The return of templates

[Triszin]

Just roll templates into legacy: advanced.

[Noserenda]

Why call it something loaded like advanced though, i mean you could equally call it "baby 40k" for those who cant handle abstract concepts? Maybe you could hearken back to HG Wells rules and have little conversions that shoot dowels as an "Advanced" mechanic too? ;)   

But more seriously, so called "Advanced" rules are always a bad idea imho, either they are mostly junk and everyone ignores them or you get the awkwardness of say AT right now where its just needlessly breaks up the rulebook into absolute mayhem and all but one or two of the rules are just the rules really. But then some people mysteriously love the garbage rules and keep trying to squeeze them into games :D 

I mean it could work as a Chapter approved thing, thats certainly something that they appear to be doing with trialling games rules or games setups and you can just pop em in there, abandon the dross and look at integrating anything that plays well back into the back game later ala 4th edition.

But dont call it advanced rules, nothing makes a certain kind of geek pecker up harder than an innate sense of smug superiority over literally nothing.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

So glad to see templates removed from the game. All it did was slow down games and causes arguments.

[Ficinus]

As a Sisters player, I feel confident saying that the largest issues with losing flamer templates is the loss of reliability and the small number of hits. In 7th, I could move a unit, have a reasonable estimate of the number of hits just by mock placing the template down, and then reason if I wanted to move a unit to shoot. Now, it's totally random what effect I have. It's totally random whether I move an inch away or am barely in range. I have to gamble every shooting phase with flame weapons.

 

The second issue is that D6 hits just isn't enough. If it could reliably be shifted so you could be guaranteed 6 hits if you had 6 models in range, then maybe that would be enough, but I'm not even sure then. The problem Sisters (and I'm sure other factions) have is that there are other (sometimes cheaper) options that are just better. For us, it's the fact that Stormbolters are 1/3 the points for the same strength and AP, but can be shooting from turn one and when within 12, are averaging a similar number of hits against most targets. Can a flamer compete when you can't even use it until turn 3?

[Marshal Rohr]

Why call it something loaded like advanced though, i mean you could equally call it "baby 40k" for those who cant handle abstract concepts? Maybe you could hearken back to HG Wells rules and have little conversions that shoot dowels as an "Advanced" mechanic too? ;)

 

But more seriously, so called "Advanced" rules are always a bad idea imho, either they are mostly junk and everyone ignores them or you get the awkwardness of say AT right now where its just needlessly breaks up the rulebook into absolute mayhem and all but one or two of the rules are just the rules really. But then some people mysteriously love the garbage rules and keep trying to squeeze them into games :D

 

I mean it could work as a Chapter approved thing, thats certainly something that they appear to be doing with trialling games rules or games setups and you can just pop em in there, abandon the dross and look at integrating anything that plays well back into the back game later ala 4th edition.

 

But dont call it advanced rules, nothing makes a certain kind of geek pecker up harder than an innate sense of smug superiority over literally nothing.

Wow, what a massive overreaction and :cuss take to people just throwing ideas around casually. Don’t call it advanced then. Call it 40k Cinematic. Long Form 40k. 40k Immersive. No one actually cares what it’s called (except you apparently who felt like losing his :cuss over the word used to describe the game with extra layers of rules by The same company when they did this before). God forbid Games Workshop add something like Split Fire to units so heavy weapons can shoot a tank or something to a set of rules for people who don’t mind longer games. Truly, a feat only worthy of PhD holders. Edited October 13, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[Oxydo]

That’s why an advanced rules system could really bring some fun back. If you don’t like templates, play normal 40k. People who prefer the granularity can play advanced. It wouldn’t hurt anything. It’s like with USRs. Instead of a differently named version of the exact same thing on a bunch of different datasheets, you could have a single page of USRs instead.

 

At the end of the day, the way explosive and flame weapons work in 8th isn’t bad. It’s just not good either. You could fix it all kinds of ways. You could have a single to hit roll and fixed amount of damage. You could use a bubble no different than the character aura bubbles to determine the damage. Designate one model in the unit and everyone within 3 to 6 inches depending on the type of thing shooting is able to be hurt. Right now, as pointed out above, it’s not even an ‘abstraction’ that a flamethrower might hit one Ork or a single character six times. That’s just a probability mechanic. It wouldn’t take anything for them to fix either, now that the rules are so short.

