See, that's what I was talking about right there - even older versions of the game couldn't figure out if they were abstractions (terrain rules, not TLoS) or simulations (vehicle facings, template weapons).

Exactly. To further explain, its pretty silly the game has devolved to alpha strike castle aura bubble blobbed units that only move to score objectives when most of the opponent's force is dead after few turns pass. Even before aura's, templete weapons, vechicle facings and manouver were a good stick/ counter to castle style play, which has always been strong on its own. The game is much diminished with the loss of such mechanics IMO.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Vehicle facings lead to arguments. I would like them to tighten up line of sight... seems really lazy on their part.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

There’s a few general stuff I’d like to see:

 

1) Less rerolls across the board

 

2) Reduce the lethality of the game overall, too much stuff dies too quickly

 

3) End the bias against FW stuff. I get it’s a hangover from last editions but the stuff is fine now, just overcosted.

 

4) Overhaul morale and avoid giving horde armies immunity to it.

 

5) Remove any rules that outright negate/ignore core game mechanics

 

In terms of specific rules:

 

1) You can disembark any transport AFTER it has moved, restrict charging after disembarking to assault vehicles.

1) Agree but less full rerolls. Reroll’s 1’s are fine but full rerolls are a bit much

 

2) This goes into aomething else. But really fixing the cover system is whay we need more than anytjing which would help a ton. For example a unit can have up 3 instances of cover drawing from 5 cover types

1) Being in Cover

2) Intervening Models

3) Intervening Pieces of Terrain

4) Special Rules

5) Strategem

 

Which would help lethality of cover alot. Something like this would go along way.

I agree but I think it needs to go further. The lethality of the game is made up of several factors that need addressing:

 

1)Too many rerolls (I agree rerolling 1s isn’t so bad but I also wouldn’t be upset if that went away too, also no rerolls on overwatch would get my vote)

 

2) Poor LoS/cover rules. I agree with all the stuff you said

 

3) Shot volume. There are simply too many shots/attacks going into armies which means good cover/armour is much less valuable. Add in the amount of multi-damage shots and it gets even worse.

 

4) AP system. With everything apart from the most basic weaponry being able to reduce armour saves it makes everything much more fragile.

 

5) The wounding mechanic. The to wound table (coupled with the shot volume and rerolls) means a lot of weapons are able to put significant damage onto units they shouldn’t really be hurting much at all. I’d like to see it changed, ideally so that certain Strength weapons can no longer hurt certain toughness units like it used to be. That’s a long shot though so I’d settle for the target toughness not needing to be double the weapons strength before it wounds on 6s. Maybe two/three points higher.

[Volt]

Volt's Big Bag of Fixing 40K solutions

 

1) Get rid of that IGOUGO crap immediately, as this is one of the biggest problems with the game currently. Switch everything to a kill team style format of simultaneous shooting phases based on readying or moving troops for initiative or introduce activation values such as found in Lion Rampant to 40k.

 

2) Fix cover by removing the stupidity of cover affecting saves and simply reduce enemy accuracy.

 

3) Switch to a 2d6 gradient for all dice mechanics instead of using 1d6 or 1d12. This creates more predictable, dependable bell curves into dice results that will make things easier to balance and increases skill by removing luck. In part of this, all attacks need to be reduced so there are less dice on the table to make things more manageable. Units should have degrading stats based on the amount of models in them in regards to how many attacks they get, with the ideal being that you never have to roll more than 20 dice. Successes in a 2d6 system are based on "windows" instead of flat pluses or minuses, with the boundaries of those windows decreasing as a unit uses models. Thus hordes are more likely to succeed in landing attacks (cause there's lots of 'em) but would simultaneously be very squishy to taking damage.

 

4) Make morale matter. If a unit breaks in morale it should be frozen in place similar to kill team and incapable of taking further action instead of just bleeding units (or pinning in past editions). If your overall army takes too many casualties, they should also be forced to make constant morale checks to prevent them from breaking. Further all charges should incur penalties to leadership checks made for the unit that was charged in order to make melee work as a proper flushing attack.

 

5) Bring back templates but leave scattering in the hole it deserves to be in. Wounds should be pools shared by an entire unit, even if comprised of multiple models, and templates should now be issued entirely new, having gradients broken up into thirds. Wherein a unit hit at the center takes the most damage, but if a unit is only caught by the 33% edge of the template, it takes less damage due to being further from the blast.

 

6) No more re-rolls. If you roll a dice and don't like the result, that's too bad.

