What Special Rules Do You Consider Universal?

[jaxom]

Deep Strike, Infiltrate, Outflank, Feel No Pain, and Bodyguard are the five I could think of off the top of my head as rules (or things of that style) I'd want consolidated into a single, consistent rule. What am I missing?

[Karhedron]

The justification for ditching USRs at the start of 8th edition was so that GW could tweak these rules on a unit-by-unit basis to allow for special cases. There are a few examples of this such as the Mawloc's "Terror from the Deep" rule but overall I feel GW have not really capitalised on the flexibility they gave themselves.

[The Yncarne]

dice modifiers

[MARK0SIAN]

Objective Secured comes to mind. I haven’t paid much attention to the wording in recent codexes but it always seemed to have an unnecessary faction specific name rather than just objective secured.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Keywords take their place, right? USRs were a huge mess in 7th edition, with many useless ones imo.

[Valkyrion]

The only messy thing about USR's is how they are presented, not their utility, and that some Universal Special Rules could just be Special Rules For Unit X - e.g, you wouldn't need a USR for Supersonic, you'd just include that rule on the datasheet for the Flyer, but you would want a USR for Auto Hitting (flamers) or Shooting Out Of Line Of Sight, or Plasma for the wounding 1's. 

 

'Eeach time an attack made with this weapon targets targets a unit within half range, that attack has a damage of D6+2' 

Or

'Armourbane - Melta'.

 

Once you've encountered that rule you're likely to have digested it and understood it and never need to read it again, you only need to remember that a weapon has that rule. 

So instead of saying you your opponent 'these eradicators are within half range so they cause D6+2 damage instead of just D6, look, here's what it says in the book.' you can just say 'these guys are in melta range', and your opponent will know what that means. 

[Nephaston]

Perhaps a mix would be better overall: Like having bespoke variants of rules like the mawloc in Karhedrons example, but for shared rules I think HH2.0 has gone a step in the right direction but could be expanded to stuff like the melta rule so instead of "Armourbane - Melta" it could be Armourbane - Melta (X) where X is the value of bonus damage you get for being in melta range, so standard would of course be Melta(2) for the d6+2 but can then keep the ability to balance individual datasheets so eradicators heavy melta rifles for example would be Melta(4).

 

[Xenith]

Sniper - replaces the "this weapon ignores the look out sir rule" on all appropriate datasheets.

Camouflaged - this word replaces all instances of "if this model is receiving the benefits of cover, improve it's armour save by +1"

Legendary - replaces all instances of "this model may receive no more than 3 wounds per phase" 

Fear - replace all instances of "models within X" of this model reduce Ld by 1"/"subtract 1 from all attrition checks after failed morale". 

Agile - replace all instances of "this model is -1 to hit"

Blessed - replaces rules to the effect of "no dice may be rerolled for attacks that target this unit"

[Halandaar]

The Flesh is Weak

Lord of Death

Augmented

 

FEEL NO PAIN

[Xenith]

12 minutes ago, Halandaar said:

The Flesh is Weak

Lord of Death

Augmented

Adamantine mantle

Black Rage

Iron Resolve

Unyielding Ancient

The Old Disgustingly Resilient

Fortune

Combat Drugs

 

FEEL NO PAIN

Added a few more!

 

I'll admit that in 8/9th we could do with 2 versions, one for normal and one for mortal wounds. 

[Lexington]

18 hours ago, Karhedron said:

The justification for ditching USRs at the start of 8th edition was so that GW could tweak these rules on a unit-by-unit basis to allow for special cases.

I think the real reason was a strong dictate from marketing/management that the 40K rules would be able to fit in a booklet of [X] pages for quick intro games.

[BluejayJunior]

I agree that a mix of USRs and bespoke rules would probably be the best. Having lots of USRs makes knowing the rules of lots of different codexes easier. But no USRs, to me, make learning/approaching the game and learning only a single codex easier. You don't have a huge list of rules that you feel like you need to know before you even get started. You just have to know the rules listed in your codex and that are almost all written out on the datasheets. 

[jaxom]

Thank you all for the feedback!

 

After the amount of time we've had in 8th and 9th editions, I think some of the rules that keep popping up to the point where the community had to come up with short hand means USRs are useful. I would continue with having bespoke rules on datasheets which would also provide space for modifications.

