Ideas and resources for playing 4th edition 40K?

[calgar101]

For me and my group, when we wanted to do a thematic scenario, say a last stand or some such we would ignore Force org restrictions. Once it became the norm to be able to do that, say Dante making Sanguinary Guard troops... that's when it was silly.

Although taking a Captain with jump pack or bike and making those troops was kind cool... letting you field a reserve company list.

I mostly stopped played normal games and me and my group played a lot of Apocalypse so we missed the broken stuff really, it only became apparent/an issue when we went 30 mins up the road ti play at another, busier club. Yeah played some competitive lists and being beaten in 2 turns without being able to do nothing turned me off the game. Haven't played since 7th ed and not sure I ever will play again. 

I'm just slowly working through my mountain of shame and building armies I like such as all the Chapters who fought in the Badab. 

 

For me 40k isn't what it was and some of that now stems from GW.

[Wolf Lord Duregar]

 

I recently came upon an archive of all the official publications for the different editions. There were 15 for 4th (although I guess there were some 3/3.5 codices that would have to be included as well), while there were 117 for 8th and about 50 more for 9th.

So I guess the feeling of "the mental load of following this game and keeping up to date on the different rules, factions and possible weird stuff that I might have to take into account" wasn't just about me getting older and stupider - not that I'm about to pretend that I'm not getting older and stupider, but still...

 

Wow, that much? I felt the same and wondered if I had become lazy too.. And I did just scratch the surface of 8th Ed etc.. trying to get into it.

 

 

I think that is the beauty of older editions, they're completed and capsulized in comparison to the trend of current edition grind so you don't have to keep checking for updates. The other thing to remember is a lot of modern models can be proxied into older editions with a few obvious exceptions but even then you can create your own rules. I think 3rd edition had Vehicle design rules in the Chapter Approved 2001 compendium that could be used to transfer stuff like the Dorn or Repulsor tanks. 

 

Yeah, it is real nice if it is a good one. All is there!  One reason i love WHFB 6th Ed. But far from the only reason.. Well, same for 4th Ed 40k really!

Yupp - there was a few such things in 3rd Ed. For monsters too iirc?

 

 

In my early days I focused mainly on 40k, I read the Fantasy battle reports but didn't have much of a clue. However I read Fat Blokes tale of building his Chaos Warrior force with great interest. Tale of 4 games was always a good read. 

 

Vradchuk or something? :D Great one too. Fat Bloke really seems like a nice guy. had a bit of a roguh time there but he soldiered on and added! Love that.

 

 

Yeah, that and I actually enjoy a certain level of restrictions on my army building, as I find it more thematic. Which is probably why I like the force org chart so much.

That being said, I do like the "micro-adjustments" that some army lists allowed for (usually exchanging one slot for another, or having more of one type of slot at the cost of zero others etc.), as they do give some flavour. But once it became "take this guy so you don't have to bother with the troops tax" it became disruptive.
 

 

Mhm! it is needed. And hard caps.. been trying to say that in some The old World groups.. in 6th Ed you could have 2 Gyrocopters at 2000p... That is it! Now, as many as the points allow on 25%.. Rare stuff ain´t rare anymore then.. it just gets silly and all the weirdos min-max som BS not even close to any background.. To me it is just silly.

 

Yeah that stuff with taking this guy and this support unit becomes Troops is dumb.. Too often a no-brainer. No hard choices, take all you want, min Troops and say it is boring with troops, like the "cool" kids..

 

/Rant..

 

[calgar101]

I played fantasy from 7th onwards but my friends always spoke highly of 6th! I liked Storm of Magic, didn't like building and painting huge blocks of Elves! 

 

Yeah Vraduck, that was his Chaos lord! What great articles! I didn't know Paul had issues at GW? I always thought he was good but then again I was 10 when reading his stuff? 

Fantasy definitely had the hard choice maxim done better... much stricter limitations. 100 points of gear for your lord... that definitely limited some broken combos!