Yes, lets split the playerbase even further.

[Marshal Rohr]

It wouldn’t split the playerbase.

[chapter master 454]

Not wanting to speak for mods but kinda feeling like some templates and random shot weapons are getting thrown at each other here when to be honest we were doing quite well before that, so before a mod decides to make things really toasty in here hows about we discuss some of what has been trod before proper.

 

As I have said with templates and as someone earlier pointed out, something I should of noted as well, is that templates actually do cause a bit of a "feel bad" loop. You and your opponent rock up to the table, both sides know what army is being played but there is little list tailoring, nothing major but only enough info really to make sure no-one gets blown out of a good game so the ork player didn't bring a whole ton of zzap guns and the marine player made sure to bring some spare heavy bolters because orks but also brought something else once all see the armies: A thunderfire cannon.

I speak from experience here, I leveled an ENTIRE squad of ork boys in one volley with it back in 5th. 30 boyz. Gone. Poof. My opponent hadn't faced thunderfires before and was sure of his cover save orks from his big mek.

Back to the analogy/allegory (whichever it is): The marine player brought it because well...I mean this is what it is for, horde armies. You may as well slap a big ol' "Horde Mincer 40'000" on the side of those bad boys because that is how the TFC do. The marine player is looking forward to using it and seeing it in its intended role.

The ork player however..."LADZ, FAN OUT TO EXACTLY AS FAR AS YOU IZ COMFORTABLE FROM YER OWN BOYZ". The ork player is now having to fan out his units, placing them at the needed distance otherwise he will be blown out easily. We aren't talking a minor boost here, in a 30 strong boyz squad with 4 blasts incoming, if they aren't more than 1.5" apart, each shell will likely get 5+ boyz and there is 4 of them. Thats 20+ hits if he doesn't fan out and now, there goes the boyz squad without a single question of doubt. So he MUST do this to maximise the survival of the squad and that should go for both casual and competitive players because nothing feels worse than a squad being wiped out with little regard (when it wasn't a token gesture squad like Rusty 17 or loyal 32). However now the marine player is feeling bummed out, as now he is HOPING for scatters on his TFC to get better hits (counter-logical really, less accurate = better hit rate?) or he will be face with a gun that went from 20+ hits to only 4 if he hits the mark. 

 

Now both players feel bad, the Ork player feels bad because the TFC is forcing him to play in a certain way that isn't fun (and is time consuming, he just wants to get his boyz stuck in, not tell them to line up proper like them stormboy gitz!) and the marine player is feeling bad his big anti-horde weapon is now just sitting there doing minimal work and is better being put to use with tremor shells (yes, effective but are they fun? Not really. I prefer watching models being taken off the board, not having to tell my opponent they now need to take longer to move by rolling dice for the squad now because of Difficult Terrain).

 

Random shots remove this factor and speed the game up massively. Won't lie, it was also a good tingly feeling to get the pie plate out and put it over a massive huddle of infantry but those were so rare it wasn't worth the hassle.

 

Like I say, the change is a good direction however what needs to change is that the weapons need to have their Floors brought down and their Ceilings raised.

 

Addendum bit:

the "Floor" of something is when it becomes good. For example, it is kind of hard to argue with Plasma, that weapon genre in 40k tends to be a low floor weapon. It is just good. However, that segues into Ceiling. Ceiling is HOW good something can become. A lot of random shot weapons actually have low ceilings because of D6 limitations (6 shots is technically a lot but in the grand scheme of things, not really) however some weapons can really spiral into high ceiling territory like Thermal Cannons of Knights, those things actually have a fairly scary Ceiling vs. Tanks with a massive 36 damage however this is only possible due to far too much RNG.

In fact, I am pretty sure there is the group on youtube called "extra credits" who did a video about this idea in relation to hearthstone. The principle is the same: Too much luck in a game is bad however luck is without a doubt needed for great games.