 

Here's the collection so far (leaving out deployment methods):

1. Jump - ignoring intervening models and terrain when moving
2. Camouflage(X) - X penalty to hit with ranged attacks
3. Evasive - can't re-roll to hit rolls against the unit
4. Bodyguard - protects Characters
5. Sniper - ignores Bodyguard
6. Torrent - auto-hitting ranged attack
7. Blast - ranged minimum hits based on target squad size
8. Agile(X) - X penalty to hit with close combat attacks
9. Resilient(X)- reduced damage taken by X to a minimum of 1, if X is H then half the damage
10. Enduring - can't re-roll wound rolls against the unit
11. Unstoppable(X) - model can't take more than X damage in one phase.
12. Damage Mitigation(X) - the ol'feel no pain

 

 Examples:

Quote

Manifestation: The unit can deploy via Deep Strike. The unit can Deep Strike more than 6" away from any enemy models if it is deployed wholly within 6" of a friendly WARP LOCUS model that was on the battlefield at the start of your turn. If that WARP LOCUS model has an Allegiance keyword, the unit being set up can only use this ability if it has the same Allegiance keyword.

 

Quote

Harlequin's Panoply: Models in this unit had a 4+ invulnerable save, Jump, and Agile(1).

Quote

Grav-hooks and Breaching Charges: Models in this unit Jump when they make a Normal Move over or through terrain.

Quote

Indomitable Onslaught: Models in this unit have Unstoppable(8).

Quote

Iron Will: Models in this unit have Damage Mitigation(5+) against damage from Mortal Wounds.

 

EDIT:

Are wound-returning mechanics (ala Apothecaries), revival mechanics, etcs?

Edited January 6, 2023 by jaxom

[Xenith]

1 hour ago, Lexington said:

I think the real reason was a strong dictate from marketing/management that the 40K rules would be able to fit in a booklet of [X] pages for quick intro games.

 

One answer might be to separate Standard rules and Special rules - Like intro games only use Standard rules, and Special rules are in a specific portion of the dataslate for more advanced games - then they can still claim that the basic rulebook fits onto a few A5 sheets - though they largely did away with this, the current rulebooks is massive.  

[Rogue]

I'm not sure I'd want to go back to a list of things like Jump, Agile (1) and Unstoppable (8), because it just means I have to and look those things up somewhere else.

 

What was Agile again? Let me just check that page somewhere in the main rulebook...

 

I suspect that the truly universal rules are the ones that get referred to by a common name, regardless of the actual name of the rule for that unit - FNP and Deep Strike spring to mind as the two best examples. Even as a Cults player, I think of my guys coming in from Deep Strike, and that's with the Ambush/Underground mechanic being a key part of the GSC codex. 

[jaxom]

2 hours ago, Rogue said:

I suspect that the truly universal rules are the ones that get referred to by a common name, regardless of the actual name of the rule for that unit - FNP and Deep Strike spring to mind as the two best

And that was kind of the point, I listed the five that sprung to mind for me and asked if there were more.

 

It seems like the ones we’re used to are those that have been around longest.

[Schlitzaf]

USR were removed to have every rule written on a datasheet. Ngl I like not having to flip threw BRB to find an obscure USR

[Evil Eye]

I'd rather we returned to USRs. Not to the ridiculous amount we had in 7th, but something more manageable like in, say, 4th would be good. It's a tiny bit of extra book-keeping but it makes the game as a whole far simpler to keep track of in the long run and IMO at least would improve inter-faction balance. It's much easier to say "Oh yes, my Genestealers have the Rend rule for their attacks" when that's already in the core book than having to explain what that does to someone who hasn't played against Tyranids before. Some unit-specific special rules are of course great, and they shouldn't be phased out completely, but having a thousand different names for the exact same rule seems kinda pointless?

[MARK0SIAN]

58 minutes ago, Schlitzaf said:

USR were removed to have every rule written on a datasheet. Ngl I like not having to flip threw BRB to find an obscure USR

They’re not mutually exclusive though. The same abilities like FNP could all be called Feel No Pain and be defined the same whilst also being printed on the datasheets for people who like it all in one place.

