its official - natural 6 always hit/wound

[mdkinker]

55 minutes ago, Tzaangor Management said:

I'd lean towards GW not worrying about stacking abilities and that the 6's always succeeding and 1's always failing are the rule mechanic that they've chosen to counter the instances of stacking that take the most fun out of the game.

Those both seem to do more against defensive stacking (though 1s failing does affect attacks,a 1+ to hit or wound is all for naught if you can hit a 1+ save). That does fit with the "everything dies in a shower of blood" style AoS has.

[Percy Verance]

There was a pic of Allie points you can now take outside of your battletomb. Was 20% of the match play points I believe.
200 Allie for 1000 point army
400 for 2000
500 for 2500

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[wayniac]

FWIW the AOS Facebook page more or less confirmed that it's only hit/wound and not abilities that trigger on a 6+.  At least that's what I gathered, since they replied to my comment saying exactly that with "^ what he said"

[Fr0]

Looks like a good change to me, auto-misses aren't fun. I'm okay with not stacking up on artefacts being written, though the only one I liked to stack was the Talisman of Burning Blood Trophy of War for when I took two Bloodstokers; mostly out of laziness and ease of remembrance.  As for not modifying the first turn roll, to my knowledge that's a Tzeentch thing and well this isn't 40k so we don't have CP to spend thus, I don't care. 

[Baron Klatz]

Think it's to counter the new horde favored approach? Bit of a bore to have rat and zombie hordes pounding away at each other for several turns with little effect.

That has a nice lore tie-in as well for the current "Age of Cities" since growing civilizations mean more large sustainable armies and technology growth for improved lethality. 

[RuneBrush]

14 hours ago, Rhellion said:

So, only Plaguebearers? Are there tons of Plaguebearer max size units running around? Maybe we will see more of them with the new horde unit rules and that was taken into consideration when implementing the rules to hit on nat 6's.

I think it is MORE likely that stacking Mourngul with Death abilities and characters for multiple minuses to hit (possibly against multiple targets, not just one) was a worse factor for melee units being hurt by auto misses. But that's just my opinion.

I am more than fine with that.

Easy there, I was just giving one example that immediately came to mind that made shooting more powerful which was what was originally asked!

[Nico]

Quote

Wording will need to be clear. Are abilities that trigger on 6+ now triggering on a natural 6 even when modifiers would have negated the possibility of a trigger? 

There is an FAQ question on a point like this. They don't trigger. It would be ridiculous if they did, e.g. Skyfires still proccing mortal wounds on a Stardrake with Mirrorshield. It's a deemed hit, but it's still not a 6.

[Nico]

I also think that this rule has just added clutter (and confusion). There are so few instances where it applies (given that Mourngul debuff doesn't stack with itself). Bravery 6 units that hit on 5+ are pretty hard to find (Marauders with flails), so you're looking at a tiny number of situations - Liberators with Hammers right next to a Cursed Book and a Mourngul, who aren't hitting the monsters (since they get a buff vs them anyway). 

I've looked at how it interacts with Screamers, Daemonettes and Scintillating Simulacra and it seems fine (it doesn't contradict these rules) - although it needs some thought. On Scintillating Simulacra, the six is a hit, so it gets lumped in with all the other hits, all of which are then converted to misses by the rule.

[Furious]

3 hours ago, Nico said:

I also think that this rule has just added clutter (and confusion). There are so few instances where it applies (given that Mourngul debuff doesn't stack with itself). Bravery 6 units that hit on 5+ are pretty hard to find (Marauders with flails), so you're looking at a tiny number of situations - Liberators with Hammers right next to a Cursed Book and a Mourngul, who aren't hitting the monsters (since they get a buff vs them anyway). 

I don't know, I expected it. I've experienced it w/Grots vs Sylvaneth. It was irritating and pointless.

[Sadysaneto]

4 hours ago, Nico said:

I also think that this rule has just added clutter (and confusion). There are so few instances where it applies (given that Mourngul debuff doesn't stack with itself). Bravery 6 units that hit on 5+ are pretty hard to find (Marauders with flails), so you're looking at a tiny number of situations - Liberators with Hammers right next to a Cursed Book and a Mourngul, who aren't hitting the monsters (since they get a buff vs them anyway). 

I've looked at how it interacts with Screamers, Daemonettes and Scintillating Simulacra and it seems fine (it doesn't contradict these rules) - although it needs some thought. On Scintillating Simulacra, the six is a hit, so it gets lumped in with all the other hits, all of which are then converted to misses by the rule.

we already had houseruled 6 as succeed a long time ago, because mourngul and neferata made impossible for a lot of units to do anything

[Rhellion]

8 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

Easy there, I was just giving one example that immediately came to mind that made shooting more powerful which was what was originally asked!