[Marshal Rohr]

Not wanting to speak for mods but kinda feeling like some templates and random shot weapons are getting thrown at each other here when to be honest we were doing quite well before that, so before a mod decides to make things really toasty in here hows about we discuss some of what has been trod before proper.

 

As I have said with templates and as someone earlier pointed out, something I should of noted as well, is that templates actually do cause a bit of a "feel bad" loop. You and your opponent rock up to the table, both sides know what army is being played but there is little list tailoring, nothing major but only enough info really to make sure no-one gets blown out of a good game so the ork player didn't bring a whole ton of zzap guns and the marine player made sure to bring some spare heavy bolters because orks but also brought something else once all see the armies: A thunderfire cannon.

I speak from experience here, I leveled an ENTIRE squad of ork boys in one volley with it back in 5th. 30 boyz. Gone. Poof. My opponent hadn't faced thunderfires before and was sure of his cover save orks from his big mek.

Back to the analogy/allegory (whichever it is): The marine player brought it because well...I mean this is what it is for, horde armies. You may as well slap a big ol' "Horde Mincer 40'000" on the side of those bad boys because that is how the TFC do. The marine player is looking forward to using it and seeing it in its intended role.

The ork player however..."LADZ, FAN OUT TO EXACTLY AS FAR AS YOU IZ COMFORTABLE FROM YER OWN BOYZ". The ork player is now having to fan out his units, placing them at the needed distance otherwise he will be blown out easily. We aren't talking a minor boost here, in a 30 strong boyz squad with 4 blasts incoming, if they aren't more than 1.5" apart, each shell will likely get 5+ boyz and there is 4 of them. Thats 20+ hits if he doesn't fan out and now, there goes the boyz squad without a single question of doubt. So he MUST do this to maximise the survival of the squad and that should go for both casual and competitive players because nothing feels worse than a squad being wiped out with little regard (when it wasn't a token gesture squad like Rusty 17 or loyal 32). However now the marine player is feeling bummed out, as now he is HOPING for scatters on his TFC to get better hits (counter-logical really, less accurate = better hit rate?) or he will be face with a gun that went from 20+ hits to only 4 if he hits the mark.

 

Now both players feel bad, the Ork player feels bad because the TFC is forcing him to play in a certain way that isn't fun (and is time consuming, he just wants to get his boyz stuck in, not tell them to line up proper like them stormboy gitz!) and the marine player is feeling bad his big anti-horde weapon is now just sitting there doing minimal work and is better being put to use with tremor shells (yes, effective but are they fun? Not really. I prefer watching models being taken off the board, not having to tell my opponent they now need to take longer to move by rolling dice for the squad now because of Difficult Terrain).

 

Random shots remove this factor and speed the game up massively. Won't lie, it was also a good tingly feeling to get the pie plate out and put it over a massive huddle of infantry but those were so rare it wasn't worth the hassle.

 

Like I say, the change is a good direction however what needs to change is that the weapons need to have their Floors brought down and their Ceilings raised.

 

Addendum bit:

the "Floor" of something is when it becomes good. For example, it is kind of hard to argue with Plasma, that weapon genre in 40k tends to be a low floor weapon. It is just good. However, that segues into Ceiling. Ceiling is HOW good something can become. A lot of random shot weapons actually have low ceilings because of D6 limitations (6 shots is technically a lot but in the grand scheme of things, not really) however some weapons can really spiral into high ceiling territory like Thermal Cannons of Knights, those things actually have a fairly scary Ceiling vs. Tanks with a massive 36 damage however this is only possible due to far too much RNG.

In fact, I am pretty sure there is the group on youtube called "extra credits" who did a video about this idea in relation to hearthstone. The principle is the same: Too much luck in a game is bad however luck is without a doubt needed for great games.

The problem you’re describing is with thunderfire cannons and not the concept of blast templates. One of the most common complaints in the AoD Ruleset is small blast spam. Just off the top of my head the best way to fix that is make barrage munitions like the TFC or Scorpius into Large Blast template weapons to represent the saturated fire. That wouldn’t fix ML spam, but I refer you back to my earlier idea of making infantry portable weapons like ML and Mortars retain the D(variable) rules for the number of wounds they cause. Edited October 13, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

What if every flamer was at least 2d3 ?

