Age of Sigmar: 4.0 What would you like to borrow from 40k 10th edition?

[Beliman]

17 minutes ago, Chikout said:

If you were to combine  wound and save  into  a strength Vs toughness roll I might be ok with that. 

I'm totally against removing a save roll (or a roll made by the defender, I don't care how it's called).

Imo, an attack secuence must be at least two rolls, one for the attacker and one for the defender. Removing miniatures without the option to roll a dice has a lot of importan psychological implications in a game like warhammer (look at Mortal Wounds, imagine that all attacks have the same interaction between both players). We can talk about Hit and Wound rolls being merged, but I'm not sure if AoS need that.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Beliman

[Chikout]

53 minutes ago, Beliman said:

I'm totally against removing a save roll (or a roll made by the defender, I don't care how it's called).

Imo, an attack secuence must be at least two rolls, one for the attacker and one for the defender. Removing miniatures without the option to roll a dice has a lot of importan psychological implications in a game like warhammer (look at Mortal Wounds, imagine that all attacks have the same interaction between both players). We can talk about Hit and Wound rolls being merged, but I'm not sure if AoS need that.

Yeah. My opinion is that AoS stats are fine the way they are but if I  was being radical  I would have the attacker make the hit roll and the defender making a save throw perhaps using toughness Vs strength to calculate that roll. 

[NinthMusketeer]

I find the three-sequence attack setup to be valuable, and it is something we see repeated across many wargames (even if it isn't explicitly "hit" "wound" "save"). It serves excellently to reign in randomness; getting a lucky hit roll is relatively common, but it is exponentially less likely for the subsequent wound roll to ALSO be super lucky, and even less likely then for the save roll to be terrible on top of that. When such a thing does happen the effect can easily make or break a game, which is why it is so important to put some restraints on that randomness in place. (This naturally highlights the big issue with every army throwing out MWs on 6s to hit...)

[Beliman]

So, new USR:

• Sustained hits: Exploding 6s to hit
• Lethali hits: 6s to hit, autowound.

After reading all Ossiarc and Soulblight, AoS has an abuse of Bogyguard (X+) that would be perfectly good. But my main surprise is in this:

Quote

Hold the phone, did we say “leading units”? Uh… find out next week here at Warhammer Community!

I'm not used to old warhammer mechanics, but there is the option to "attach" Characters in to units for Horus Heresy that I really like it. A bit crazy because that changes all auras and Look Out Sir, but if I need to make a chose between small heroes on foot that can be sniped unless we play an specific Battlescroll (Galletian Champions) or a Core Rule that protects and still gives some mechanics, I think that I prefer this last one (plus challenge!).

[EntMan]

"What would you like to borrow from 40k 10th edition?"

For my armies specifically? Bolters and Las Cannons!

[Clan's Cynic]

Not 40k 10th, but I would like to see Surge Moves from Horus Heresy 2.0 appear in some form. I always found it very strange that a failed Charge meant you simply didn't move at all.

It would also give some risk to 'trying' a big 12" Charge.

Edited April 7, 2023 by Clan's Cynic

[Beliman]

So, new mechanic for War40k: attach "Leaders" to units or "Lone Operative" Heroes that walk alone but still buff certain units (like Auras):

Spoiler

I must say that Horus Heresy sold me to that mechanic, even if it's a bit complicated that it needs to be (there is a subfaction to challenge and you can answer or ignore it). If War40k can simplify a bit, it would be a lot better and I think that it could be really good for the game. Of course with some tweaks.  Auras, Look Out Sir and/or Galletian Champions will not be needed anymore and I think that's good for the game.

Another thing is that this mechanic opens the door to build other interactions on top of this:

• Challenge (as we already saw in Cado's scenario new Heroic Action).
  Spoiler

  

• Sniper/Sharpshooters abilities as main rule (Maybe as part of USR?).
• Bodyguard (tweaked for anti-sharpsthooters/challengers maybe?).
• Assassin-like characters hidden in units, like what some units already have, but for the first time, a necessary rule to play with/against.

What do you think?  Would you like to see something like that for AoS? A bit too much?

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

5 minutes ago, Beliman said:

So, new mechanic for War40k: attach "Leaders" to units or "Lone Operative" Heroes that walk alone but still buff certain units (like Auras):

  Reveal hidden contents

I must say that Horus Heresy sold me to that mechanic, even if it's a bit complicated that it needs to be (there is a subfaction to challenge and you can answer or ignore it). If War40k can simplify a bit, it would be a lot better and I think that it could be really good for the game. Of course with some tweaks.  Auras, Look Out Sir and/or Galletian Champions will not be needed anymore and I think that's good for the game.

