Jump to content

Welcome to The Bolter and Chainsword
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Targeting Characters

Beta Rules

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
14 replies to this topic

#1
Brother Tyler

Brother Tyler

    ++ FIDELIS MILITUS ++

  • +++ADMINISTRATUM+++
  • 20,668 posts
  • Location:The Temple of Oaths
  • Faction: VIIth Legion
Published here.

This rule will be tested at the Las Vegas Open and AdeptiCon (two of the largest Warhammer 40,000 events in the world) in 2018.
 

40kFAQFuture-Dec15-Boxout2d.jpg

Hidden Content


This rule means that characters can no longer be used to block characters, meaning Culexus Assassins are more likely to be used as the horrifying psyker-hunters they were always meant to be and not as elaborate human (or posthuman) shields.


  • Emicus likes this

#2
Firepower

Firepower

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 10,357 posts
  • Location:St. Louis
  • Faction: Black Templars

I quite like this rule.  The current set up is too easily exploited for cheesy shenanigans :P


Suffer not the xeno psyker kitten, as to it the souls of man are but balls of yarn and jingly amusements!
Brother Chaplain Kage: "I don't think anything makes Firepower happy."
gallery_38474_6916_27314.jpggallery_38474_6916_19616.jpgBT_Chaos_at_the_Gates_Banner.gifgallery_38474_6916_5384.jpggallery_29004_6198_9307.pngsml_gallery_29004_10691_1994.pnggallery_38474_6917_1744.pnggallery_38474_6916_16905.png
Templars a la Firepower -- IA: Broken Arrows -- Broken Arrows WIP Blog -- My Crummy Sketches


#3
Eddie Orlock

Eddie Orlock

    ++ FRATERIS TEMPLAR ++

  • ++ MODERATI ++
  • 3,059 posts
  • Location:Calgary
  • Faction: Storm Angels
If the goal is to fix an unintended interaction with Culexii, it would seem to me that a better place for the fix would be the Culexus datasheet.

"Culexus Assassins may be ignored when determining if a character is the closest target to a firing unit."

Are there any good examples of this interaction being problematic with other characters up front?
"Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low."
- Wallace Sayre

The continued future of the Bolter and Chainsword is in your hands.

#4
Gentlemanloser

Gentlemanloser

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • +EXCOMMUNICATUS+
  • 14,653 posts
20 Primaris Psykers or the equivalent.

Can't shoot any other Psyker until the closest one is dead. Can't split fire, and you force the opponent to waste a lot of shots.
  • Firepower likes this
QUOTE (Seahawk @ Jul 30 2011, 05:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
We all feel different ways about different rules, but if you're traveling between different gaming groups or to tournaments, the only commonality is the rules as they are written. If you can get your opponent to agree with you on house-ruling something then that changes things, but until then all we can do is go by how things are written.

#5
Kallas

Kallas

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,145 posts
  • Location:Edinburgh, UK
  • Faction: Howling Griffons
I honestly think the Beta character rules are a bit too far.

I think something like:
An enemy CHARACTER with a Wounds characteristic of less than 10 can only be chosen as a target in the Shooting phase if is the closest visible model to the firing model. Ignore other enemy CHARACTERS with a Wounds characteristic of less than 10 when determining if the target is the closest enemy unit to the firing model.

Additionally, when determining visibility of models for the purposes of finding the closest visible enemy unit, ignore friendly models.

(This is so that friendly models cannot be used to block enemy units, to target characters more easily.)

#6
Gentlemanloser

Gentlemanloser

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • +EXCOMMUNICATUS+
  • 14,653 posts
I actually one ran 7 GK apothecaries instead of any Paladin.

Had them in front of Draigo/Voldus. Left one just out front so he had to be targeted.

Dropped him back a little to heal up forcing my opponent to target an unwounded Apoth by moving him to the front.
QUOTE (Seahawk @ Jul 30 2011, 05:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
We all feel different ways about different rules, but if you're traveling between different gaming groups or to tournaments, the only commonality is the rules as they are written. If you can get your opponent to agree with you on house-ruling something then that changes things, but until then all we can do is go by how things are written.

#7
NTaW

NTaW

    ++ SUSPECTAVI VENEFICI ++

  • ++ MODERATI ++
  • 1,980 posts
  • Location:Canada

I actually one ran 7 GK apothecaries instead of any Paladin.

Had them in front of Draigo/Voldus. Left one just out front so he had to be targeted.

Dropped him back a little to heal up forcing my opponent to target an unwounded Apoth by moving him to the front.