[Captain_Krash]

And can't target flyers

 

Krash

[jaxom]

Slightly more objective are the mechanics changes. For me, the advantages templates offer are horde control, a counter to castling tactics, a drawback to auras, a scaling target unit size, and the ability to hit multiple units with the same weapon - particularly for the big stuff (ever used a Titan in 8th Ed?). All of these are things 8th Ed sorely needs.

 

You have a good point regarding castling tactics. As for hitting multiple units with one weapon: a simple fix is to have certain weapons (the old blast and large blast ones) generate the number of shots first and then let them split fire to units within some distance of each other.

 

At the end of the day, the way explosive and flame weapons work in 8th isn’t bad. It’s just not good either. You could fix it all kinds of ways.

 

Yes, very much yes. I think the keys to making a possible change are three-fold: smooth progression of game play, not too swing-y, and working spray weapons into position and unleashing should feel satisfying. I think that's the greatest feel-change from previous editions; if I had to estimate I'd say the average was 4-5 hits at long range and up to 8-10 at short range.

 

 

I agree things like flamers and other heavier duty weapons feel meh right now. Only flamers have it good and even then, can flub it hard. There needs to be a "Floor" mechanic for these weapons that can retain their "Ceiling" ability (and to be fair, most D6 weapons really aren't even that good, they are high Floor, Low Ceiling at best). Quite possibly there needs to be a return of certain keywords, the hard removal of all keywords has hurt. I have made I believe 2-3 variants of how to improve blast weapons in general and to be fair I can make more.

 

"Blast: for every 5 models in the target unit, add 2 to the roll to determine number of shots"

"Large Blast: for every 5 models in the target unit, add 3 to the roll to determine number of shots"

"Spray: for every 2 models within range of this weapon in the target unit, add 1 to the roll to determine the number of shots. These weapons hit automatically"

 

I don't want templates to return because it just creates a game that isn't fun when the best play is to make sure everyone is more than 1.5" apart.

 

 

That said, I do have solutions for making lame, former-template weapons better:

 

I think GW doesn't make use of enough ability modifiers for weapons, like the Executioner's laser doing a minimum of D3. I understand they didn't want to complicate things at the start of the edition with the indices, but especially as of the recent Space Marine codex and its multiple layers of rules, I think that ship has sailed. AoS is the simple but deep game, 40k is the advanced game. I would do stuff like this:

 

 

Flamer: 8" / Assault d3 / S4 / AP0 / D1 / If the target unit has 10 or more models, change this weapons type to "Assault 3+d3". This model may not target units with the Supersonic ability. This weapon automatically hits its target.

 

Frag Missile: 48" / Heavy d3 / S4 / AP0 / D1 / If the target unit has 10 or more models, change this weapons type to "Heavy 2d3".

 

Demolisher Cannon: 24" / Heavy d3 / S10 / AP-3 / Dd6 / If the target unit has between 5 and 9 models, change this weapons type to "Heavy d6". If the target unit has 10 or more models, change this weapons type to "Heavy 2d6".

 

 

I think making use of modifiers based on unit sizes can easily and cleanly adjust weapons for both shooting as single models when that isn't their main purpose, as well as make them more effective against large units, which should be their forte. In addition, I threw in a fix for flamers hitting Flyers, cause I've just always thought that was dumb.

 

These kind of changes are more intuitive than using templates and are no more complicated than most rules in the game.

 

 

One thing the current rules have going for them is they fit neatly together. There's not a lot of additional cognitive space required or divergence from the normal flow of ranged combat when using blast and flame weapons. We know GW made specific weapon types for the core rules (Pistol, Rapid Fire, Assault, Heavy) and chose not to include common modifiers (Poison, melta, etc), but to have them on data sheets (not saying I necessarily agree, but that it's the design paradigm we're currently looking at). I think you're both right in doing more with those abilities in order to create a better range of results. Starting with a few case studies and their floor and ceiling then reverse engineering how to get there seems like a good way to start.