 

I haven't learned the newer editions and I'm not a fine of the game mechanics now but it seems far more broken.

Horus Heresy seems quite good and I've loads of marines for that, I love the books. Night play that a little but yeah just building armies now. 

Edited August 21 by calgar101

[Wolf Lord Duregar]

6th Ed is called the King of Editions for a reason.. 7th Ed added some good things but also.. Some bad. The army books are, horrible.. But the move to five models for a rank was just a small start on that massive greed move in 8th Ed that killed the game.. Forcing you to buy much more models.

Gav Thorpe seemed to command the 6th Ed, taking over from tuomas excellent work on the rulebook. Along with Alessio they seemed to treat the game with love during the entire period, dropping good books and campaigns. The US Studio´s General´s Compendium being one as well.

 

It´s not just whinging about newer editions for both WHFB and 40k.. GW has always been greedy but it has become worse and more cynical after those. Even MORE driven by nerfing stuff to sell others or just changing for changis sake - ie to sell more.

 

Nah nah! I mean he struggled with his army at the begiining there!

 

Oh I like both the old 40k as well as that WHFB slots system. I did not when it was introduced but I do now. Both have pros and cons 8thinking about percentages here, i don´t know current 4+k stuff)

 

Yeah Horus Heresy seems pretty alright.. Might give it a go.. Atleast they have templates there..

 

I was about to join up with 8th Ed but the million dice, then some BS re-roll to hit and some other BS to wound and then some other BS to armour saves.. Just made me feel, what is the point? You have a million shots, lemme remove that many models..

 

 

Nonsense.. Seems a bit better now but....

 

[Noserenda]

I think i can legitimately say nobody has ever called 6th the King of Editions in earshot, or even been particularly positive about it :D 

[calgar101]

Yeah going off what my friends who'd played fantasy for several editions, 6th was good and the changes to huge armies killed it. 

I'll have to try get some of the older army books, have a read up. Gave Thorpe I feel has often been an underrated army book author. He is one of the 'Old Guard'. 

 

GW definitely changed how they do things now, how many Space Marine units have recently been deleted? So many models no longer supported. I have several Iron Clad dreadnoughts, no rules (not that I'll play 10th) and how many other models? 

I saw a post from a Blood Angels player about the new BA rules; the loss of a few units has invalidated almost half his army.

 

Oh man all them re-rolls.... I think nonsense is still there and creeping back in.

[TheTrans]

 

I think i can legitimately say nobody has ever called 6th the King of Editions in earshot, or even been particularly positive about it :D 

I think you're thinking of the wrong 6th ;)
 

 

Yeah going off what my friends who'd played fantasy for several editions, 6th was good and the changes to huge armies killed it. 

I'll have to try get some of the older army books, have a read up. Gave Thorpe I feel has often been an underrated army book author. He is one of the 'Old Guard'. 

 

GW definitely changed how they do things now, how many Space Marine units have recently been deleted? So many models no longer supported. I have several Iron Clad dreadnoughts, no rules (not that I'll play 10th) and how many other models? 

I saw a post from a Blood Angels player about the new BA rules; the loss of a few units has invalidated almost half his army.

 

Oh man all them re-rolls.... I think nonsense is still there and creeping back in.

 

We recently came off of a large resurgence of WHFB 6th in Australia, was really good, fantastic old system and sure bits of it got wonky, but broadly speaking the edition was pretty tame and everything had its palce. ToW has obviously come along and killed that scene as so many people get dragged over to the new and shiny (polished turd), but honestly like HH2.0, there are a huge amount of problems and while HH1.0 certainly had problems too, it seems the power disparity and model count have balooned in HH2.0... which is not dissimilar if you take a WHFB 6th and jump to TOW. 

No obviously 3rd/4th 40k was a similar timeframe to WHFB 6th, which, I think, subjectively at least, I can say was true peak GW (While I collected bits and pieces back then, I never played either game, so had no nostalgia based on the rules, but looking back after playing many of the later incarnations, I think I can say, while more options came out, the rules definitely felt a little MORE corporate driven). 

