the BIG 9th edition room

[Brother Talarian]

Our chapter specifically won’t get better than the current dominating chapters unless there’s a substantial change to OUR rules.

 

The changes are general SM changes and game mechanic changes.

 

I haven’t fully read the leaks myself, but from what I’ve seen on warcom all rules seem pretty dope, and are nice for melee armies.

 

As for the SS, I don’t see it as a nerf. Makes marines more durable vs small arms fire, “ignore” ap-1 and still have a solid save vs high AP.

 

Makes termies with shields also super durable, especially in cover.

[SirJyo]

How much are we betting on crusaders being 16 points for no reason other than GW.

 

On the bright side drop pods stayed the same price

[Brother Kraskor]

Assuming you got a Captain with Oathkeeper in the Impulsor you can get him within 6” of the enemy unit and heroically intervene into the same enemy you devout pushed your bladeguard into. Pop the Judiciary ability and watch your captain and vets gear the target unit apart.

 

You cannot HI in your own turn. So this would only work if the combat remained ongoing and the opponent didn't fall back. Otherwise we could just load up Impulsors with characters and drive them to within 3" and effectively charge out of it without using a CP.

[Medjugorje]

How much are we betting on crusaders being 16 points for no reason other than GW.

 

On the bright side drop pods stayed the same price

we will see. I am confident that they are at least 15/14 

 

But to be honest. chainswords will be ap-1 so our troop choice is not that bad - although the new Primaris are even better.

[Marshal Arthur]

 

 

Assuming you got a Captain with Oathkeeper in the Impulsor you can get him within 6” of the enemy unit and heroically intervene into the same enemy you devout pushed your bladeguard into. Pop the Judiciary ability and watch your captain and vets gear the target unit apart.

You cannot HI in your own turn. So this would only work if the combat remained ongoing and the opponent didn't fall back. Otherwise we could just load up Impulsors with characters and drive them to within 3" and effectively charge out of it without using a CP.

My mistake. It’s one of those rules that comes up so rarely I had completely forgotten its limitations.

[BitsHammer]

Looks like GW is on full damage control this morning and have released the free core rules.

 

English: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Lw4o3USx1R8sU7cQ.pdf

 

The Article with links to other languages: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/07/02/free-core-rules-new-models-sighted

[BitsHammer]

From Reddit:

Engagement Range

• 1" horizontally, 5" vertically (e.g. on top of a ruin)

Charge:

• Can't move through friendly or enemy models' bases (in general, but specifically relevant when charging). Exception being aircraft, which are ignored.
• Old 8th rule: First model has to finish charge move within 1" of one target of the charge, maintaining coherency, can't move within 1" of units, which were not target of the charge.
• New 9th rule: Unit must be able to finish within Engagement Range of every target of the charge, otherwise charge fails. Can then move in any order up to charge distance, maintaining coherency, as long as fulfill the charge conditions at the end of the movement. Can't finish within 1" of enemy units that were not target of the charge.
• Charging through terrain: Ignore terrain features up to 1" in height, taller terrain must be climbed up/down.
• Units with "fly" don't ignore terrain on the charge move, but can be moved through other models' bases.
• No universal Overwatch, only through stratagem and/or special rules

Heroic Intervention:

• Same as 8th, but can be attacked by charging units, see below.

Pile-In:

• Same as 8th, move up to 3", finishing closer to the nearest enemy model, but stated that models touching other models cannot be moved during pile in

Consolidate:

• same as Pile-In

Fighting:

• Charging units fight first, after that, players alternate choosing units to fight, starting with the player who is currently not taking his player turn.
• Models pile in, then models within Engagement Range can fight, as well as models within 1/2" of models within 1/2" of enemy models.
• Charging units can only target units that were targets of the charge, or units that heroically intervened
• Declare target units of all your attacks and weapons used for those attacks, then resolve all attacks made against the first target unit, before making any attacks vs the second target and so on.
• If you use several different weapons for your attacks, resolve all attacks with the same weapon profile before making any attacks with a different profile.

[tvih]

That range for being eligible to fight really is gonna hurt big horde units. Marines, not so much.