Edited October 13, 2019 by jaxom

[Exilyth]

In an ideal world, we'd have a projector/beamer and a 3d camera system mounted above the table - point at a point, template is projected, adjust position, approve placement and the computer determines the number of models half/fully under the template. That would eliminate arguments and speed up the process.

 

IRL, terrain overhangs and monetary constraints make such a solution impossible for most.

 

 

Tbh, I prefer the speed up of the current rules, but blast weapons could use a slight buff - maybe a +X to number of shots or something.

[Panzer]

Instead of a scatter dice mechanic, roll to hit, if it hits, use the template to determine how many models are hit. Alter the distance rules so that 25mm base models can only be 1 inch apart to cut down on horde spacing increasing the movement turn time. This would also balance the mathematical advantage horde armies have to hurt smaller armies with the sheer number of dice they have by making them absorb more damage every turn. Get rid of small blasts and keep the Dx mechanic for missile launchers, mortars, etc. Flamers autohit (as they should) and get an additional single D6 of additional hits to the models under the template to represent the way flame weapons don’t just touch you and you burn or don’t burn, but models removed can only come from under the template. As far as I can tell, it was always small blasts that caused the most issues because some units can put out a huge amount of them. If those are the problems, focus on those instead of the flamer and large blasts.

 

40k could really benefit from an ‘advanced’ rule set that adds some depth to the current bubbleball that is 8th Edition. Bringing back templates, making cover mechanics more in depth, and maybe even alternating activation.

 

I could live with that.

 

 

 

I dislike the ‘roll to hit once, if you hit, every model under the template is hit’ though - I think it’d lead to extremely swingy results, but I’d have to try it thoroughly to know whether or not that’s true.

 

 

Well it would make them similar to most anti-tank weapons in that regard and it is after just one shot the weapon fires. Just that instead of doing a lot of damage to a single model it would do a little bit of damage to multiple models. For more reliability one would need more shots ... just like with anti-tank weapons. At least there wouldn't be any 1d6 roll for the damage involved since that would be replaced by placing the template over x number of models.

 

EDIT: though to be fair the more closer adaption to what we currently have would be to place the template and then roll a hit-roll for each model since the no-template wording for the current system would basically be "as many shots as models in the target unit up to 6" instead of "1d6 shots".

Edited October 13, 2019 by sfPanzer

[m0nolith]

As someone who endured endless micromanaging of miniature spacing... big no to templates coming back.

If you want realism, there are better games than 40k.

There’s enough bloat anyway and so many multishot weapons that the shooting phase already goes on for ages.

It’s not about whether there are games out there that are better at conveying realism, but whether the realism or lack thereof in 40k is impacting its ability to immerse the player into the game.

 

For me that line is well below what would immerse me so for the time I’m not into it.

Bring back templates and vehicle facings and I may hit up 40k again.

Edited October 13, 2019 by m0nolith

[AgramarTheLunarWolf]

I like your ideas a lot 454

 

Me too. I dislike a lot the current edition because that lack of any kind of templates...

[kombatwombat]

A small number of weapons with multiple small blasts could have issues. The problem wasn’t templates, but how those weapons’ rules interacted with the templates mechanic. Potential fixes for those are to not require the centre of a template to be over a model (so the 1.5” spacing hoping for scatter thing goes away), reducing coherency of horde units to 1”, or both.

 

It occurs to me that in all the years before 8th Ed there wasn’t big a call for removing templates from the game. A bit of googling doesn’t turn up a bevy of results asking for their removal in prior editions. I can only find one thread on it and that’s more of a spitballing ideas rather than ‘templates are bad’.

 

I think some people had one or two experiences of playing That Guy who tried to creep his scatter or measure every Ork to be 2” apart to the nearest millimetre. People generally remember and talk about bad experiences more than good ones, so they post on here saying ‘this one time...’. Someone else chimes in ‘that other time...’, then someone else says ‘also that one time...’. These people see the echo effect and then start feeling that templates only caused issues and were always awful.

 

With no real call for templates to be removed in earlier editions, I think a big part of the sentiment against them comes from that Internet Echo Chamber effect. It certainly isn’t helped by the small number of true 8th Ed die-hards (every Edition has those hardcore fans) jumping on it.

