No1 rule that you think needs changed.

[Interrogator Stobz]

 

I have no issues with the character rules as they are. They are infinitely better than the super units that were possible in past editions.

Can you please explain exactly what things are better about the current character targeting rules than the previous editions, that are explicitly due to the changed character targeting mechanics and not other rules changes?

 

Invisible super duper deathstar units were a problem in previous editions, true. That wasn’t due to the character mechanics though, it was down to the abilities of those characters to give out invisibility, 2++, 4+++ and rerolls to Saves. Those abilities are what changed, not the character mechanics; invisibility is gone, reroll Saves and FNP granting are gone, and invuls are capped at 3++. The character buffs have just been weakened.

 

Furthermore, what’s the difference between a character surrounded by 10 Terminators giving them a buff aura, and the character being part of that Terminator unit? Either way, you can’t target the character without a sniper. Hell, the only differences are that the character can give out his buff to more than one unit at a time (making him stronger in that sense than in the deathstar days), excess damage to the unit can’t possibly roll over to the character, and the unit can succeed in a charge but the character leading them can fail the charge and be left behind.

 

If anything, the new character mechanics are more broken than the old ones. It’s just that the buff powers have been significantly nerfed.

So.Much.This.

[TorvaldTheMild]

I think that characters should be able to be their own unit or chose to be in a unit.  As for shooting characters, I think that the 'can only shoot if its the closet' should only apply to heavy weapons and units that aren't infantry.

[Bryan Blaire]

The could also open up the “Target a Character” stratagem to any non-Vehicle unit, rather than it being a Primaris only thing, that way Characters still maintain some protection, but you can determine when in a battle the commander might give an order specifically to hunt down an opposing commander to any unit.

[Marshal Loss]

I echo the "characters should be able to join a unit" crowd. It would be nice to return to the days where a commander would be surrounded by his loyal bodyguards, leading from the front, as opposed to the current system where everybody hides behind units. Balance aside - as others have compellingly made that argument - it was a really cool visual for me.

 

edit: grammar

Edited August 25, 2019 by Marshal Loss

[Panzer]

I echo the "characters should be able to join a unit" crowd. It would be nice to return to the days where a commander would be surrounded by his loyal bodyguards, leading from the front, as opposed to the current system where everybody hides behind units. Balance aside - as others have compellingly made that argument - it was a really cool visual for me.

 

edit: grammar

 

I seriously don't see how that's gone. My Captain is still surrounded by whatever unit I want him to be with and he's usually at the front as well.

 

I guess I'm in the minority by not having the slightest issue with the character rules as they are and I definitely prefer them over the 7th edition "I face tank everything so my bodyguards don't die!" character rules.

Edited August 25, 2019 by sfPanzer

[Interrogator Stobz]

There is nothing elegant about rules limiting a Titan worth 2000 points (for example only, add in any disciplined shooting unit) that can see a 45 point character but cannot kill it because it is hiding in plain view behind a 7 point non character. Nothing.

 

As for positivity, I am absolutely positive that six of the last seven editions dealt with characters better.

That's what this thread is kind of about, what can we POSITIVELY change; not an argument about why it shouldn't.

 

+++AND ON THAT NOTE; CUT OUT ANY PERSONAL ATTACKS OR COMMENTS BROTHERS, ALL OF YOU. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN WARNING POINTS WILL BE ISSUED. THIS IS YOUR ONLY WARNING HERE.+++

 

Carry on, on topic.

[Interrogator Stobz]

 

I echo the "characters should be able to join a unit" crowd. It would be nice to return to the days where a commander would be surrounded by his loyal bodyguards, leading from the front, as opposed to the current system where everybody hides behind units. Balance aside - as others have compellingly made that argument - it was a really cool visual for me.

 

edit: grammar

 

I seriously don't see how that's gone. My Captain is still surrounded by whatever unit I want him to be with and he's usually at the front as well.

 

I guess I'm in the minority by not having the slightest issue with the character rules as they are and I definitely prefer them over the 7th edition "I face tank everything so my bodyguards don't die!" character rules.

 

The main difference is once the bodyguard unit is dead, the character is fair game.

[Ishagu]

There is nothing elegant about rules limiting a Titan worth 2000 points (for example only, add in any disciplined shooting unit) that can see a 45 point character but cannot kill it because it is hiding in plain view behind a 7 point non character. Nothing.

 

As for positivity, I am absolutely positive that six of the last seven editions dealt with characters better.

That's what this thread is kind of about, what can we POSITIVELY change; not an argument about why it shouldn't.

 

But don't you see that the character models are just abstract gaming pieces on a table?

The game is a visual representation of a battle, it's not an actual snapshot of one. Abaddon or RG or any great commander wouldn't be out in the open in plain sight, waving a sword about a few feet behind a squad of 5 guys.

