|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 18, 2011 12:19:55 GMT -5
Hello everyone, this is the main rules development for Kingdom, the alternate Sci-Fi/40K/etc rules set based on the Warhammer 40,000 rules. I believe you're all familiar with this mad realism rewrite/project's goals (To make the game realistic, fun, and to bring it closer to the fluff).
So, my proposed changes so far include:
Army Composition:
Armies will be made up of squads. The size of a squad depends on how many men are bought for it - a minimum will be either 2 or three men per squad, with no upper limit on how many men may be in a squad, nor what wargear and weapons may be purchased. Squads will have to be homogenous (for relative simplicity and to avoid egregious exploitation). Squads will be organised under sub-leaders, such as platoon commanders.
Movement:
Running will be reduced to D3" save in the case of units with Fleet, which will run D6".
Cavalry will move 6" and run 2D6".
Tanks are going to experience a serious mobility buff. 12" and still able to fire*, will not be stopped by anything aside from dedicated obstacles (tank traps, mines, bogs etc). Wheeled vehicles will experience the same mobility buff (12", still able to fire*) but will still be vulnerable to terrain effets
The assault move is being completely removed. You want to assault, you do it in the Move phase.
VTOL craft (replace skimmers) are going to be able to move 24" normally, or 36" in a straight line*, and still fire all their weapons. They will ignore the effects of Terrain (because they fly over it). Immobilised results will destroy VTOL craft.
Jump infantry will probably get a movement buff to 18" and be able to just fly over things. They will have to land to use heavy weapons and to assault (obviously), though they can use small arms while flying*. Landing in terrain will still trigger a dangerous terrain test.
Squad coherency up to 4" at minimum.
Shooting:
All the weapons have had their ranges, rate of fire and general lethality massively increased. Wandering into open ground is now officially a bad idea.
Overwatch will return.
Anyone fired upon will have to take a morale check. Every casualty suffered that turn is a -1 modifier to their leadership for that turn (not just for the morale check, their overall Leadership).
Edit: Invulnerable saves now encompass all saves you take instead of armour (when the weapon has lower AP). Ward saves are taken along with armour saves.
Assault:
When charged, a unit must take an LD test. If they pass, they strike first, if they don't, they strike last. All subsequent combat is at initiative order. Units behind defensive cover (barricades and so on) pass this check automatically. Each close combat weapon you have gives an additional attack. A two-handed close combat weapon gives you one extra attack and +1 Strength. A chainblade weapon gives +1 Strength. A Power weapon gives +1 Strength and ignores armour. A Power Fist gives +2 To Strength, Ignores Armour and -1 To Initiative. Small arms can be used in the assault phase. Just like shooting at basic BS.
Other ideas:
An activation system, similar to other wargames. You deploy, then roll a dice. Highest scorer gets to attempt to activate one unit (Take an Ld test for that unit). The unit, if activated, then moves, shoots, assaults/etc. If at any point the unit fails a Leadership test, the initiative passes to the opponent, who then gets to choose which unit to activate, take an LD test to activate it. If a unit completes it's sequence of play without failing a Ld test, the player retains the initiative and may attempt to activate another unit...so on, so on.
*All at -1 To Hit.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 18, 2011 16:37:13 GMT -5
My idea for overwatch is this: At the start of their own movement phase, any unit can be deployed in Overwatch if they:
Have no enemy within line of sight of them Do not move or shoot.
If an enemy unit moves into the Line of Sight of the Overwatching unit, that enemy unit is fired upon by the Overwatching Unit. If you don't want your Overwatching Unit to Fire on that particular enemy, your Overwatching Unit has to take an LD test.