 

I think if you really asked yourself honestly how many games did you have problems with templates, and how many more games did you have with no problems. Then ask yourself how many of those problems were against That Guys, and remember that those problems stem from that small number of players, not the templates. Those people are still awful to play against, with or without templates. If you can honestly say that you routinely had problems caused by templates, I’d argue the problem is your local playing environment and not the game - huge competitive events with hundreds or thousands of games played got by without major issues for years - even decades.

 

Overall, I think the issue boils down to:

 

- templates improve the thematic element and immersion of the game

- the drawback of that is increased time, which as I’ve argued adds up to ten minutes in a three hour game, tops

- there was no great push for the removal of templates before 8th Ed

- the issues caused by templates were isolated and generally caused by particular players, who cause problems with or without templates anyway

- the Echo Chamber effect magnifies that small handful of games with negative experiences to outweigh the overwhelming majority of games played without issues in people’s minds

- it actually wasn’t that bad, even at its worst

- templates solve a lot of mechanical issues like horde control, countering castles and making big weapons function, which the game currently suffers from

- mechanically there isn’t a huge amount of issues caused by templates (and ill-defined notions of ‘taking longer’ is not a mechanical issue)

 

YMMV, but for me the debate is succinctly put as ‘a few extra minutes and a small number of games with minor issues caused by toxic players shouldn’t outweigh the advantages’.

Edited October 14, 2019 by kombatwombat

[chapter master 454]

Just because there wasn't complaints, doesn't mean there wasn't a problem.

You can have a bad knee and make no complaints. There is still a problem.

 

Templates really were just additional gimmicks by their own right. However I do agree if you were able to place the template anywhere you wanted (not just on that one grotz head) it would likely of removed many other issues however spacing would still be an issue.

 

Again, really back then when I look at blast weapons, from my experience really the only ones used were ether pie plate or go home and even then, back then I remember vindicators being more of an Anti-tank thing than anti-horde (it just doubled up as one by the mechanic of the pie).

 

I also want to point to the audience that have been growing with discontent over the fact they need to haul 4 books, 3 binders of FAQs, 2 diplomas on erratas, 6 references and a pear tree. We already need quite a bit of dice to play the game along with a tape measure and now you want to bring back those 3 fiddly pieces of plastic? To be fair, they did double as handy dandy disciplining tool.

 

Then again I have already put my flag in the "no templates camp" so yea, likely to say I am biased!

(also...screw the scatter die as well...another piece of nonsense to get lost...heck scatter dice were the lighters of the wargaming world!)

[Marshal Rohr]

Scatter dice had other uses besides weapons. Drifting smoke, wild fire, fleeing civilians, chem weapon cloud, etc. all of that needed the arrows and provided a lot of easy to do narrative elements that were entire random.

[kombatwombat]

Just because there wasn't complaints, doesn't mean there wasn't a problem.

You can have a bad knee and make no complaints. There is still a problem.

I disagree in this instance - gamers, particularly online, are the whiniest pack of whingers imaginable. You could give 40k players free money and they’d complain it was in the wrong currency.

 

If there was anything even slightly wrong with 40k you wouldn’t so much hear about it as be deafened by it.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Hell, 40k fans will complain about something good just because it's not specifically benefiting them personally. 

[Slave to Darkness]

Regarding the template issue,if one player claims its 6 hit and the other says its 5, or they argue about scatter angle make the 'highest dice roll wins debate' an official ruling. Yea it kinda sucks when your convinced your right and its 'not fair' but hey, war sucks and :cuss happens, next time the result might swing in your favour. Sure its random but nothing is predictable in warfare and it IS a WARgame... 

 

But if we have to stick with the current mess then at least bump up the number of hits or come up with a way for missed hits to clip other units, roll a 6+ for misses and they potentially hit another enemy unit within 2 inches (to hit roll required) you will literally be rolling a couple of dice so its not exactly gonna slow the game down.

 

Curious to see how Template weapons work in Bolt Action now. Hmmmmm

[The Unseen]

5o answer your question Slave to Darkness, for blast weapons in bolt action, you roll to hit, and if it's a hit, you place the template wherever you want and the unit suffers hits for every model touched by it.