 

Um... what?

There was zero confrontation in my post, it was just a reply.  

[hot_boy_ronald]

22 hours ago, Tzaangor Management said:

I'd lean towards GW not worrying about stacking abilities and that the 6's always succeeding and 1's always failing are the rule mechanic that they've chosen to counter the instances of stacking that take the most fun out of the game.

I think this is a much more elegant way of handling the stacking of abilities. It allows for some crazy buffs in the right situations but there is ALWAYS a chance for failure or success in any given roll. I love the critical success and critical failure idea from playing DnD in the past, and I think its more thematic this way than to outright ban certain sequences of play (double buff from double heros for example). 

[Nico]

Quote

Is there an ability that they'd be trying to protect? I can't think of one, but that would explain the reticence to Rule of One it all out. Or maybe they like that style of gameplay which stacks abilities? It is a bit of an "all your eggs in one basket" approach, which can have drawbacks.

Phoenixes are clearly designed with stacking in mind.

 

[TheOtherJosh]

So... "Locus of Change" Screamer of Tzeentch Ability 'Treat any Hit Rolls of 6 as Hit Rolls of 1 instead.'

Would that "override" the new Rule of 1?

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, TheOtherJosh said:

So... "Locus of Change" Screamer of Tzeentch Ability 'Treat any Hit Rolls of 6 as Hit Rolls of 1 instead.'

Would that "override" the new Rule of 1?

... and there we have one already.

This new rule blows chunks (imo).

[TheOtherJosh]

... and there we have one already.

This new rule blows chunks (imo).

 

It's only applicable when they're within 9" of Daemon Heroes of Tzeentch (fortunately)...

 

Anyone ask that question on the book of faces yet?

[mdkinker]

I think with the Screamers, a 6 would count as a hit and then be converted to a 1 for the sake of any abilities. Makes it a whole lot less powerful, if that's how it should be read.

[Nico]

No - it would change to a 1 before you ask is it a 6. The rule doesn't say you can never reroll or adjust the dice (as distinct from +1/-1 modifiers). For example, Kairos could still change a 6 to a 1, or a Starseer could force you to reroll it.

As I said the net effect of this rule is a load of confusion and a few units will roll a bunch of dice and do a tiny sliver of damage.

[Killax]

On 31-7-2017 at 6:18 PM, wayniac said:

Seems like a good change?

Absolutely, it's one of the 40K rules Im very happy they implemented. As it allows stacking of abilities to still have some form of a cap.

On 31-7-2017 at 6:20 PM, Arkiham said:

So, mass shooting even better.

Age of shootmore getting more and more entrenched.

I don't dissagree, but the reason as to why Shooting is currently seen as better has much more to do (still) with the Core rules and how unlimited the Shooting phase is (in terms of picking what you want and shooting whenever, even in melee).

If the Horde rule is fleshed out well enough however there is still some cap added to Shooting. The prime issue for the game in itself for shooting remains that Hero sniping is arguably too easy to do and we have a few pieces of Shooting units/battalions who are just too cheap/too good for current cost.

[Trout]

On 8/1/2017 at 6:10 AM, Nico said:

I also think that this rule has just added clutter (and confusion).

I would agree if this rule came out on its own. But as an add-on to an already existing rule that 1s always miss, it's fairly intuitive. I would imagine many people, upon reading that 1s always miss were already asking themselves why the inverse isn't true for 6s.

[Killax]

12 minutes ago, Trout said:

I would agree if this rule came out on its own. But as an add-on to an already existing rule that 1s always miss, it's fairly intuitive. I would imagine many people, upon reading that 1s always miss were already asking themselves why the inverse isn't true for 6s.

Exact, to me this rule feels very intuitive even. 40K has it, WFB had it, now AoS has it too. Just splended in my opinion. I believe there are even boardgames who have this type of ruling.

What was/is counter intuitive to me is that some dice required 7's or more, which can't normally be archieved with a D6 thus really doesn't even reward the highest number of eyes on a dice. 

The way this rule of one works is twice as good as the previous variant. As it is a soft cap for stacking abilities. 

[HappyCultist]

Any idea, or clarification on how or if this will make the Grot Warboss rule - Dead Tricksy (or just Lucky) obsolete?

'Enemy models that target the Warboss treat all rolls of 6 as 1 insted'?

 

[Nico]

I think the Grot rule still works. This would apply before you ask whether the dice is a 6 or not. It's not a negative modifier which is what this rule is squarely aimed at (rule of Mourngul). It's closer to a reroll.

[HappyCultist]

Thanks. That kind of makes sense I guess. If not they just gonna die a little quicker. Not that unfamiliar in my ranks.

Strike from the bottom! Stay at the bottom..