[calgar101]

I agree that the time of 3rd/4th editions of 40k was peak GW. The only thing that I really loved after that was the 5th/6th ed Apocalypse expansions. Played more Apocalypse games than regular 

[Wolf Lord Duregar]

 

I think you're thinking of the wrong 6th ;)
 

 

We recently came off of a large resurgence of WHFB 6th in Australia, was really good, fantastic old system and sure bits of it got wonky, but broadly speaking the edition was pretty tame and everything had its palce. ToW has obviously come along and killed that scene as so many people get dragged over to the new and shiny (polished turd), but honestly like HH2.0, there are a huge amount of problems and while HH1.0 certainly had problems too, it seems the power disparity and model count have balooned in HH2.0... which is not dissimilar if you take a WHFB 6th and jump to TOW. 

No obviously 3rd/4th 40k was a similar timeframe to WHFB 6th, which, I think, subjectively at least, I can say was true peak GW (While I collected bits and pieces back then, I never played either game, so had no nostalgia based on the rules, but looking back after playing many of the later incarnations, I think I can say, while more options came out, the rules definitely felt a little MORE corporate driven). 

 

Yeah! I feel the best thing about TOW is the models coming back..

I re-read the TOW-rulebook yesterday and the rules are totally okay, not as good as 6th Ed IMHO (too many special rules pushed in because reasons for once thing) - but it gets problematic, subjectively, when you get to Army Selection and how generous it is. For me..

 

it is a little sad it killed some 6th Ed communities as too many jump to that polished turd because everyone else seems too. Too many sheep.

 

I want to do some 4th Ed 40k armies too. Might get some old buddies to play but totally okay with making a couple of house armies too. That Facebook-group felt very inspirational last time i checked.. Were not many 4th Ed battle reports on You Tube last time i checked, sadly. Would have been fun to be in a situation to start one and get some games going with nice armies and terrain. But sadly, years from being able to do that...

I found Rogue Element Gaming when I started to re-paint my O&Gs (a small Mordheim warband at that point) - and it was a huge inspiration.. Would be nice to be a source of inspiration to others like that with 4th Ed content for 40k..

 

I don´t mind 3rd Ed either but 4th Ed felt a little more.. mature? The early days with Rhino Rushes and sweeping advances through half the army still give me PTSD (and i was playing Blood Angels then and being the culprit!).

4th Ed did fix alot that was - weird. The revisions did too so 3 rd Ed was good at the end iirc.. But the 4th Ed rulebook also felt.. Very nice. It was a massive step-up from the 3rd Ed in inspiration for everything. The Kill Team rules and army displays and counters etc.

[Brother Tyler]

Let's get back on topic - Warhammer 40,000 4th edition.

 

And keep in mind, this site is not about Warhammer Fantasy Battle or Age of Sigmar or The Old World at all. There is a lot to discuss about the actual topic (WH40K 4e) and the site subject matter (WH40K) without a nostalgic trip down memory lane taking us off topic.

[Harrowmaster]

The old "How to Make Wargames Terrain" book and expansions like "Planetstrike" and "Cities of Death" could be great sources of inspiration and/or alternate ways to play.

[Antarius]

 

The old "How to Make Wargames Terrain" book and expansions like "Planetstrike" and "Cities of Death" could be great sources of inspiration and/or alternate ways to play.

Indeed! I actually still have physical copies of all of those.

I realise I have the 3rd ed. "Cityfight" codex too, which I remember as perhaps the best GW supplement to date - it's very well-written and has great atmosphere, but it's also a quite cohesive and immersive set of rules that really change the way the game plays while only introducing a few new mechanics (a really elegant way of doing game design and something I always think is the mark of a well thought out expansion). So I should probably see if that's transferable to 4th.

[Harrowmaster]

 

Indeed! I actually still have physical copies of all of those.