 

Vehicles aren't correct sizes, models don't move their poses, etc

 

Remember that 40k is a game with the rules of a game. The current version of the game is more elegant than past version, with less disparity between armies and less ambiguous rules.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Ishagu

[Panzer]

 

 

I echo the "characters should be able to join a unit" crowd. It would be nice to return to the days where a commander would be surrounded by his loyal bodyguards, leading from the front, as opposed to the current system where everybody hides behind units. Balance aside - as others have compellingly made that argument - it was a really cool visual for me.

 

edit: grammar

 

I seriously don't see how that's gone. My Captain is still surrounded by whatever unit I want him to be with and he's usually at the front as well.

 

I guess I'm in the minority by not having the slightest issue with the character rules as they are and I definitely prefer them over the 7th edition "I face tank everything so my bodyguards don't die!" character rules.

 

The main difference is once the bodyguard unit is dead, the character is fair game.

 

 

Unless he joins another unit ... or used his superior saves to protect his bodyguards in the first place as it happened so often in past editions. No, sorry I don't see how this is a particularly big issue or how the old rules are supposed to be better. It's different, but not necessarily better.

[Interrogator Stobz]

That can be tweaked no problems sfP, he can't join another unit if he gets targetted by the next shooting unit first. But the old ways weren't perfect I agree.

 

Ishagu: Everyone understands abstraction; and that is something that the current edition doesn't meet my version of abstraction, 8th its more suited to left brain data gamers and less for spacial intuitive ones. Lose pre-measuring, impossible to target characters, bring back templates and vehicle facings, lose the redonkulous order of operations for dice. Yep, I positively preferred the last 6 editions to this one, positively.

And all my mates will only play the most current version, so there you go.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Interrogator Stobz

[Ishagu]

The unit joining thing caused so many problems.

 

If they bring it back I would immediately attach cheap captain HQs with Stormshields and relics to reduce damage to large shooting units and use them to make those units far more durable. Suddenly the hero becomes the bodyguard.

 

This is just an example. I'm not even accounting for rule stacking and the problems that causes. The Deathwatch army shows that units comprises of different types of models do get rule stacking benefits.

Suddenly all the infantry units would have a flying hero attached.

[Interrogator Stobz]

The unit joining thing caused so many problems.

 

If they bring it back I would immediately attach cheap captain HQs with Stormshields and relics to reduce damage to large shooting units and use them to make those units far more durable. Suddenly the hero becomes the bodyguard.

 

This is just an example. I'm not even accounting for rule stacking and the problems that causes. The Deathwatch army shows that units comprises of different types of models do get rule stacking benefits.

Suddenly all the infantry units would have a flying hero attached.

A slight tweak and that problem goes away, require the bodyguard to be targeted first. Better that than have what you describe, because that was a real problem I agree.

And better than un-targetable characters in a game of shooting.

 

Sorry to duck out, work calls.

 

Carry on +++POLITELY+++

Edited August 25, 2019 by Interrogator Stobz

[Panzer]

 

 

The unit joining thing caused so many problems.

 

If they bring it back I would immediately attach cheap captain HQs with Stormshields and relics to reduce damage to large shooting units and use them to make those units far more durable. Suddenly the hero becomes the bodyguard.

 

This is just an example. I'm not even accounting for rule stacking and the problems that causes. The Deathwatch army shows that units comprises of different types of models do get rule stacking benefits.

Suddenly all the infantry units would have a flying hero attached.

A slight tweak and that problem goes away, require the bodyguard to be targeted first. Better that than have what you describe, because that was a real problem I agree.

And better than un-targetable characters in a game of shooting.

 

Sorry to duck out, work calls.

 

Carry on +++POLITELY+++

 

 

Actually I think it being a game of shooting is a good reason for characters not being targetable just like that. Just take a look at Apoc. The biggest complain there is that characters simply die pretty much instantly regardless of whether it's a game played with lots of points or not. Especially artillery becomes a huge character sniping problem without some extensive rework.

 

And since you like "realistic" mechanics like armour facings and templates so much ... what is the realistic difference of a character standing within 2" of one unit and standing 2.1" away from them? Why can he suddenly get shot at by a whole army if he makes half a step away from a random squad? Or standing within 2" of two different units? Why can only one squad protect him?

 

You keep saying things can be tweaked whenever there's an argument against the old character rules, but that also goes for the current character rules. Everything can be tweaked.

Edited August 26, 2019 by Brother Casman
Removed off topic discussion

[Interrogator Stobz]

snip..

 

Actually I think it being a game of shooting is a good reason for characters not being targetable just like that. Just take a look at Apoc. The biggest complain there is that characters simply die pretty much instantly regardless of whether it's a game played with lots of points or not. Especially artillery becomes a huge character sniping problem without some extensive rework.