:lol: made all the friends that day, eh?

#8
Gentlemanloser

Gentlemanloser

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • +EXCOMMUNICATUS+
  • 14,653 posts
Lost The match to nids.

Our nid player disliked me running three culexes 'sins more than the 7 apoths!
  • NTaW likes this
QUOTE (Seahawk @ Jul 30 2011, 05:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
We all feel different ways about different rules, but if you're traveling between different gaming groups or to tournaments, the only commonality is the rules as they are written. If you can get your opponent to agree with you on house-ruling something then that changes things, but until then all we can do is go by how things are written.

#9
yergerjo

yergerjo

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 303 posts
  • Location:Jacksonville, Florida
Being that I've been running HeroHammer with my marines, this rule has come into play to allow them to snipe the apothecary instead of the captain or anciebt once the vet squad is wiped.

#10
yergerjo

yergerjo

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 303 posts
  • Location:Jacksonville, Florida
Yesterday I had a situation where this rule applied.

We basically had a 20" line of models: A helldrake 3" from a Cataphracti Captain in combat with a Terminator Chaos Lord which was 6" away from a SM Apothecary which was another 3" from a Chapter Ancient.

Under BRB the Heldrake was unable to flame anything since the CataCaptain was in combat and the closest model, but with the Beta it was able to flame the Apothecary instead since characters do not block characters from targeting anymore.

I'll post a pic later if requested.

#11
Madmonkeyman

Madmonkeyman

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 279 posts
I think it's a great rule . Played 10 games with it now. Means that when their are just enemy characters left it easier to shoot more than one at a time. Much better. Can't see a down side

#12
Kallas

Kallas

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,145 posts
  • Location:Edinburgh, UK
  • Faction: Howling Griffons

Can't see a down side


Units hiding, which then stops you shooting at characters (for some reason).

It's not necessarily super easy, but it's definitely super dumb.

#13
yergerjo

yergerjo

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 303 posts
  • Location:Jacksonville, Florida

26803986_10212604497960648_581429047_n.j

 

So here's the situation:

 

The Ravager (Red) wanted to target the Exalted Flamer [character] (Yellow)

 

However the Demon Prince (Blue) was closer and locked in combat, thereby not targetable. By the Beta rule this does not block the shot.

The Herald of Tzeentch (Pink) was closer and locked in combat, thereby not targetable. By the Beta rule this does not block the shot.

The Flamers (Orange) were closer and locked in combat, thereby not targetable. By the Beta rule, this non-character unit which is closer DOES block the shot.

 

Result: The Exalted Flamer is not a valid target for the Ravager.

 

***

 

My thoughts, I agree that characters should not be able to shield characters. This rule seems to be worth while, even though in my examples it could work to my negative allowing my opponent to target the character forming a linchpin to my defense or strategy (targeting a 3+ Apothecary rather than a 2+/3++ Terminator Captain). 
Perhaps if we wanted to allow some element of shielding/protecting other characters, maybe a -1 to hit for each intervening character? As it stands I can live with and think this Beta Rule should be enacted.


Edited by Brother Tyler, 14 January 2018 - 01:21 PM.
Fixed BBCode, changing <> to []


#14
Trevak Dal

Trevak Dal

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 4,282 posts
  • Location:Tennessee
  • Faction: Black Legion (Night Blades)
Or just have the ability to not be targeted as easily fall to your warlord.

Speeds up the game, cuts the bull:cuss.

Edited by Trevak Dal, 16 April 2018 - 11:03 AM.

"Our Turn" - Centurion Khârn.

 


#15
Dam13n

Dam13n

    ++ CÆLATOR ALTRICES ++

  • ++ MODERATI ++
  • 2,378 posts
  • Location:Poole, UK
  • Faction: The Scions

The rule has now been finalised:
 
 

TARGETING CHARACTERS:
 
An enemy Character with a Wounds characteristic of less than 10 can only be chosen as a target in the Shooting phase if it is both visible to the firing model and it is the closest enemy unit to the firing model. Ignore other enemy Characters with a Wounds characteristics of less than 10 when determining if the target is the closest enemy unit to the firing model.
 
This means that if any other enemy units (other than other Characters with a Wounds characteristics of less than 10) are closer, whether they are visible or not, then the enemy Character cannot be targeted.

 
 
Given that the rule is now final, and abiding by the Forum Rules outlined by Brother Tyler, this thread is hereby closed.  Further discussion on this subject is now permitted in the Official Rules sub-forum.
 
gallery_26_548_17394.gif







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Beta Rules

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users