I realise I have the 3rd ed. "Cityfight" codex too, which I remember as perhaps the best GW supplement to date - it's very well-written and has great atmosphere, but it's also a quite cohesive and immersive set of rules that really change the way the game plays while only introducing a few new mechanics (a really elegant way of doing game design and something I always think is the mark of a well thought out expansion). So I should probably see if that's transferable to 4th.

I'd imagine it is, from 3rd-7th the core mechanics were very similar so it should be straightforward enough to tweak it. 

[calgar101]

Those expansions were awesome! Very good for making campaign games interesting. 

I'm going to dig out my 4th Ed books tomorrow and put a list together. I'll look at what Space Marine chapters are pictured in the codex and select one to make a force for.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

 

Indeed! I actually still have physical copies of all of those.

I realise I have the 3rd ed. "Cityfight" codex too, which I remember as perhaps the best GW supplement to date - it's very well-written and has great atmosphere, but it's also a quite cohesive and immersive set of rules that really change the way the game plays while only introducing a few new mechanics (a really elegant way of doing game design and something I always think is the mark of a well thought out expansion). So I should probably see if that's transferable to 4th.

It was also the first Cityfight book. Loaded with info of how to build your city structures from hardware store materials or just garbage. And there was also a battle report in it: Cadians vs. Night Lords. 

[Doghouse]

One fun thing I have been playing around with is getting Chatgpt to convert Primaris into 4th edition with home brew rules. I'm not saying it's perfect and no idea how it would effect balance but it would be an off the cuff starting point to convert modern minis into 4th edition rules for those who's armies are not in 4th.

 

This is what it came up with.

 

"Proposed 4th Edition Intercessor Profile:

 

Unit Type: Infantry
Points Cost: 23-25 points per model
Stats:
WS: 4 (same as standard 4th edition Marines)
BS: 4 (same as standard 4th edition Marines)
S: 4 (same as standard Marines)
T: 4 (same as standard Marines)
W: 2 (this is a major difference, giving the Intercessor durability similar to Terminators in 4th edition)
I: 4 (same as standard Marines)
A: 2 (more attacks than a standard Marine, matching their modern profile)
Ld: 8 (slightly better Leadership than standard Marines)
Sv: 3+ (same as standard Marines)

Equipment:
Bolt Rifle:

Range: 30"
Strength: 4
AP: 5 (to match the feel of a bolter in 4th edition; no AP on standard bolts in later editions)
Type: Rapid Fire 1
Note: Adjust the weapon's AP to match the 4th edition standard, where AP5 would be a good balance for a bolt rifle compared to bolters.

 

Special Rules:
And They Shall Know No Fear: Same as the 4th edition rule.
Combat Squads: Intercessors should have the option to split into two smaller units if a full squad of 10 is taken (as in 4th edition Marines).
Bolter Discipline (Optional): In 4th edition, this rule didn’t exist, so you might remove or limit the double-shooting capability unless within 12".

 

Reasoning for Points:
Durability: The 2 wounds significantly increase survivability, making them more durable than a 4th edition Terminator (2 wounds vs. 1 wound for Tactical Marines).
Firepower: A bolt rifle with longer range and better stats is a direct upgrade from a bolter, adding value to the model.
Versatility: The extra attack and strong shooting make the Intercessor versatile in different combat scenarios.
Given all these factors, a cost of 23-25 points per model seems reasonable for 4th edition, balancing the unit's durability, firepower, and special rules.

 

Summary:
A 4th edition Intercessor would have 2 wounds, better weapons, and possibly a few toned-down special rules compared to modern versions. This would place them at a higher cost than standard Marines of that era, in the 23-25 points range per model, making them a powerful and elite infantry choice within a 4th edition context."

 

Personally I am sticking purely to 3rd/4th edition codices but I am a firm believer that 40k should be a sandbox so if anyone wanted to try something like this I think this is a good starting point for homebrewing units for games with your friends. (I would have killed for something like this as a kid! )

 

The other more old school way would be just proxy stuff.