 

And since you like "realistic" mechanics like armour facings and templates so much ... what is the realistic difference of a character standing within 2" of one unit and standing 2.1" away from them? Why can he suddenly get shot at by a whole army if he makes half a step away from a random squad? Or standing within 2" of two different units? Why can only one squad protect him?

 

You keep saying things can be tweaked whenever there's an argument against the old character rules, but that also goes for the current character rules. Everything can be tweaked.

 

 

If you can't understand my 'why'  on this issue then we will have to agree to disagree.

Not targeted at you in particular Brother but circular opinion arguments can be construed as spam and I am not going to go there.

 

 

 

+++THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT DISCUSSION OF ONE PRIMARCH OR PARTICULAR UNIT, STOP DERAILING IT PLEASE.  NOR IS IT A PLATFORM TO ARGUE THE WHY OF OTHER'S OPINIONS. THERE HAVE BEEN ENOUGH OF THOSE. THIS THREAD HAS A VERY LIMITED LIFE LEFT, IF YOU CANNOT ALL STAY ON TOPIC IT WILL BE CLOSED FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE BnC+++.

[Ishagu]

Well the character rule is what a bunch of people were bringing up and it's divisive.

 

I think that the feedback from Apoc where people complain about characters being taken off too quickly should not be ignored. The same would happen in 40k immediately.

Also we know that unit combining does have issues, and if you tweak it to the point where it doesn't create benefits then there's no point in even doing it.

 

This goes back to my original opinion. The current system is the most elegant, and perhaps it's not perfect but it works well.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Ishagu

[Gederas]

Now, I feel that this is my fault since I was the first one to bring up the character targeting rule.

 

But I feel that I need to bring up what I said:

Why can't I shoot Guilliman because there's a single marine hidden behind a wall closer to me than Guilliman, and I can't see the marine, which means it isn't a valid target to shoot at in the first place?

Now, everyone who's been arguing about the character rule seems to be forgetting what I said.

 

Let's use this an example:

I have a squad of Chaos Marines who are 8" away from Guilliman. He is the closest enemy model to them that is VISIBLE to them. There's a squad of Ultramarine Intercessors who are behind a wall, that doesn't have windows; a solid, line-of-sight blocking wall. They are 7" from the Chaos Marines.

 

If they cannot be seen, and therefore, ARE NOT A VALID TARGET TO SHOOT AT, why can I not target Guilliman who is the closest visible, and therefore VALID target?

 

I don't care about the no-targeting characters unless closest rule. I do care when it means a non-viable target means they can't be targeted.

[BitsHammer]

I feel like a more elegant solution would be that characters can be targeted but they can use any into within 3" to take the saves and resulting wounds (to represent loyal bodyguards, diving behind a tank for cover or using a cultist as a meat shield). Then to represent actual bodyguard units could they get something like +1 to their save when taking daves against wounds inflicted against a character.

 

This let's people target characters, increases the importance of relative positioning and allows for units to take wounds for characters while not allowing the character to take saves for the unit.

Edited August 26, 2019 by Fulkes

[kombatwombat]

Unless he joins another unit ... or used his superior saves to protect his bodyguards in the first place as it happened so often in past editions. No, sorry I don't see how this is a particularly big issue or how the old rules are supposed to be better. It's different, but not necessarily better.

The character tanking all of the Lascannons and letting the bolter shots plink off his bodyguards was a problem in previous editions, yes. That trick only worked because of the old casualty removal rules where the closest model took the hit, and the 2+ Look Out, Sir! mechanic for independent characters. Back then, you could put the character out front, use the Look Out, Sir! to make the high-volume, low-quality shots hit the bodyguards, and let the 3++ character that could only suffer a single wound from any weapon tank the low-volume, high-quality shots.

 

That trick doesn’t work now. For one thing, the loss of the Eternal Warrior mechanic means that a single low-volume, high-quality shot might outright kill your character with a single bad save roll, so the risk is greatly increased. Far more importantly though, the current casualty removal mechanic means that once a model takes a wound, it becomes the model that takes every wound after that.

 

Used your 3++/5+++ Captain to tank some plasma and protect the Hellblasters he’s with? Well, he failed one save, so now he gets to enjoy 300 Lasgun shots that must be allocated to him and can’t be handed over to the Hellblasters until he’s dead. As soon as that character fails a single save, every shot targeting that unit now gets to shoot the character directly. Maybe using your character as a tank isn’t such a hot idea anymore!

 

I can’t really see a disadvantage with going back to the previous edition’s character mechanics. All of the old problems with characters and death stars seem to have been removed because they depended on mechanics that no longer exist.

[Gederas]

I feel like a more elegant solution would be that characters can be targeted but they can use any into within 3" to take the saves and resulting wounds (to represent loyal bodyguards, diving behind a tank for cover or using a cultist as a meat shield). Then to represent actual bodyguard units could they get something like +1 to their save when taking saves against wounds inflicted against a character.