 

I'm currently contemplating making the Indomitus models into Templars paint-wise - or at least the melee units, specifically. Though with the new rules about detachments costing CP, I imagine they'd usually end up played with CF/IF rules with the rest of my Primaris. I don't see myself playing oldmarine-heavy lists much which my Templars are, it's too heart-wrenching to see how far they've fallen.

[Punchomatic]

So terminators with storm shields now effectively have a 2++ RAW. Looks like thunder hammers are back on the menu boys!

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

The engagement and charge rules seem interesting to me. Am I reading it correctly that if we charge a unit on the second floor of a building, to end within engagement range we only have to end within 1 horrizontally and 5 vertically of them? Meaning we could charge into the first floor of a ruin and end 4 inches beneath them while still fighting? As long as each model we activate is within 1 horrizontally and 5 vertically?

 

I'll need to play test that a bit in my group and see how goofy it feels.

[BitsHammer]

So terminators with storm shields now effectively have a 2++ RAW. Looks like thunder hammers are back on the menu boys!

No they don't. The shield modifies your save characteristic which only applies to your armour save. Basically it gives them a 2+ that ignores the first -1 AP(or -2 in cover). Still good, but it's not a 2++.

The engagement and charge rules seem interesting to me. Am I reading it correctly that if we charge a unit on the second floor of a building, to end within engagement range we only have to end within 1 horrizontally and 5 vertically of them? Meaning we could charge into the first floor of a ruin and end 4 inches beneath them while still fighting? As long as each model we activate is within 1 horrizontally and 5 vertically?

 

I'll need to play test that a bit in my group and see how goofy it feels.

Old editions had a 3" rule, but this is likely to accommodate taller buildings in case someone made their own ruins a bit bigger.

[Punchomatic]

 

 

So terminators with storm shields now effectively have a 2++ RAW. Looks like thunder hammers are back on the menu boys!

No they don't. The shield modifies your save characteristic which only applies to your armour save. Basically it gives them a 2+ that ignores the first -1 AP(or -2 in cover). Still good, but it's not a 2++.

I don’t think that’s accurate. The shield specifically says it changes the save so the 2+ becomes a 1+. Dice rules say only an unmodified 1 fails. AP affects the die roll.

 

What that means is if you have a 1+ only an unmodified 1 fails since ap makes any other roll a modified 1.

[BitsHammer]

 

 

So terminators with storm shields now effectively have a 2++ RAW. Looks like thunder hammers are back on the menu boys!

No they don't. The shield modifies your save characteristic which only applies to your armour save. Basically it gives them a 2+ that ignores the first -1 AP(or -2 in cover). Still good, but it's not a 2++.

I don’t think that’s accurate. The shield specifically says it changes the save so the 2+ becomes a 1+. Dice rules say only an unmodified 1 fails. AP affects the die roll.

 

What that means is if you have a 1+ only an unmodified 1 fails since ap makes any other roll a modified 1.

 

It's inaccurate only based on limited information we know right now, but I can bet there is no way in the warp that GW would intentionally redo the MANz debacle again ON PURPOSE this time.

[Punchomatic]

I don’t even see how they can FAQ this without just saying saves can’t be below 2+

[BitsHammer]

I don’t even see how they can FAQ this without just saying saves can’t be below 2+

Apparently a 1+ save exists as a thing, the question is how that interacts with AP. Because I don't want to think of Deathguard Terminators getting a 1+ save for any reason.

[tvih]

 

I don’t even see how they can FAQ this without just saying saves can’t be below 2+

Apparently a 1+ save exists as a thing, the question is how that interacts with AP. Because I don't want to think of Deathguard Terminators getting a 1+ save for any reason.

 

 

Basically storm shield should indeed have a clause for a max of 2+, but alas, seems not to be the case. Can you imagine 45 TH+SS terminators in a list with a smash captain wielding artficer/indomitus 2+ armor relic and storm shield? It would make 8th Ed smash captains look like toddlers. Also with Bladeguard Veterans having 3 wounds despite not even being Gravis, it wouldn't totally shock me if terminators got an extra wound too. But for shield terminators, 1+ with 3W would in turn be excessive.