 

Now if you will excuse me I have to report to the Reclusium for mandatory brain wiping and flogging for dabbling in the dark arts of Abominable Intelligence.  

[crimsondave]

 

One fun thing I have been playing around with is getting Chatgpt to convert Primaris into 4th edition with home brew rules. I'm not saying it's perfect and no idea how it would effect balance but it would be an off the cuff starting point to convert modern minis into 4th edition rules for those who's armies are not in 4th.

 

This is what it came up with.

 

"Proposed 4th Edition Intercessor Profile:

 

Unit Type: Infantry
Points Cost: 23-25 points per model
Stats:
WS: 4 (same as standard 4th edition Marines)
BS: 4 (same as standard 4th edition Marines)
S: 4 (same as standard Marines)
T: 4 (same as standard Marines)
W: 2 (this is a major difference, giving the Intercessor durability similar to Terminators in 4th edition)
I: 4 (same as standard Marines)
A: 2 (more attacks than a standard Marine, matching their modern profile)
Ld: 8 (slightly better Leadership than standard Marines)
Sv: 3+ (same as standard Marines)

Equipment:
Bolt Rifle:

Range: 30"
Strength: 4
AP: 5 (to match the feel of a bolter in 4th edition; no AP on standard bolts in later editions)
Type: Rapid Fire 1
Note: Adjust the weapon's AP to match the 4th edition standard, where AP5 would be a good balance for a bolt rifle compared to bolters.

 

Special Rules:
And They Shall Know No Fear: Same as the 4th edition rule.
Combat Squads: Intercessors should have the option to split into two smaller units if a full squad of 10 is taken (as in 4th edition Marines).
Bolter Discipline (Optional): In 4th edition, this rule didn’t exist, so you might remove or limit the double-shooting capability unless within 12".

 

Reasoning for Points:
Durability: The 2 wounds significantly increase survivability, making them more durable than a 4th edition Terminator (2 wounds vs. 1 wound for Tactical Marines).
Firepower: A bolt rifle with longer range and better stats is a direct upgrade from a bolter, adding value to the model.
Versatility: The extra attack and strong shooting make the Intercessor versatile in different combat scenarios.
Given all these factors, a cost of 23-25 points per model seems reasonable for 4th edition, balancing the unit's durability, firepower, and special rules.

 

Summary:
A 4th edition Intercessor would have 2 wounds, better weapons, and possibly a few toned-down special rules compared to modern versions. This would place them at a higher cost than standard Marines of that era, in the 23-25 points range per model, making them a powerful and elite infantry choice within a 4th edition context."

 

Personally I am sticking purely to 3rd/4th edition codices but I am a firm believer that 40k should be a sandbox so if anyone wanted to try something like this I think this is a good starting point for homebrewing units for games with your friends. (I would have killed for something like this as a kid! )

 

The other more old school way would be just proxy stuff.

 

Now if you will excuse me I have to report to the Reclusium for mandatory brain wiping and flogging for dabbling in the dark arts of Abominable Intelligence.  

That is cool.  I wonder what it would Generate for Guilliman and Lion.  I was thinking you could just about use their HH rules.

 

Edit:  Ok, that sounded like too much fun so I downloaded the app and tried it.  This is crazy.  I told it to generate Lion El'Jonson stats for 4th edition based on his 10th edition abilities.  The first time it generated stats they were pretty bad.  I then told it that he was a primarch and should be more powerful than Abaddon and it generated below.  What was really crazy was I asked for Guilliman next and it revised Lion's WS up one more because it said Guilliman should be lower than Lion but higher than Abaddon because he is a primarch.  This is so cool....