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on Mar 18, 2011 21:26:23 GMT -5
You say squads will be homogenous, does this mean that there will be no squad leaders, or just that the leaders need to be armed the same? Also, are squad support weapons going to be a part of a different squad, instead of say having a flamer/stubber along with a 5 man fire team? I imagine you would do it so a stubber could be a 2 man squad giving cover to the normal dudes, instead of in 40k where it would have to sit with them.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 19, 2011 7:08:20 GMT -5
Sorry, didn't make that clear:
Squads have to be made of the same models as other squads (to prevent min-maxing). The exception is that a squad may have Leader models (Lieutenant, Captain, Commissars, Inquisitors etc). Weaponery-wise squads can have anything they want. One of my current Merc fireteams consists of 2 guys with battle rifles, 2 with assault rifles and 1 with a medium machine gun.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Lupus on Mar 19, 2011 17:52:34 GMT -5
RT, on the activation system you might want to (or maybe already have?) look into the rules for Epic (I can explain/display these for you anytime of Skype if need be... reminds me I should upload a thread of my epic guard army...anyway...).
Works basically the same as you just described, but there's also the option to "retain the initiative" so you can activate two (or in the case of Eldar, three) units/formations.
The overwatch rules/guidelines/restrictions seem logical and fair. Thank god this rule will return to the game!
P.S. Do you want me to post a new thread regarding the Inquisitor/commissars/etc development/ideas?
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 20, 2011 7:49:20 GMT -5
An important question is how psychic powers are going to be handled. As far as the aliens codex goes it's imperative we have a good psyker system for all aliens to be handled effectively. After all, in many cases, it's what makes them so alien - e.g tyranid and eldar powers, etc.
Psychic powers could be divided into offensive and defensive. Other thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 20, 2011 8:25:14 GMT -5
Lupus: Yes, a new thread on developing Commissars, Inquisitors, Rogue Traders and the general Imperial sub-codex is what I intended. Separate threads for each separate project so that everyone interested can easily find what they're looking for. Also, I'll look at the Epic activation rules. Those rules are going to make Overwatch very important (as the most important way to halt an enemy advance), hopefully. @chem: We're going to need a good psychic power system in general. Currently I've got a few psychic powers lying around for both Chaos and the generic human faction - I'll post them up. If you or anyone else has any ideas or improvements then write them up. Human Powers: Vision: The model can see infiltrated units within 48” (the owning player must immediately deploy them) and 'spot' any concealed units he is in communication with. (10pts) Ward: All units within 12" of the psyker gains a 5+ save against any psychic power affecting them. Any Daemons coming within 12" of a psyker using Ward must take an immediate Instability test. (10pts) Chain Lightning: A psychic shooting attack. Range: 24" S4, AP5, D6 Hits. (15pts) Weaken: Psychic shooting attack. One enemy unit within 36" is now at -D3 Leadership. (15pts) Conceal: The psyker may draw a line, 2D6" long at any point within 24". Any unit targeted through this is now in Light Cover. Chaos Powers 1. Balefire: Psychic Shooting Attack at S4, AP: D6, Template, 2. Teleport: Used at the start of the movement phase. The model may remove itself and any other models (friend or foe) in base to base contact from the table and either move them into Reserves, or instantaneously deepstrike back onto the table. 3. Hoodoo: A single enemy unit within 36” must pass a standard Ld test or fall back. 4. Transform. Used during the shooting phase. The sorceror picks a single enemy unit. That unit must pass an unmodified leadership test, or have D3 models removed and transformed into a Chaos Spawn. 5. Unholy protection. Used during the shooting phase Grants a single friendly unit within 12” a 6+ invulnerable save 6. Puppet master: Used at the start of the Assault phase. Pick a single, unengaged enemy unit within 24”. That unit must pass an unmodified leadership test or attack itself in close combat. The surviving models act normal. Edit: New idea!Another idea I had was "being in communication". In essence if functions like the old vox-caster system did back for the Guard, except, crucially, units need to be "in communication" to spot for indirect fire. If indirect fire units are firing at something they can see, I'm tempted by a simple 1D6* (no modifier) scatter, or 2D6-BS. If they're firing at something they cannot see, but a unit in communication with them can see, then the standard 2D6 applies. If, however, they cannot see the unit and neither can any friendly unit in communication with them, then the blast scatters 3D6 inches. "Map-firing" or blind firing artillery is notoriously inaccurate. In fairness, it's notoriously inaccurate even with a spotter on the first shot (then the spotter corrects the firers aim), but I have no idea to more accurately implement this. Maybe make spotting reduce the scatter from an initial 3D6, to 2D6 down to 1D6 for each turn spotting against a target that isn't moving**. *2D6 scatter is quite excessive a distance of scatter, 1D6 might be a bit too little. Ideas? **Isn't moving 6" or more, anyway, to prevent unscrupulous players just shuffling models within squads or moving there infantry an inch or two. Or maybe, if you're calling in a barrage, you should just have a "point" where the artillery lands and scatters around, represented by a small coin or marker?
