New 40k Rules Info and what could work for us!

[Sleboda]

4 hours ago, Lord Veshnakar said:

nerfing shooting overall would effect all of the shooting units, even the ones that are sub-par right now.

I'm sure plenty of TOs would love this.  Fixing specific issues with, ah-hem, "creative" blanket changes has been their thing for decades now.

 

[Killax]

I don't think shooting becomes significantly worse if your forced to do it on an enemy that is within 3" of you (first) on a model to model basis. All it does do is increase importance of set up for those units even more. Which is rather realistic...

But talking about 'sub-par' shooting units, who exactly are these from the newer Batteltomes? 

[Thostos]

 A bit of a Necro,sorry for this,but Characters for 40k 8th are up and one rule in particular popped out at me while reading it just not.

   Characters in the shooting phase can only be targeted if they are the closest unit/model...I would love to see this in AoS,but would it have a huge impact on the game?

 

[daedalus81]

Right now?  No.

It's needed in 40K, because there are so many guns.  Remove the ability to target characters like that now and Kunnin' Ruck will be invincible.

[PJetski]

1 minute ago, Thostos said:

 A bit of a Necro,sorry for this,but Characters for 40k 8th are up and one rule in particular popped out at me while reading it just not.

   Characters in the shooting phase can only be targeted if they are the closest unit/model...I would love to see this in AoS,but would it have a huge impact on the game?

 

It would have a huge impact. Kroak + Vortex would be literally unstoppable 

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, Thostos said:

 A bit of a Necro,sorry for this,but Characters for 40k 8th are up and one rule in particular popped out at me while reading it just not.

   Characters in the shooting phase can only be targeted if they are the closest unit/model...I would love to see this in AoS,but would it have a huge impact on the game?

 

I would hate this with a passion. All hail Herohammer. Yuck.

The more I see of the new 40K the more love it ... for 40K.

I was hoping for a unification of systems. Now I dread it.

[FRoper]

I would say it would be simpler to nerf the actual units or maybe just have someway to protect characters or transfer wounds to a nearby unit on a 4+. this would mean that characters have more protection, but can still be sniped.

Another way would be true line of sight, and the use of larger terrain. i have found that playing witha lot more terrain and quite a lot of larger buildings and true line of sight stops most offending problems with shooting the exception being skyfires.

Blanket changes are kind of bad as they won't address the problem.

 

[Jamopower]

There was a rumour, maybe from playtest version, that the rule would have been so, that you couldn't shoot characters if they weren't the closest model or within 12". That could work better in AoS. Not being able to target unless they are closest makes them really hard to kill by shooting Against someone who knows what he is doing. I have a feeling that it will be an issue even in 40k eventually.

Bit more refined Los rules would be better though.

[AGPO]

I'm interested about the potential of heroic intervention. It makes characters leading war bands feel much more appropriate.

[Popisdead]

50 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

There was a rumour, maybe from playtest version, that the rule would have been so, that you couldn't shoot characters if they weren't the closest model or within 12". That could work better in AoS. Not being able to target unless they are closest makes them really hard to kill by shooting Against someone who knows what he is doing. I have a feeling that it will be an issue even in 40k eventually.

Bit more refined Los rules would be better though.

It works for 10W or less.  So Treelord Ancients can be targetted but Branch Wraithes cannot (if it were an AoS rule,.. which I hope it is).

[wayniac]

I hope beyond hope that we see the new characters and shooting rule backported to AOS.  Not being able to target characters unless they are the closest model would be HUGE for AOS and fix IMHO what is probably the biggest issue with the rules.  Instead of the wounds requirement they could just not have it apply to anything with the MONSTER keyword.

[Thostos]

Yeah I agree,,it probably would be OTT for some armies yet hurt others too much.A "look out sir" of some sorts would be a nice change and much more mild one I would think.

 

 

[someone2040]

A lot of the things coming into 40k sound really awesome. But before we get too excited, it's important to understand that 40k is in a different place to AoS.