 

As for DG terminators though, they don't have a shield option anyway.

Edited July 2, 2020 by tvih

[BitsHammer]

 

 

I don’t even see how they can FAQ this without just saying saves can’t be below 2+

Apparently a 1+ save exists as a thing, the question is how that interacts with AP. Because I don't want to think of Deathguard Terminators getting a 1+ save for any reason.

 

 

Basically storm shield should indeed have a clause for a max of 2+, but alas, seems not to be the case. Can you imagine 45 TH+SS terminators in a list with a smash captain wielding artficer/indomitus 2+ armor relic and storm shield? It would make 8th Ed smash captains look like toddlers. Also with Bladeguard Veterans having 3 wounds despite not even being Gravis, it wouldn't totally shock me if terminators got an extra wound too. But for shield terminators, 1+ with 3W would in turn be excessive.

 

As for DG terminators though, they don't have a shield option anyway.

 

No, but there is an upgrade in the Crusade system that lets you have a 1+.

[Medjugorje]

We could take Gullyman as our warlord now. We would get more CP + additional +1 to charge and +1 to advance rolls. The only thing we loose is our (very weak) superdoctrine but gain very good bonus and a melee monster and better tactical objectives (especially 12 should be very easy now^^).

 

So we dont need canticle of hate and it costs just a few points ( i really dont know if its worth it because we dont get the better rerolls from him. 

[Medjugorje]

I don’t even see how they can FAQ this without just saying saves can’t be below 2+

in the rules there its clear - an unmodified 1 is always a fail.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I don't get why this is so confusing. As far as I can see it, the 2+ becomes, in effect a 1+. But unmodified 1s always fail. So the 1+ basically means you get to ignore the first point of AP.

Therefore, only weapons of AP-3 or more will force you to take the 4++

[BitsHammer]

I don't get why this is so confusing. As far as I can see it, the 2+ becomes, in effect a 1+. But unmodified 1s always fail. So the 1+ basically means you get to ignore the first point of AP.

Therefore, only weapons of AP-3 or more will force you to take the 4++

AP modifies the roll, and you can't modify below 1, so you can't modify the die low enough to make them fail without some kind of exception that we're not currently seeing.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Oh, perhaps it won't be a problem. Wait for the updates.

[Punchomatic]

 

 

I don’t even see how they can FAQ this without just saying saves can’t be below 2+

in the rules there its clear - an unmodified 1 is always a fail.

Yes that’s not the issue. The issue is how would they FAQ the interaction between storm shields and existing armor that gives a 2+.

 

I don’t think they’ll change the way rolls work so how would they avoid terminators with storm shields getting, effectively, a 2++?

 

Capping saves at 2+ or saying a save can’t be modified to be better than 2+ is one possible way.

[Medjugorje]

I don't get why this is so confusing. As far as I can see it, the 2+ becomes, in effect a 1+. But unmodified 1s always fail. So the 1+ basically means you get to ignore the first point of AP.

Therefore, only weapons of AP-3 or more will force you to take the 4++

but weapon types of -3 often have higher Damage characteristics!

 

And for Vanguards and other units with 3+ save its just better on AP0 and thats clearly BAADDDD. I often had games with absolutely no AP0 attacks - just spam of higher AP.

 

And after this edition will be very good for monster and vehicle units it will be even a higher amount of such weapon types what makes all of our good units (which power just depended on the stormshield) bad.

 

Especially for our bodyguards. They will now fall like flies.

[Brother Kraskor]

We could take Gullyman as our warlord now. We would get more CP + additional +1 to charge and +1 to advance rolls. The only thing we loose is our (very weak) superdoctrine but gain very good bonus and a melee monster and better tactical objectives (especially 12 should be very easy now^^).

 

So we dont need canticle of hate and it costs just a few points ( i really dont know if its worth it because we dont get the better rerolls from him. 

 

Where's that? His auras wouldn't help as they affect Ultramarines (the good one anyway).