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on Mar 20, 2011 10:34:20 GMT -5
On the subject of scatter, do you want this to stay as a wholly D6 based game, or could we go with, say D8 or D10-BS scatter? I would think that D6 would be better as many games workshop games players don't have other dice, I only have them as a hang over from 2nd edition.
Other than that, you could get into a bit of maths, say 2(d6-bs) or even 3(d6-bs). It all depends on how simple you want to keep it really.
Edit: Although now that I think about it, the last example does not allow for 1" scatter, so is not great.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 20, 2011 18:16:19 GMT -5
Hmm, I'll see about it. D10 scatter might actually be workable. It offers significant variance (thus allowing for complete misses) while not making complete misses more likely than relatively accurate hits.
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on Mar 20, 2011 18:38:50 GMT -5
The good thing is you never have to roll multiple scatters at the same time, so you would only ever need one d10.
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Mar 21, 2011 3:42:57 GMT -5
From an outside view, adding D10's into the equation usually makes people think "this is going to be complicated." It's an unfortunate side effect that most warhammer players are scared of the D10 because they only have D6 in their usual games system. Makes little logical sense I know, but it is the truth.
Paradill
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 21, 2011 14:46:49 GMT -5
2d6 is almost a d12, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Mar 22, 2011 4:18:18 GMT -5
Yes, yes it is.
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Mar 22, 2011 4:25:13 GMT -5
Thinking about changing the system to: Roll to Hit - Take cover save, take Ward save, take armour or invulnerable save, THEN roll to wound. Seems more logical and doesn't actually change the probability of the outcome. I don't know how I've read this so many times and not seen this enough to register. I tried something similar a year or two ago, changing the system to roll to hit- roll saves - roll to wound. The feedback I got (and what I felt) was that taking the final roll away from the person being shot at can really take away from the tension and the fun of it ("HELL YES I MADE MY 5++" etc.) I completely and whole heartedly agree it is more realistic, but taking some of the tension away when the probability stays the same might detract from the over all experience. Paradill
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 22, 2011 12:43:51 GMT -5
Thinking about changing the system to: Roll to Hit - Take cover save, take Ward save, take armour or invulnerable save, THEN roll to wound. Seems more logical and doesn't actually change the probability of the outcome. I don't know how I've read this so many times and not seen this enough to register. I tried something similar a year or two ago, changing the system to roll to hit- roll saves - roll to wound. The feedback I got (and what I felt) was that taking the final roll away from the person being shot at can really take away from the tension and the fun of it ("HELL YES I MADE MY 5++" etc.) I completely and whole heartedly agree it is more realistic, but taking some of the tension away when the probability stays the same might detract from the over all experience. Paradill You do have a valid point Paradill. If no-one else has an objection, then I'm going to shelve this idea. One thing that has come out of this though: Implementing Ward and Invulnerable Saves: Ward saves will consist of all saves you get in addition to your armour save - force fields and the like. Invulnerable saves will be all the saves you take instead of your armour save - things like Storm Shields, the Crux Terminatus (although this is probably going to be removed or reorganised considering Terminator Armour is now being treat as a kind of Walker).
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 22, 2011 17:09:41 GMT -5
Keeping things in the same order is probably better.
Are you making specific rules for sniper rifle style squads?
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on Mar 22, 2011 21:14:57 GMT -5
Changing as little as possible will help to ease people into it. A lot can be changed for the better but there is little need to change something that has no real effect, it will just complicate things.
I'm not sure how well recieved this wil be by you RT: I don't like the name Kingdom. It seems far too fantasy like to me. Something like empire/imperium/republic/oligarchy seems far more futuristic. It really doesn't matter I suppose, just thought that I would mention it.
How about Perception?