There's a lot more shooting in 40k. Unlike in Age of Sigmar, it's far more unusual for a unit in 40k to not have some kind of shooting attack.

40k also has the advantage that they're now starting from a blank slate. What this means is, all the rules are warscrolls are being built around a set of fixed and known core rules in the game. So everything is being created knowing that characters can't easily be picked out for shooting (apart from Sniper weapons).

Unfortunately, making such a large change in AoS isn't as easy as creating the rule and calling it done. There are some quite powerful effects that come from characters in the game at the moment. Tzaangor Shamans, Sayll, Bloodsecrators just to name a few. In fact, the whole reason that the game is turning into a shooting arms race in part is because these characters are so powerful, you need to be able to remove them from the game otherwise your opponent gets huge benefits.

From the suggested information, it doesn't seem like characters will have buffs that reach far or are too powerful inbuilt into them. 

So it's not such a simple thing to backport some rules into Age of Sigmar. It really depends on how much it shakes up a mechanic.

Increasing Unbind range to 24" for example, pretty simple rule and a good change for the game to make more counterplay to spellcasting. A lot harder to backport shooting rules.

[Cookiez]

A little digression - 40k 8th so far looks like AoS as it should be done at the release.

But back to the topic of shooting. Personal shooting weapon that can shoot from combat seems ok to me, like Fyreslayers axes or Kharadrons pistols. Then just add the rule, that a MODEL with a high range weapon, that has a enemy model in 3", cannot shoot/can shoot only that model. Problem solved.

And unkillable heroes are bad. Srsly, just don't.

[sandlemad]

So now here's a thing in the leaked 40k datasheet for Thousand Sons: https://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/12/49/83/25/rubric10.jpg

Look at the bottom, there's a distinction between 'Keywords' and 'Faction Keywords'. Could that be ported into AoS? Seems like it has the potential to clarify some of the issues about army composition and allegiance abilities by separating the list-building mechanics slightly from the game mechanics for buffs/spells/prayers.

[Killax]

7 minutes ago, sandlemad said:

So now here's a thing in the leaked 40k datasheet for Thousand Sons: https://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/12/49/83/25/rubric10.jpg

Look at the bottom, there's a distinction between 'Keywords' and 'Faction Keywords'. Could that be ported into AoS? Seems like it has the potential to clarify some of the issues about army composition and allegiance abilities by separating the list-building mechanics slightly from the game mechanics for buffs/spells/prayers.

We're allready working that way though? For 'Faction Keywords' in most cases in my eyes are the first two to three Keywords found on a Warscroll. 

Granted I do agree, having this be a bit more clear as it is now would be very benificial to newer players  

[PJetski]

41 minutes ago, sandlemad said:

So now here's a thing in the leaked 40k datasheet for Thousand Sons: https://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/12/49/83/25/rubric10.jpg

Look at the bottom, there's a distinction between 'Keywords' and 'Faction Keywords'. Could that be ported into AoS? Seems like it has the potential to clarify some of the issues about army composition and allegiance abilities by separating the list-building mechanics slightly from the game mechanics for buffs/spells/prayers.

Would definitely like to see this brought into AOS. Keywords are a great system but grouping Faction/gameplay keywords (ORDER, STORMCAST, HUMAN, ORRUK, etc.) with gameplay-only keywords (WIZARD, PRIEST, HERO, etc.) makes it very messy and unclear for people learning the game. 

[RuneBrush]

I've always wondered why the factional keywords weren't in bold with the others in regular weight.

[Sleboda]

On 5/9/2017 at 3:26 PM, wayniac said:

Not being able to target characters unless they are the closest model would be HUGE for AOS and fix IMHO what is probably the biggest issue with the rules. 

That would  probably get me out of the game entirely.

We don't need Herohammer again. 

One off THE biggest positives of AoS is the "everything dies all the time" aspect of it. 

[someone2040]

I actually disagree on the keywords. I really don't think it adds anything into the game at the moment.