 

You're absolutely right—Lionel Johnson, being a Primarch, should indeed have stats that reflect his superior abilities, especially in comparison to characters like Abaddon the Despoiler. Let's adjust his profile to better reflect his status. ### Revised Stats for Lionel Johnson in 4th Edition #### **Stat Line** - **WS (Weapon Skill)**: 8 - This puts him significantly above Abaddon (who has WS 7), reflecting his unparalleled skill in close combat. - **BS (Ballistic Skill)**: 6 - Primarchs are known for their exceptional marksmanship, so a BS of 6 is appropriate. - **S (Strength)**: 6 - Stronger than Abaddon (S 5), reflecting his immense physical power. - **T (Toughness)**: 6 - Also higher than Abaddon’s T 5, indicating his enhanced resilience and durability. - **W (Wounds)**: 6 - As a Primarch, Lionel Johnson should have more wounds than Abaddon (who has 4), to reflect his ability to endure massive damage. - **I (Initiative)**: 7 - His reflexes and speed should surpass Abaddon's I 6, making him one of the fastest characters on the battlefield. - **A (Attacks)**: 6 - Lionel should have more attacks than Abaddon (who has 5), showcasing his superior combat prowess. - **Ld (Leadership)**: 10 - As before, this reflects his unbreakable will. - **Sv (Save)**: 2+ - With a 4+ invulnerable save, representing his powerful armor and innate protection. ### Special Rules - **Fearless**: Remains the same, automatically passing all Morale checks. - **Independent Character**: Can join and leave units as per 4th edition rules. - **Rites of Battle**: Allows all units within 12" to use his Leadership of 10 for Morale checks. - **Mastery of the Blade**: Reroll all failed hits in close combat, reflecting his supreme skill with his sword. - **Aura of Protection**: Grants a 4+ invulnerable save, representing his 10th edition defensive capabilities. - **Primarch's Wrath**: He could have a rule granting additional attacks or special effects on rolls of 6 to hit, emphasizing his ferocity in battle. ### Weapons - **Lion Sword**: A power weapon with AP2, possibly with a special rule that either ignores invulnerable saves on a roll of 6 or deals additional damage. The exact mechanics would depend on how closely you want to adhere to the 10th edition profile while adapting to 4th edition rules. - **Bolt Pistol**: Standard for Space Marines, fitting within the 4th edition rules. - **Master-Crafted Boltgun**: Acts as a boltgun with the ability to reroll one failed hit per turn. ### Conclusion These revised stats should now reflect Lionel Johnson's true prowess as a Primarch, making him appropriately stronger, faster, and more resilient than Abaddon the Despoiler. Does this better align with your vision for Lionel Johnson in your homebrew project? 

 

Then I asked for RG.  Bear in mind, I did NOT tell it RG had a more strategic prowess and more "strategic focused" combat skill vs Lion.  I guess just comparing their 10th edition stats?  Maybe it looked at their HH stats?  Sorry if I'm geeking out but I've never used this before.

 

Let's update Lionel Johnson's Weapon Skill to 9. For Guilliman, we can position his stats appropriately. ### Revised Stat for Lionel Johnson - **WS (Weapon Skill)**: 9 ### Guilliman’s Stats (Compared to Lionel and Abaddon) #### **Stat Line** - **WS (Weapon Skill)**: 8 - Higher than Abaddon's 7 but slightly lower than Lionel Johnson's 9, reflecting Guilliman's combat skill, which is formidable but more focused on strategy than pure martial prowess. - **BS (Ballistic Skill)**: 6 - Equal to Lionel’s, showing his excellent marksmanship. - **S (Strength)**: 6 - Consistent with Lionel's Strength, as both are powerful Primarchs. - **T (Toughness)**: 6 - As resilient as Lionel, fitting his role as a leader who endures. - **W (Wounds)**: 6 - Same as Lionel, indicating his ability to withstand significant damage. - **I (Initiative)**: 6 - Slightly lower than Lionel’s 7, reflecting his more methodical approach in combat. - **A (Attacks)**: 5 - One less than Lionel, to represent Guilliman's balanced combat style. - **Ld (Leadership)**: 10 - As a Primarch, his leadership remains unmatched. - **Sv (Save)**: 2+ - With a 4+ invulnerable save, representing his powerful armor and tactical acumen. ### Special Rules - **Fearless**: Guilliman remains Fearless, passing all Morale checks automatically. - **Independent Character**: He can join and leave units per 4th edition rules. - **Master Tactician**: Units within 12" can reroll failed Morale tests, reflecting his strategic genius. - **Aura of Protection**: Grants a 4+ invulnerable save, consistent with his 10th edition defenses. - **Supreme Commander**: An ability that enhances his army’s strategic flexibility, perhaps allowing an extra Strategic Redeployment or giving nearby units a bonus to their Leadership. ### Weapons - **Hand of Dominion**: A power fist with AP2, likely with a bonus to Strength, and possibly with a rule for causing additional damage or ignoring certain saves. - **The Emperor's Sword**: A master-crafted power sword with AP2 and potentially a rule that increases its damage or grants additional attacks on a successful hit. How does this look for Guilliman? We can tweak these as needed to fit your project’s vision!