7) No more CP and no more stratagems. It was an idiotic concept in the first place that turns the game into magic the gathering instead of a proper wargame, and gameplay needs to be focused on actual warfighting and not popping magical abilities (not even tied to psykers) that allow you to circumvent game rules.

 

8) Characters should be targetable, but have disproportionately better saves to allow them to survive in the shooting phase, and have modifiers to make it harder to hit them.

 

9) Armor facings need to return, as do armor facings need to be added for monsters as well. The armor facing should be made a simple save value, but differing on the vector of attack.

 

10) Remove flyers to apocalypse and specialist flyer game models with the full sized models. If flyers are included in a normal game of warhammer, they should be used for air strikes and instantly fly across the table - not have them oddly hover above the table at an incremental pace. If you want, you can take a flyer model and just make whoosing noises while dropping blast templates over the target.

11) Rework characters so they actually make sense. Characters shouldn't give flat re-rolls, but provide buffs based on what actually makes sense for that individual, or for custom characters allow players to customize a character to give the buffs they want. Alexander the Great didn't make his Phalanxes hit harder by standing them next to them, he drilled them so they moved faster than normal, increased flexibility, and improved their morale. Heroes should have battlefield-wide effects where they increase unit movement speeds, change initiative rules (such as automatically making any unit that moves count as readied in the shooting phase), or boosting the morale of the army.

12) Bring back tactical modifiers like smoke grenades that actually matter, nerve gas, flashbangs, etc.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Volt

[Lexington]

 

I would like a ranged combat and cover system that wasn't entirely designed around the boxed set for a different game that only had a minor ranged combat element.

 

Yeah BS used to mean "bow skill" and it was just a peripheral part of the game for a few units. Veteran and high skill units should be harder to hit, because this is a shooting game and there needs to be more than one characteristic on the unit profile for ranged combat.

 

I don't actually have a (huge) problem with the tried-and-true BS system, myself, but it's everything around it these days - LoS, cover, modifiers, etc. - that are a real problem. What I'm referring to specifically in the comment is this interview with former GW Studio member James Hewitt, where he gives an inside view into how AoS was developed. One big thing is that the game was designed solely to support the models in the initial boxed set, and he calls out the lack of ranged weaponry in the box (vs. the wider game) as a huge weakness in the design because of this. 40K 8th Ed's system is pretty much just AoS with a few details tacked on, so I think this goes a long way towards explaining why it's so terrible in this regard.

[Dark Shepherd]

I mean the whole point of seize is to reduced first turn advantage a bit and mean you cant just deploy fully in the open knowing you are safe. Put some effort into mitigating it and suddenly its fine. I mean unless you want to gamble, but then thats your choice.

Seize was cool when deployment was alternated and at best you had a 60% chance of going first if you knew youd finish deplying first

[Karack Blackstone]

I fully agree with the back and forth about the list of 1 through 6.

 

I will add however, near as I can tell, a points overhaul and the addition of the Resilience stat to models would make sense.

 

A GEQ would be 4 points, 4+ WS, BS, S 3, T3, 1 A, 1 W, 1 R, 6 Ld, 5+ Sv, LG, LP. +1 Pt. for CK.

A MEQ would be 14 points, 3+ WS, BS, S 4, T 4, 1 A, 2 W, 2 R, 7 Ld, 3+ Sv, BG, BP, CK. +1 Pt. for CSwd, if allowed

A PEQ would be 16 points, 3+ WS, BS, S 4, T 4, 2 A, 3 W, 2 R, 7 Ld, 3+ Sv, BR, BP, CK. +1 Pt for CSwd, if allowed

 

I haven't had the chance to get must past this yet, however the entire points revisit and rebalance would be a lot of work, however I'm trying to figure out a math formula that would work in log base 4, +1 free pt. every 4, and a balance around having the fact that models need to be both lethal and deadly yet also durable enough to make sense on the 40K battlefield.

 

Edit: Type, edit, type, edit...

Edited April 14, 2020 by Karack Blackstone

[Closet Skeleton]

No rules designer can save a player base that chooses to play unfun scenarios with unfun terrain set ups.

 

 

 

I will add however, near as I can tell, a points overhaul and the addition of the Resilience stat to models would make sense.

 

There are already three different stats for how hard something is to kill, adding a forth is never going to be an answer.

