Discussion of the 6th ed 40k rules

[me_in_japan]

I thought to start a thread where we could discuss the new ruleset. I know there are a coupla threads were folk are chatting and speculating, but this one is intended for actual interpretation of the rules, for those of us who have a book to look at.

I have a coupla questions regarding the wound allocation rules. (pg 15)

1) When shooting at a unit with mixed saves (e.g. if they have someone in cover, or contain a dude with better armour, or whatever) do you really have to roll to save one at a time? I mean, say if my dakka venom shoots your unit of orks, one of whom is in a forest, do you need to roll to save one at a time, allocating a single wound on the closest model, rolling to save, removing ork, allocate wound, roll to save, remove ork, repeat, repeat, repeat? That's what the rules say, as I understand them.Seems a bit...time consuming.

2) when firing with mixed weapons do you need to completly finish the wounding from one set of weapon fire before moving on to the second type? e.g. 8 guardians with shuripults and one team with a brightlance shoot at a unit of orks led by a meganob (dunno if this is a legal unit, but whatever). The meganob is the 3rd closest ork. Do I have to start shooting with the 'pults, kill the first 2 orks, then watch the remaining shuripult shots ping off the meganob armour, before I can use my brightlance? Seems a bit harsh, is all.

I could be wrong with both of these interpretations, but if folks could take a look at the rules (both on the wound allocation page) I'd be much obliged.

ps - there is no more Toughness modifier (from bikes, etc). This means nurgle bikers are natural toughness 6. eek! and nob bikers dont get instakilled by anything under S10! waaah! )

*thought* hmmn. focus fire. interestin'

[ashmie]

Surely you designate dice and allocate wounds and roll the dice all together. I used to roll the saves one by one but players enlightened me to roll them all together but designate which dice were which.

[me_in_japan]

that's how it worked in 5th ed. As I read the 6th ed rules, you have to allocate a wound, roll to save it, allocate next wound, roll to save it, etc. If you dont do this, then you dont know how many shots eventually hit that bloke with the melta gun in the forest. (maybe his mate in closer proximity to the eldar saves twice before succumbing to your shuricat fire. Maybe he doesnt. As I understand it, the only way to tell is to roll em one at a time, as the main thing controlling who gets hit is proximity. You cant allocate wounds as you used to.)

[Primarch]

1. If the models all have the same armour save, you roll them all at once. If the unit has mixed armour saves then yes, you roll them individually. I would guess that you could save some time by rolling in batches,

e.g. 10 marines and 1 termie
MMMMMTMMMMM you could roll batches of marine saves M until you reach the Termie T at which stage you roll individually.

2. You have to finish off each set of wounds from each weapon type before moving on to the next. Using your example, yes, you would watch those shuripults bounce off until you run out of dice before switching to the lance. Of course if the Meganob is at the front of the unit you can allocate the lance first. He will probably save it with the Look Out Sir rule though.

I can see this rule and the one for piling in to close combat being the most troublesome of the new ruleset to get to grips with. Against units where everyone has the same saves, things will go faster. No more allocating wounds to models just because they brought an extra pair of toenail clippers compared to the rest of the unit. Against units with mixed saves, attached characters and cover it will be troublesome.

[Admiral-Badruck]

Cover should be okay if folks use the focus fire rule.

[The Underdweller]

There is a thing about "Fast Dice" on the same page as the "Look out, sir!" rule (p.16?) that says you can role dice in batches if you have mixed saves. Still seems a bit fussy, though.

My Tau are liking all of this cover save "5", Focus fire stuff (and "Battle Brothers" with Space Marines!?). My Tyranids, what with their poor armour saves, and the somewhat nerfed "fleet" and "Furious charge" rules, not so much...

[Primarch]

My Tyranids, what with their poor armour saves, and the somewhat nerfed "fleet" and "Furious charge" rules, not so much...

Rage got better, as did monstrous creatures due to Hammer of Wrath and Fear. Sadly the loss of 2d6 Armour Penetration for monsters means that now Nids have even less ways to destroy tanks properly.

[Auxryn]

My first impression of the 6th ed rules is that they make shooting more powerful and much more complicated.
The Overwatch rules, mobile shooting with Rapid Fire weapons, various opportunities for Snap Shots, reduced cover saves, Wall of Fire, and Precision Shots all come to mind.

There are a few things which fiddle with assault as well, but I can't decide if it makes them better or worse. Perhaps a little better, but assault does not benefit as much as shooting. The No Retreat rule seems to be totally gone, which makes Fearless-ness much better.

One of the major differences in 5th ed was to make assaults, particularly large assaults, more deadly than before. I guess this is the pendulum swinging back.

I like the idea of new terrain rules, flyers, and purchase-able fortresses.

It's interesting that this revision of the rules overrides the individual codexes, unlike previous ones.
It seems like the rules are substantially unfinished without new codexes. The Rage rule is a good example. On the other hand, there seems to be no universal rule which reproduces what Rage originally did, so I suppose there will be no more "Rube Goldberg" armies.

In general, the rules are much more complicated and fiddly than the 5th ed rules. I welcome them with a deep sigh.

[me_in_japan]

Does it override the codecii? I haven't read the whole book yet, but I thought I saw the usual rule at the start of the book that said "where a rule in this book and a rule in an army book disagree, the army book takes precedence."

No?

[Primarch]

Does it override the codecii? I haven't read the whole book yet, but I thought I saw the usual rule at the start of the book that said "where a rule in this book and a rule in an army book disagree, the army book takes precedence."

No?

I think the core rules replace some common rules from codicies, for example They Shall Know No Fear has a USR entry now. Likewise with the changes to Power Weapons, the core rules are clearly different to what is written in the various books. Everything is (or should be) covered in the FAQs though. If your codex says different to the new rules and the FAQ doesn't cover it, the codex is correct.