In theory, if AoS (or either game) gets many different factions, including factions that end up bridging two or more sub-factions together, then it could make sense to reduce the clutter in the keywords section.

For example, lets say we get Battletome : WAAAGH Gorgrim, a tome that details the exploits of the mighty Orruk Warboss' WAAGGH across the mortal realms. His armies consist of Greenskinz, Gitmob Grots and Aleguzzler Gargants. All models from this faction gain the keyword 'GORGRIM's HORDE'.

Then we get another Battletome, lets say called Battletome : WAAAAGH Toothsmasher, a tome that details the exploits of the mighty Ironjawz Megaboss WAAGH across the mortal realms. His armies, because their big and tuff, only include Ironjawz, Aleguzzler Gargants and Troggoths. All models from this faction gain the keyword ' TOOTHSMASHER'S BIGMOB'.

 

If this kind of thing starts happening, where bridging factions start emerging that allow you to give keywords to warscrolls across different sub-factions. Then I can see a case for splitting up the keywords into two sections. But at the end of the day, all it does is reduce clutter. All the keywords are used in gameplay for example (I'm 100% sure there'll be gameplay effects that occur only for/against CHAOS or TZEENTCH models for example).

Now, if they had all keywords relevant to gameplay in a Gameplay Keywords section, that might make more sense. But, I think that's very hard to determine what ends up being a gameplay keyword and what's not (for example, maybe the mighty Fyreslayer Runesmith would re-roll hit rolls against models with the keyword TOOTHSMASHER's BIGMOB because they wiped out his Fyreslayer clan).

 

Overall, splitting the keywords doesn't do anything. It's up to GW to decide if they want to change the army building process, or create bridging factions to allow for different kind of lists rather than just grand alliance or sub-faction lists we have currently.

[Kosmion]

I think there could be a penalty for shooting into combat ai. you could very well hit your own unit. Make the shooting player reroll all misses, on 6s those projectiles hit that players own unit/s. The shooting player gets to choose where to allocate wounds if there are multiple units in that same combat. Or something like that. 

I think this would leave shooting as it is right now without breaking it, but also create immersion as only the most skilled say archers would hit the actul targets, and not their own (like legolas☝️). While dumb orcs...sorry, orruks could potentially kill dozens of their own

the problem with this tho is autohitting weapons, like skaven warpfire thrower, wich most certainly should hit its own units if any weapon should, would be superbly accurate? Some sort of extra rule would need to be added to those kinds of weapons

[RuneBrush]

On 09/05/2017 at 9:26 PM, wayniac said:

I hope beyond hope that we see the new characters and shooting rule backported to AOS.  Not being able to target characters unless they are the closest model would be HUGE for AOS and fix IMHO what is probably the biggest issue with the rules.  Instead of the wounds requirement they could just not have it apply to anything with the MONSTER keyword.

16 hours ago, Sleboda said:

That would  probably get me out of the game entirely.

We don't need Herohammer again. 

One off THE biggest positives of AoS is the "everything dies all the time" aspect of it. 

2 hours ago, Kosmion said:

I think there could be a penalty for shooting into combat ai. you could very well hit your own unit. Make the shooting player reroll all misses, on 6s those projectiles hit that players own unit/s. The shooting player gets to choose where to allocate wounds if there are multiple units in that same combat. Or something like that. 