 

 

6) Bring back Assault Vehicles rules but this be worst idea. Anyone else remember back in 6th-7th where in transport, disembarking = no bueno charging? 8th edition is acyually closer to the golden age of Rhino Rush in 4th-5th. Which had similar transport restrictions of modern 8th edition

 

 

6th-7th ed transport rules were player unfriendly garbage that could only have come about after multiple editions of trying to 'fix' something that was questionably broken in the first place. 8th's have issues but are at least simple and fair.

 

 

 

3) Shot volume. There are simply too many shots/attacks going into armies which means good cover/armour is much less valuable. Add in the amount of multi-damage shots and it gets even worse.

4) AP system. With everything apart from the most basic weaponry being able to reduce armour saves it makes everything much more fragile.

 

 

Shot volume in 8th is half the fault of player list building. Its the designers fault that low volume weapons are unappealing and rarely cut it competatively but triple burstcannon riptide or assault cannon razorbacks being the only razorback is not the way the game is meant to be played.

 

Land Raiders needed their guns to be 2 shots, they were never worth it under the old 'twin-linked' system, but assault cannon razorbacks didn't need to be 12 shots and therefore the most powerful unit in the game until Guiliman got nerfed in the crossfire.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Closet Skeleton

[MARK0SIAN]

No rules designer can save a player base that chooses to play unfun scenarios with unfun terrain set ups.

 

 

 

 

I will add however, near as I can tell, a points overhaul and the addition of the Resilience stat to models would make sense.

There are already three different stats for how hard something is to kill, adding a forth is never going to be an answer.

6) Bring back Assault Vehicles rules but this be worst idea. Anyone else remember back in 6th-7th where in transport, disembarking = no bueno charging? 8th edition is acyually closer to the golden age of Rhino Rush in 4th-5th. Which had similar transport restrictions of modern 8th edition

 

6th-7th ed transport rules were player unfriendly garbage that could only have come about after multiple editions of trying to 'fix' something that was questionably broken in the first place. 8th's have issues but are at least simple and fair.

 

3) Shot volume. There are simply too many shots/attacks going into armies which means good cover/armour is much less valuable. Add in the amount of multi-damage shots and it gets even worse.

 

4) AP system. With everything apart from the most basic weaponry being able to reduce armour saves it makes everything much more fragile.

 

 

Shot volume in 8th is half the fault of player list building. Its the designers fault that low volume weapons are unappealing and rarely cut it competatively but triple burstcannon riptide or assault cannon razorbacks being the only razorback is not the way the game is meant to be played.

 

Land Raiders needed their guns to be 2 shots, they were never worth it under the old 'twin-linked' system, but assault cannon razorbacks didn't need to be 12 shots and therefore the most powerful unit in the game until Guiliman got nerfed in the crossfire.

I don’t think you can really lay the blame at the feet of the players for it. You said yourself, the designers presented the player with one option which was really underwhelming and another option that (partly because of its shot volume) was really great. You don’t have to be that guy to choose the latter in that case.

 

In a more general sense, of course players lists have emphasised shot volume because the game rules have created a scenario where shot volume performs really well compared to other weapons because: it has easy access to rerolls, it can wound anything and is good against a variety of targets, it’s more consistent with regards to shot numbers and damage and finally it’s often cheaper. None of that is really the fault of the players for using it.

 

Shot volume on everything, including twin Lascannons, all feeds into the overall lethality I mentioned earlier and is deadly when all those elements combine.

 

If there was a single phrase that summed up 8th edition rules for me it would be “Quantity over Quality” and until they address the things that make quantity so good it will continue to be a problem.

Edited April 14, 2020 by MARK0SIAN

[MARK0SIAN]

I’d also like to see another rule added for the game but this time for the designers:

 

No weapon should have to roll for its number of shots AND it’s damage.

 

Either fixed number of shots and random damage or vice versa. Rolling for both makes weapons too swingy and unappealing. They even kind of admitted it themselves when they redid the sisters exorcist tank. Having a weapon whose successful damage can range from 1 to 36 wounds was just daft.

[MegaVolt87]

I’d also like to see another rule added for the game but this time for the designers:

No weapon should have to roll for its number of shots AND it’s damage.

Either fixed number of shots and random damage or vice versa. Rolling for both makes weapons too swingy and unappealing. They even kind of admitted it themselves when they redid the sisters exorcist tank. Having a weapon whose successful damage can range from 1 to 36 wounds was just daft.

Also add to this not to add a points premium to such a weapon because the assumption is it will roll the maximum value consistantly. Sorry, D6 etc will never always roll 6 to justify such a points inflation. Edited April 14, 2020 by MegaVolt87