If it's a miss, you just missed.

No scatter involved.

It's very similar in the end to current 8th edition, with the added hassle of needing to space models out.

One of the few parts of BA that I don't like.

 

But for the first part, that very quickly leads into player disputes getting resolved by a judge, FAST.

"You got 2 guys there."

No I didn't, I got 5.

You clearly got 2.

Well, guess we'll roll for it then."

And yes, people like this exist, and will use and abuse it in tournaments.

 

Also, all the people saying templates didn't add a lot of time A. Never ran a horde army and also B. Never played against a 5th edition IG parking lot that could throw 30+ blast templates around in a single shooting phase, even before wyverns were introduced.

And Emperor help you if they ever met.

You'd be lucky to make it to the end of turn 2 on 3 hours, between the horde players laborious movement phases to give them at least some chance of living, and the guards absurd number of scatter dice to measure.

 

And I heard plenty of complaints about them then, but I'm pretty sure the online presence for 40k community was just smaller then.

Anecdote of course, can't judge that for sure.

[Panzer]

A small number of weapons with multiple small blasts could have issues. The problem wasn’t templates, but how those weapons’ rules interacted with the templates mechanic. Potential fixes for those are to not require the centre of a template to be over a model (so the 1.5” spacing hoping for scatter thing goes away), reducing coherency of horde units to 1”, or both.

 

It occurs to me that in all the years before 8th Ed there wasn’t big a call for removing templates from the game. A bit of googling doesn’t turn up a bevy of results asking for their removal in prior editions. I can only find one thread on it and that’s more of a spitballing ideas rather than ‘templates are bad’.

 

I think some people had one or two experiences of playing That Guy who tried to creep his scatter or measure every Ork to be 2” apart to the nearest millimetre. People generally remember and talk about bad experiences more than good ones, so they post on here saying ‘this one time...’. Someone else chimes in ‘that other time...’, then someone else says ‘also that one time...’. These people see the echo effect and then start feeling that templates only caused issues and were always awful.

 

With no real call for templates to be removed in earlier editions, I think a big part of the sentiment against them comes from that Internet Echo Chamber effect. It certainly isn’t helped by the small number of true 8th Ed die-hards (every Edition has those hardcore fans) jumping on it.

 

I think if you really asked yourself honestly how many games did you have problems with templates, and how many more games did you have with no problems. Then ask yourself how many of those problems were against That Guys, and remember that those problems stem from that small number of players, not the templates. Those people are still awful to play against, with or without templates. If you can honestly say that you routinely had problems caused by templates, I’d argue the problem is your local playing environment and not the game - huge competitive events with hundreds or thousands of games played got by without major issues for years - even decades.

 

Overall, I think the issue boils down to:

 

- templates improve the thematic element and immersion of the game

- the drawback of that is increased time, which as I’ve argued adds up to ten minutes in a three hour game, tops

- there was no great push for the removal of templates before 8th Ed

- the issues caused by templates were isolated and generally caused by particular players, who cause problems with or without templates anyway

- the Echo Chamber effect magnifies that small handful of games with negative experiences to outweigh the overwhelming majority of games played without issues in people’s minds

- it actually wasn’t that bad, even at its worst

- templates solve a lot of mechanical issues like horde control, countering castles and making big weapons function, which the game currently suffers from

- mechanically there isn’t a huge amount of issues caused by templates (and ill-defined notions of ‘taking longer’ is not a mechanical issue)

 

YMMV, but for me the debate is succinctly put as ‘a few extra minutes and a small number of games with minor issues caused by toxic players shouldn’t outweigh the advantages’.

 

I honestly have to completely disagree with everything in this post (well except for "templates improve the thematic element and immersion of the game"). However that's a topic that's been argued so many times already I don't feel like going into details as of why and how I disagree. The topic is kinda argued to death already and while you complain about an internet echo chamber you don't realise that this is just another form of an internet echo chamber that probably won't change anything anyway.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Plus, whoever says it doesn't add much time hasn't seen the time drain of a player exactingly measuring out the 2" maximum distance between each and every one of their 100+ Boyz/gaunts.