I think this would leave shooting as it is right now without breaking it, but also create immersion as only the most skilled say archers would hit the actul targets, and not their own (like legolas☝️). While dumb orcs...sorry, orruks could potentially kill dozens of their own

the problem with this tho is autohitting weapons, like skaven warpfire thrower, wich most certainly should hit its own units if any weapon should, would be superbly accurate? Some sort of extra rule would need to be added to those kinds of weapons

I'm not sure the new character shooting mechanic would work for AoS as it would in the new 40k.  It looks like 40k characters are going to be not as tough as in AoS and overall the game has a much higher shooting element than we do.  I do feel though that some AoS factions suffer massively from hero sniping as it stands and we are seeing an increase in ranged attacks so would be nice to see something change on that front

[Killax]

1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:

I'm not sure the new character shooting mechanic would work for AoS as it would in the new 40k.  It looks like 40k characters are going to be not as tough as in AoS and overall the game has a much higher shooting element than we do.  I do feel though that some AoS factions suffer massively from hero sniping as it stands and we are seeing an increase in ranged attacks so would be nice to see something change on that front

Could you define that? With some stats spoiled as such:




I think 40K easily has compairable characters who simply put are much easier to protect. 2+ armour saves are not too easy to come by in AoS. In 40K that's a completely different matter.  What I will agree upon is that a lot of AoS characters have 5-6 wounds where in 40K 3-4 are the norm. However we also see a massive ammount of damage D3, 2 and 3 in AoS so that wound count isn't that exciting either.

I personally believe the one thing AoS 'suffers' from is Hero sniping or in general the ease to shoot key models with and not only shoot them but also easily remove them. In addition, we also see Vechicles/Walkers with an Armour save now, W8 T7 + Armour save 3+ will be a whole lot more difficult to remove as W14 and Armour save 4+ if you hit and wound on a common 3+/4+. 

We'll see where this leads us. I hope for some 40K influence seeping back into AoS in the way AoS has influenced this new 40K edition.

[RuneBrush]

1 hour ago, Killax said:

Could you define that? With some stats spoiled as such:

I think 40K easily has compairable characters who simply put are much easier to protect. 2+ armour saves are not too easy to come by in AoS. In 40K that's a completely different matter.  What I will agree upon is that a lot of AoS characters have 5-6 wounds where in 40K 3-4 are the norm. However we also see a massive ammount of damage D3, 2 and 3 in AoS so that wound count isn't that exciting either.

I personally believe the one thing AoS 'suffers' from is Hero sniping or in general the ease to shoot key models with and not only shoot them but also easily remove them. In addition, we also see Vechicles/Walkers with an Armour save now, W8 T7 + Armour save 3+ will be a whole lot more difficult to remove as W14 and Armour save 4+ if you hit and wound on a common 3+/4+. 

We'll see where this leads us. I hope for some 40K influence seeping back into AoS in the way AoS has influenced this new 40K edition.

Most AoS armies have a handful of rend -1 with one or two rend -2 - on rare occasions a character will have a rend -3!

Every army in 40k will have access to multiple high AP weapons - we already know Lascannons are AP -3 with D6 damage and Meltaguns are AP -4 with D6 damage and they're pretty common throughout most Imperial armies.  We also don't know what a "regular" character model looks like stat wise, things like Space Marine Captains and similar are likely to only be 4 or 5 wounds and be kitted out the same as a regular marine, so could be susceptible to a Meltagun to the face.

[Killax]

26 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Every army in 40k will have access to multiple high AP weapons - we already know Lascannons are AP -3 with D6 damage and Meltaguns are AP -4 with D6 damage and they're pretty common throughout most Imperial armies.  We also don't know what a "regular" character model looks like stat wise, things like Space Marine Captains and similar are likely to only be 4 or 5 wounds and be kitted out the same as a regular marine, so could be susceptible to a Meltagun to the face.

Certainly though the moral remains you can't shoot with most of those weapons on characters as easily and even more importantly you can't shoot with those weapons in melee at all. In addition the common weapons do not seem to have as much rend as you for example see in AoS. As the weapons you mention are a single inclusion per 10 and with the updated rules are an OR/OR not Add 1 for X and another one for X etc. 

The character stats seem to remain largely the same. As barring Vechicles and Walkers little changed in terms of survivability itself. I expect your typical SM hero to have 3 wounds and some of those better/more elite variants 4. In that same vein we see Orks with 4/5 and wouldn't be suprised to see Nurgle or Khorne warriors to roughly follow that same patron.