 

I think to actually use this, Lion would need a nerf or be expensive.  It’s still pretty cool though.

 

Edit:  I asked for a 4th edition points value.  It said 320 to 350 for Lion and 290 to 310 for RG.

 

These are more of a 4th/10th hybrid it appears to me.  I think if I did it over I would ask for more of a straight 4th edition stats line not based on their 10 edition datasheet.

Edited August 23 by crimsondave

[Antarius]

I won't debate the wisdom of bringing Primaris and Primarchs into 4th ed. (that's the beauty of the hobby, after all; you can do what you like with it).
Nor will I go into a lecture on the merits of AI in general, as that is off-topic and rarely, if ever, goes anywhere good (personally I think AI can be a fun tool for some things, but only ever as a starting point, but my opinion is just that - my opinion).

But I will say that I think it is very obviously not capable of giving even a first draft of a suggestion as to points values. You are much better off pricing it out yourself, as the AI is clearly not capable of taking rules (and likely not profiles either) into account (because it is not actually thinking, but providing words and/or numbers that are statistically likely to be used in the given context - not that this means AI is "bad" or not usable for anything, just that you should always remember this when using it). In fact, I will go so far as to say taking its suggestions on points values as a starting point is likely to skew your judgement, so it'd be a lot better to look at similar 4th ed units instead and go from there.

As possibly the most obvious example, its suggestion for Guilliman's fist is "A power fist with AP2, likely with a bonus to Strength, and possibly with a rule for causing additional damage or ignoring certain saves" which is nonsensical in terms of 4th edition, as the rules for a power fist is "ignores armour saves, doubles strength up to a max of 10 and strikes at Ini 1".
Where to start? I mean AP2 makes no sense as a regular fist already bypasses armour completely, a str bonus would make no sense either, as we would already hit the stat cap with a normal powerfist using Guilliman's suggested Str 6 - and remember that there very specifically and deliberately isn't anything that causes additional damage in 4th (because the instant death rule takes care of that and wound values in 4th are accordingly low*).
It clearly isn't capable of sussing out what a power fist even does in 4th edition, so it stands to reason that it can't calculate its value either - and that's just equipment which should be the easiest to price in a formulaic manner, never mind more abstract rules and their impact on the game at large.

Again, not trying to take away anyone's fun and I'm not here to rail against AI (use it if you think it's fun - especially if it helps to get your creative juices flowing). Just a reminder that it's a tool with severe limitations and that you should always apply your own judgement 

* also note that it actually suggests a higher W value for the two Primarchs than e.g. a Great Unclean One, or IIRC anything in a 4th ed. Codex has and some of the other stats seem similarly OTT in a 4th ed. context, so I would also question the wisdom of using it for figuring out profiles, now that I come to think of it.

Edited August 23 by Antarius

[calgar101]

Agree with you there Antarius. For me another reason that 4th appeals to me is the lack of power creep units and the new story line is vanished haha.