Another thing is that this mechanic opens the door to build other interactions on top of this:

• Challenge (as we already saw in Cado's scenario new Heroic Action).
    Hide contents

  

• Sniper/Sharpshooters abilities as main rule (Maybe as part of USR?).
• Bodyguard (tweaked for anti-sharpsthooters/challengers maybe?).
• Assassin-like characters hidden in units, like what some units already have, but for the first time, a necessary rule to play with/against.

What do you think?  Would you like to see something like that for AoS? A bit too much?

I think there would be some upsides to these changes if they were to make their way to AoS.

• Being generally un-targetable (attached to units or independent operators) by shooting would alleviate the problem of small heroes getting shot off the table before they do anything.
• A duel mechanic would make melee foot heroes worth using.
• Snipers units would be a niche in which small ranged heroes and specialist units could live, and a way to introduce some counterplay to excessive buffing by small heroes.
• Artillery and ranged units could become more powerful, but also more satifsying to play with and against because they pretty much have to put their shots into big heroes or units.

Since buff stacking is not as much of a problem anymore, I am generally supportive of these ideas. I think they would enhance the game if done well.

The only thing I didn't super love about the 40k implementation is that heroes can only join certain units. I don't think that's needed for AoS, where it is generally pretty clear which heroes and units go together already. There would just need to be a rule about how to handle different movement values in one unit (probably just take the worse one).

[Skreech Verminking]

Personally I am just going to wait till the new edition drops.

as much as I would like to have certain functions in aos that are currently showing in 40k, gw bas shown that the edition is less certain of what stuff will be part pf that edition.

since that is the case I’ll happily bring my wishlist into this part of the forum, as soon as the 40k edition drops.

ps: I love the fact that heroes are apparently going back i to units.

man have I missed that

[NinthMusketeer]

Id be so happy to have characters joining units again!

[Beliman]

Another 40k news, this time about thougness. Not to open the Str vs Th debate but it's a system that can help basic synergies like giving some defense to X units (like Monsters!):

Spoiler

A lot of weapons that we have seen are around S4 to 6, that means that they usually will To Wound on 6 (critical hit) unless they have Anti-Vehicle. That's interesting because makes each weapon specialized in to kill one target (or more than one but less efective). What do you think about that? Can AoS have something like that without taking the Str vs Th?

Edited April 13, 2023 by Beliman

[RuneBrush]

19 hours ago, Beliman said:

A lot of weapons that we have seen are around S4 to 6, that means that they usually will To Wound on 6 (critical hit) unless they have Anti-Vehicle. That's interesting because makes each weapon specialized in to kill one target (or more than one but less efective). What do you think about that? Can AoS have something like that without taking the Str vs Th?

Some of this comes down to the way damage is allocated to models in 40k.  A single attack doesn't spill/splash over, so a damage 10 attack going into a model with a single wound will kill that model (obliterate it into mist) but not going to hurt his buddy.  This allows you to have high strength/damage single shot weapons in 40k without making that weapon excel at killing all units on the board.  Mortal wounds are the exception, as these do splash over.

[NinthMusketeer]

I'd not be opposed to having shooting attacks NOT spill over by default, while melee attacks DO spill over by default.

[Gareth 🍄]

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/18/the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000-makes-all-the-phases-count/ 

Quote

With this change, morale is no longer just a casualty multiplier. Like psychic powers, Battle-shock now impacts every other phase of the game, shaping how you use your units and rewarding players who can keep their army in fighting order.

I like it!

Edited April 18, 2023 by Gareth 🍄

[Euphanism]

I really do like the Battleshock changes, something similar would be great. Just please stop making me do reverse math.

[RileyArlic]

I'm not really sure I want them to bring too much over from 40k that we don't already have in AoS.

I think I'd like for things to be getting tougher, like they are getting in 40k. A reduction in the deadliness of things, a reduction in mortal wounds. AoS has steadily been following 40k 8th and 9th's trend of increasing rend/AP and damage, and I'd rather that get nipped in the bud before it gets too out of hand. 

I like what I'm hearing about Battleshock in 40k and I think that system could do very well in AoS, along with the 'OC' score. 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

On 4/18/2023 at 4:34 PM, Gareth 🍄 said:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/18/the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000-makes-all-the-phases-count/ 

I like it!

This makes so much sense for an objective based game. I really hope we see this in AoS at some point, along with a capture power stat.

I personally think the whole battleshock/inspring presence/inspiring presence swith off/battleshock immunity arms race we have in AoS right now is a design dead end. Tying bravery to the objective game seems way better. Finally a way for low bravery units to not just explode or be battleshock immune through some back door.

[The Lost Sigmarite]

Seeing the visual overhaul of the new 40k datasheets, I hope AoS 4th takes inspiration of that and gives a little reskin to the warscrolls. I've seen their sepia and golden tones for a long time now. 

[NinthMusketeer]

9 hours ago, RileyArlic said:

I'm not really sure I want them to bring too much over from 40k that we don't already have in AoS.