 

This let's people target characters, increases the importance of relative positioning and allows for units to take wounds for characters while not allowing the character to take saves for the unit.

Now this? This I like, and would solve so many of the issues of the character targeting

Edited August 26, 2019 by Gederas

[Ishagu]

+++SNIP+++

 

Not constructive; instead of criticism provide solutions. If you like the status quo it only needs saying once.

Edited August 26, 2019 by Interrogator Stobz

[Panzer]

Now, I feel that this is my fault since I was the first one to bring up the character targeting rule.

 

But I feel that I need to bring up what I said:

Why can't I shoot Guilliman because there's a single marine hidden behind a wall closer to me than Guilliman, and I can't see the marine, which means it isn't a valid target to shoot at in the first place?

Now, everyone who's been arguing about the character rule seems to be forgetting what I said.

 

Let's use this an example:

 

I have a squad of Chaos Marines who are 8" away from Guilliman. He is the closest enemy model to them that is VISIBLE to them. There's a squad of Ultramarine Intercessors who are behind a wall, that doesn't have windows; a solid, line-of-sight blocking wall. They are 7" from the Chaos Marines.

 

If they cannot be seen, and therefore, ARE NOT A VALID TARGET TO SHOOT AT, why can I not target Guilliman who is the closest visible, and therefore VALID target?

 

I don't care about the no-targeting characters unless closest rule. I do care when it means a non-viable target means they can't be targeted.

 

You know, that is a valid argument but would be just as easily dealt with as Stobz wants to deal with the various issues in the old system.

Just tweak it so that only visible models count as blocking and that friendly units don't count as line of sight blocking for the purpose of determining whether an enemy model is visible when shooting at a character.

This would easily prevent silly things like in your example and also prevent the character sniping by narrowing your own units line of sight by parking your rhino infront of it. 

Edited August 26, 2019 by sfPanzer

[Ishagu]

Now that could work.

That's an elegant alteration.

 

But I should also mention that indirect fire is becoming more and more common.

 

If people have balanced lists making use of it where possible it makes the situations with hidden units preventing a character from being a target unlikely to occur.

Edited August 26, 2019 by Ishagu

[BitsHammer]

Auras and bodyguard units already encourage grouping this is a compromise for letting characters sit in units and the current abusable rules.

[Ishagu]

Auras and bodyguard units already encourage grouping this is a compromise for letting characters sit in units and the current abusable rules.

Yes but in a far less precise or arranged way.

 

The game is pretty fast and slick now. I think the only things causing slowness of play are armies with huge body counts.

 

Don't get me wrong, some of the suggestions do have a thematic flair to them but functionally very little changes, more grouping is required and more time will be spent on additional wound allocation and dice rolling.

 

Also they end up benefiting armies like Guard again, as they can crowd huge infantry blobs around their heroes.

Edited August 26, 2019 by Ishagu

[Panzer]

 

Unless he joins another unit ... or used his superior saves to protect his bodyguards in the first place as it happened so often in past editions. No, sorry I don't see how this is a particularly big issue or how the old rules are supposed to be better. It's different, but not necessarily better.

The character tanking all of the Lascannons and letting the bolter shots plink off his bodyguards was a problem in previous editions, yes. That trick only worked because of the old casualty removal rules where the closest model took the hit, and the 2+ Look Out, Sir! mechanic for independent characters. Back then, you could put the character out front, use the Look Out, Sir! to make the high-volume, low-quality shots hit the bodyguards, and let the 3++ character that could only suffer a single wound from any weapon tank the low-volume, high-quality shots.

 

That trick doesn’t work now. For one thing, the loss of the Eternal Warrior mechanic means that a single low-volume, high-quality shot might outright kill your character with a single bad save roll, so the risk is greatly increased. Far more importantly though, the current casualty removal mechanic means that once a model takes a wound, it becomes the model that takes every wound after that.

 

Used your 3++/5+++ Captain to tank some plasma and protect the Hellblasters he’s with? Well, he failed one save, so now he gets to enjoy 300 Lasgun shots that must be allocated to him and can’t be handed over to the Hellblasters until he’s dead. As soon as that character fails a single save, every shot targeting that unit now gets to shoot the character directly. Maybe using your character as a tank isn’t such a hot idea anymore!

 

I can’t really see a disadvantage with going back to the previous edition’s character mechanics. All of the old problems with characters and death stars seem to have been removed because they depended on mechanics that no longer exist.

 

 

This could easily be circumvented by using an actual bodyguard unit that can tank shots for the character even if he's wounded or even after he failed his save so he doesn't lose wounds in the first place. Yay, finally a use for Company Veterans, am I right? :D