I'm going to have a fun memory lane read later.

 

2 of my gaming friends are also interested in going back to 4th Ed, we have been discussing running our own 13th Black Crusade campaign to, re write our sand box haha.

 

Back when a Captain was metal, will strip him to lead my Space Marines. I'm thinking of doing the Aurora chapter as I love tanks.

Edited August 23 by calgar101
Add image.

[crimsondave]

I didn’t say the rules were good and should be used.  I thought my last statement made it clear that the rules weren’t even 4th edition rules but some kind of hybrid between the two.  I just thought it was cool watching the AI try to do it.

[Harrowmaster]

As for inspiration you could look at Necromunda.

 

Reading through the books, Munda feels closer in spirit to older editions with its variant rules and campaign systems.

 

The skills also remind me of the old battle honours.

[Antarius]

 

I didn’t say the rules were good and should be used.  I thought my last statement made it clear that the rules weren’t even 4th edition rules but some kind of hybrid between the two.  I just thought it was cool watching the AI try to do it.

Yeah, I know. I hope you didn't think I was saying "your fun is bad and you should feel bad", because that definitely wasn't my intention 
It's just that I've seen very bright people take the AIs word as somehow worth more than their own reasoning, so I just wanted to make it perfectly clear that it's not, since you said it was the first time you were using it for something like this.

[crimsondave]

Oh no, I didn’t.  At the end of the day, AI is just code.  It’s cool the way it can figure out things to compare against once you give it context like in my example but, like your example, it still can’t reason.  I don’t think primarchs work in the older editions anyway.  Limits to 10 on stat lines is too limiting and frankly why I’m not as big of a fan of the 3-7th stuff.  In MY ideal world I’d like 10th rules with WS and Initiative added back in with 90% special rules (devastating wounds, lethal hits, most re-rolls) deleted.  One can dream.

[Doghouse]

Well I'm proud of you mate for trying something you hadn't tried before. 

 

Now report to the Reclusium for mind scrubbing and flogging for dabbling in Abominable Intelligence...

 

I'm starting my Lord Inquisitor and ten Space Marine allies this weekend for the start of my 4th ed force. 

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

@Doghouse:

 

Some food for thought for Intercessors in 4th 40K. I have the 4th 40K SM codex in hand and it was the first one which allowed to customize your SM force akin to the 3.5 CSM codex. With that system you could unlock traits & disadvantages which would be a neat way to address the Intercessors.

 

So here is my take on them:

The Intercessors are wearing Mark X armour and inside are Firstborn marines. That would eliminate nicely the atrocious Primaris fluff. One way to approach this is to ramp up the points for the Intercessors in comparison to the Tacticals as the new suit grants 2 Wounds and the wearer even gets a superior firearm. However as a simple point increase is boring as hell here and here are more suggestions to make it a little bit more difficult to simply spam this new high-tech gear. One could implement one of them, a few or even all. It´s up to the players in the end:

 

- Field Test:

Mark X suits are ALWAYS deployed alongside Tacticals in battle to directly compare the prowess to the vintage suits. As such for every Tactical unit selected you may select an Intercessor unit.

 

- Maintenance:

Mark X suits are brand new and still suffer from quirks and glitches. To address this issue Techmarines (Elite choice) are tasked to constantly monitor the new gear between battles. For every two Intercessor units selected you have to include a single Techmarine unit which has to include at least two servitors which have no weapon upgrades.

 

- Price of Failure:

Mark X suits are widely known in the Imperium to boost the war effort in a meaningful way. The flipside on the other hand would be that the destruction of such gear would be a propaganda success of the Imperium´s many enemies. Intercessor units which have been reduced to 50% strength, fled or have been wiped out grant bonus victory points to the opponent.

 

- Prototypes:

Mark X suits are fairly new and not many have been produced. As such Intercessor units count as being an Elite option in the SM codex rather than a Core slot as their Tactical brethren.