 

For me, the advantage of USRs is not just that they were all contained in one place. The main advantage for me is that with one name for the ability, everyone knew what it meant. You didn’t have to be familiar with the opposing codex and the names of the rules because your opponent could just say ‘These have Feel No Pain.’

 

Now it’s ‘These guys have hive doodads’ or these guys have ‘Greater Good doohickeys’ which both mean Feel No Pain. It’s just unnecessary for the exact same rule to have 15 different names across 15 different codexes. 

Nothing about USRs means they can’t be replicated on a datasheet to save people time. It also means they can be FAQ’d more easily. 

 

[The Unseen]

Yeah, USR's should be brought back and integrated with the Keyword system, but should also continue to be listed in Codexes and on datasheets when appropriate. But the fact that every codex has the same handful of special rules repeated, and sometimes problems arising from wording varying special rules slightly different in different codexes is just nuts.

[chapter master 454]

I like the name Torrent over Spray I had for auto-hit...good choice.

I would say that there are a number of abilities that are universal. However there needs to be a limit to how many we have? And what would that number be? Going to say 20, no more is fair enough. We can even have each codex have within it's section covering it's army wide rules have reminder sections on these key abilities that DO appear in the army. While it may seem to defeat the purpose, the point of keywords is to give players a common language to speak. Ether though both our armies have say Sterner Stuff, if I say Sterner Stuff instead of "disgustingly unclean" when you say you have "virtuous without care" and we both are referring to effectively the same ability...it helps and remove confusion. In effect, what we are doing is actually decluttering and removing a bunch of same effect different name USRs. We also don't want our weapon details being near enough dataslates by themselves!

 

Torrent - Hits automatically

Bodyguard - Allows a unit to count as shielding for characters, even when below 3 models

Sniper - Ignore Bodyguard and Look Out Sir

Critical (X+) - Unmodified Hit rolls of X+ inflict the weapons damage profile as mortal wounds instead, attack sequence ends.

Feel No Pain (X+) - For each point of damage this model receives, ignore that damage on a roll of X+ (Maybe include a small blurb on how to fast roll this for multi-damage weapons).

Sterner Stuff - Reduce the damage inflicted to this unit by attacks by 1 (to a minimum of 1 damage)

Melta (+X) - Attacks made at or within half of this weapons range stat add the noted damage to the damage profile.

Barrage - Can target units out of line of sight however the attacking unit cannot re-roll hit or wound rolls (I feel this is a better way to keep barrage in line).

Gatling (X+) - Hit rolls of X+ are treated as being two hits instead of one.

Deep Strike - This would likely require a small section on it, but instead of repeating that section in every datasheet that doesn't modify it (which is 99% of them), we have it in one place.

Shieldbreaker - Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against attacks made by this weapon (because this is becoming more common than I would like to admit).

Stealth - Counts as in light cover if 12" from attacking unit. Gains additional +1 to saving throws if already in cover.

 

These are some of my suggestions but I know there are more. Again, the purpose isn't to confuse players but to help them be able to tell their opponent what they have. I mean, we already are doing that already with the game as we have a number of these "can only be wounded on 4+" stratagems and they ALL have unique names but what do we all common call it? "Trans-Human physiology" because space marines had it first, used it first and all the other ones are a mouthful to say while gaming (The custode's one is cool but I always trip on it..."Bio-Arcane Alchemy"?)

 

I do share the sentiment about GW not taking advantage of it but still...at this point we never got rid of USRs...we just made a metric ton more that never needed names to begin with. 

 

[jaxom]

Question about brain space. Do you consider weapon special rules the same as universal specials rules? Do they take up the same capacity? Like are melta and no-line-of-sight competing with feel no pain to be remembered?

[Schlitzaf]

So my main feeling is that. Gonna sound so silly but gonna say it:

A USR should only be USR if EVERY codex has it. And its “functional” identical in every codex.*

 

The USR I note with acute was that it wasn’t a USR but pretended to be and only used in 3-5 codexes. (Wolves, Tau, and  I want to see a few others). But however something like, Deep Strike, Outflank, Infilitrate, Scout (I think on Scout?) and FNP is not just in every codex also functionally identical.   
 

So that where I go with next.

 

*or 50% of Codexes (with main reasom to not say that is SM are 50% of Total # of Codex)