I think I'd like for things to be getting tougher, like they are getting in 40k. A reduction in the deadliness of things, a reduction in mortal wounds. AoS has steadily been following 40k 8th and 9th's trend of increasing rend/AP and damage, and I'd rather that get nipped in the bud before it gets too out of hand. 

I like what I'm hearing about Battleshock in 40k and I think that system could do very well in AoS, along with the 'OC' score. 

I would be inclined to clarify that the rend being given out is fine (GW was very stingy with it before, and has been giving out better saves alongside) but it's the mass MWs with no limits that feed the offense machine. Everyone dealing MWs on 6s to hit isn't a fun mechanic.

[NinthMusketeer]

Anyways, I'd like to see CHARACTERS JOINING UNITS again! One of the biggest features I have missed from the old days.

[The Lost Sigmarite]

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/28/gambits-and-missions-heres-how-you-win-games-of-new40k/

I like this mission system and the heavy use of cards for objectives ! I think that some of it (but not all) could be applied to AoS. I hate going through the GHB for missions, and my old potato phone can't run the AoS app, so...

[WrathOfTheLion]

On 4/24/2023 at 10:32 AM, NinthMusketeer said:

Anyways, I'd like to see CHARACTERS JOINING UNITS again! One of the biggest features I have missed from the old days.

I think they've been toying with this idea with Galletian Champions. Once I saw that characters could join units again in 10E, I could conclude that a similar change is likely on the AoS team's radar with the current season.

As for other mechanics, USRs are fairly obvious. Certain mechanics, like 6s to hit become mortals, etc. are straightforward mechanics to be changed to a USR.

OC as a stat also makes a lot of sense. AoS has the same issues/rules interactions that 40k had there, with Giants counting as <X> models on an objective, etc. Handling that in an OC stat would be a straightforward simplification.

[Beliman]

First Faction Focus of 10th edition. Not surprise that it's for Space Marines.
Just remember that all 40k factions are going to have 2 battle traits abilities, one comes from their Faction:

Spoiler

And a second "Battle Trait" from their detachment:

Spoiler

 

It remind me of Faction-Subfaction, but without a lot of things going on. Take in mind that 10th edition have USR, so it's not just about having 6 or 7 battletraits like Nighthaunts, it's about having 2 battle traits and a bunch of Special Rules in their warscrolls (appart from their abilities).

Another thing that I really like is the "Primarch" characters:

Spoiler

We already have something like that as God-characters, but I always have the feeling that we have a bad implementation in AoS (they are so busted and are a pain to deal with, dominating entire phases or they are bad and die early in the game). Not sure if Mr Ultramarine is good, bad or whatever, but he seems a powerhouse. Btw, I like his thoughness, that makes him a lot more resiliant to basic and elite weapons.

Maybe we are in front of a new Herohammer edition? Time will tell but I hope that AoS has something for our non-titanic Heroes because they feel like buff bots or tech-pieces (btw, nothing wrong with that, but I expect a bit more).

Appart from few weapon profiles (that I really like, each one seems to be focused on one target), WarCom reveals a new Command Ability (Stratagem):

Spoiler

It remind me of Malifaux. Structured cards that explains exactly what this ability is about. Strightforward and easy to learn. I wouldn't mind to see a new structure for some of our abilities (mainly commands or unique mechanics that interact in a diferent ways with the main Core Rules).

So, what do you think about Space Marines? Could that be translated to something from our favorite golden-boys too? SCE re-rolling with Oath of Moment and then having some type of stances each round? More Gotrek-like characters? 

Edit: So, 10th edition will have the same Charge mechancis as AoS. That's nice to see, easier to do and more about QoL than luck/skill with the dice.

Edit 2: Another thing that I would like to have for AoS is the melee range of weapons. 10th edition seems to simplify a bit more and now, only models that are base to base to the enemy and other models that are base to base with another model that is already btb with the enemy can attack. So, two rows if they are base to base.

Edited May 3, 2023 by Beliman

[NinthMusketeer]

I would honestly prefer AoS transfer its gods to 'aspect-tier' where the model is representing a single 'projection' or avatar of the god rather than the god themself. That way it would make narrative sense to dial back their abilities and get them into the ~500 point range of performance and cost.

[Clan's Cynic]

3 hours ago, NinthMusketeer said:

I would honestly prefer AoS transfer its gods to 'aspect-tier' where the model is representing a single 'projection' or avatar of the god rather than the god themself. That way it would make narrative sense to dial back their abilities and get them into the ~500 point range of performance and cost.

I agree, but unfortunately I think we're beyond that point with the 'very real actual 100% full' Nagash getting lasered to death. 

Although I suppose they could just retcon it and say the 'magic backlash' was enough to make him take a breather, even though it was "just a powerful aspect of him."

Edited May 5, 2023 by Clan's Cynic