Edit: Oh, and feel free to go tell me to suck a duck on this point. It is your baby after all.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 23, 2011 12:19:52 GMT -5
Keeping things in the same order is probably better. Are you making specific rules for sniper rifle style squads? Sniper sections are going to be included as part of the specifics of a human army list - 2 models, Marksmen or Elite, at least one must have an Anti-Material or Battle Rifle with a Scope. I'm not sure how well recieved this wil be by you RT: I don't like the name Kingdom. It seems far too fantasy like to me. Something like empire/imperium/republic/oligarchy seems far more futuristic. It really doesn't matter I suppose, just thought that I would mention it. You most certainly don't have to suck anything - I want your opinions on everything. If you insist on sucking something, then let's find you some Mint Imperials, or failing that, a hooker. Everyone: Nothing is sacred here. You can pick up out anything you feel weakens the project, anything you don't like, and if someone does that and you disagree with them, you can argue with them to. I picked you all because you're all mature enough to handle sensible, solid discussion even when things get hot. I picked "Kingdom" because the original title, "Defiance" is being used by another wargames project. Normally I keep to a tradition of naming my projects after my favourite VNV Nation songs/albums, but if anyone has name ideas then that's fine. Possible names: 1. Pro Victoria 2. Sentinel 3. Tempest 4. Legion 5. Nemesis 6. Faith, Power and Glory.
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on Mar 23, 2011 12:34:11 GMT -5
Nemesis seems to fit you down to the ground RT, or maybe that is just FKM's stance. #6 is too long, #1 is a bit silly and sentinel, while good, is a unit so could be confusing. I like tempest and nemesis in equal measure, although I would probably go with tempest. It sort of fits the intense localised action I am imagining this game to have.
I just wish I had someone to play it with. My one regular opponent hates small games, I can hardly even get him to play 2k.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Lupus on Mar 23, 2011 13:20:41 GMT -5
I'd suggest either Tempest or Legion - they both sound pretty inspiring. My only issue with Tempest is that it conjures images of the Shakespearian play... but that might just be me...
Kingdom, while actually a rather groovy name does suggest something more medieval/fantasy related. But I can see where you were going with the name though RT.
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 23, 2011 18:23:53 GMT -5
Sniper sections are going to be included as part of the specifics of a human army list - 2 models, Marksmen or Elite, at least one must have an Anti-Material or Battle Rifle with a Scope. Other armies should get dedicated snipers, though. So, lets say, a Dark Eldar player wants a squad of 10 warriors, 6 of whom have infantry portable dark lances, then that'll be allowed in the rules. Even though such a squad would probably be ludicrously expensive points wise..
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 23, 2011 19:41:24 GMT -5
Eldar will get dedicated snipers (Rangers will operate alone and in pairs). Dark Eldar won't. Other armies:
Tau will get their sniper drone squadrons and their rail rifles, as well as their Steal Suits. They'll not be the same as sniper sections (won't be able to pick out individual squad members), but that's the tradeoff for the increased resilience and firepower of A) Battlesuit-mounted heavy weapons, and B) Drone-controlled AI weapons. They're simply not that discriminate.
Orks won't get anything of the sort, neither will Space Marines (As Space Marines don't train actual snipers). Tyranids obviously have the Lictor for infiltration missions.
Necrons won't. Because Necron snipers make no sense - Necrons don't pick out leaders, they slaughter without discrimination or mercy and aren't even individually conscious.
Frankly, a DE player can have his entire squads equipped with Splinter Cannons and Dark Lances, he's just going to have to live with the loss of mobility.
Also -changing the title to Tempest.
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Mar 24, 2011 10:24:01 GMT -5
The new name is groovy. I agree completely on the sniper front. Necrons, SM, DE, Orks and Tyranids have absolutely no need for them.
Paradill
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 24, 2011 14:35:09 GMT -5
SM scouts can be snipers. Admittedly it's not the most common combo, but fail to see the difference between guard snipers and scout snipers. Scouts even have the option for camo cloaks in their 40k codex.
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on Mar 24, 2011 19:09:33 GMT -5
Surely marines can have snipers? They not only have scouts with actual sniper rifles, but bolters can be used at quite a long range with all those weird types of ammo they can get. Not exactly sniping but longer range than you would think a bolter would work at.
|
|