Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
After looking at 40ks rule set for a while.
It seems to have far too many (special) rules compared to the comparitivley straight forward game play.
EVERY (?) basic rule appears to have at least one has a special rule that is an exception to it, or totaly contradicts it!
Do you think it would be better to have a more straightforward rule set to match the straight forward game play?
Do you prefer having to learn lots of extra 'special rules' that are often poorly implemented and defined?Does having lots of 'special rules' make up for the straight forward game play?
It has been said the special rules help inspire gamers to buy the latest releases.
Just looking for your opinions on the subject.
I'd say that special rules and exceptions are what is needed to give variation to the armies.
If you think back to earl editions of warhammer, when elf infantry was just humans with a highter ws. bs, i and LD, orks were just humans with an extra toughness. a little dull.
If all units were just a variation of basic stats and common weapons a necron warrior would be little different from a marine, throw in a marines leadership rules and a necrons we'll be back and you have two very different feeling units. Ork boyz without their mob leadership rules and furious charge are just generic dull combat troops, just a bit tougher. With them you do your best to make sure thy gt the charge, just like a real ork would want and while lots of boyz are around who cares about a few casualties.
Yes the special rules may inspire me to buy vanguard marines with all their lovely modifications to the deep strike rules, but then if vanguard marines were just assault marines with an extra ws and bs they'd be rather dull. If banshees were just guardian storms with power weapons and slightly better stats the eldar book would be a lot more dull etc.
The fact they are all (mostly) listed as universal special rules in the big book rather than in the individual codex's helps keep everything consistent and allows codex's to remain usable even when the core rules are modified.
Well, special rules really are necessary, for the reasons stated above. It adds variety to the gameplay, but also to the character of the armies. There's usually a fluffy reason for the use of a specific rule.
For example, Nurgle Plague Marines have the "Feel No Pain" special rule, which basically gives downed warriors the chance to get back up again, but that's just a rule argument. The story that goes with it is, the plague marines are so decayed and rotted, they can't feel it anymore when bullets rip through them, so, not unlike zombies in a George Romero movie, you shoot 'em, and they keep coming.
The Necrons have a similar rule, called "We'll Be Back," but the story behind that is that the robotlike constructs that are the Necrons are run by the spirit of a dead being, and even when the metal bodies are shattered, it's possible that the spirit was not flung far enough away that it can't pull the bodies back together again.
The rule works almost exactly the same as the Plague Marines' "Feel No Pain," but when it comes to background, there are two very different reasons, both of which present a very different look and feel. In this sense, special rules aren't just there for gameplay. They also enhance the character of the army you are playing, hopefully making them more fun.
Having said that, I will agree that too many codex-specific "special" rules can get in the way of the game's playability. Surprisingly, I think GW is on to this, as evidenced by the gradual phasing out of codex-specific special rules, replaced with references to the "universal special rules" instead. I think eventually codices will no longer have "special" rules of their own, rather, they will just reference X or Y Universal Special Rule in the 40k rulebook.
FNP is worse than WBB
maybe they're doing that to necrons so that current necron players will spend money on starting a different army
WBB is the whole premise of the Necrons army. I cannot see that rule being replaced by FNP. The two rules are quite different, actually. WBB allows fallen Necrons to wait around until another Necron of the correct type wanders by. This puts emphasis on making the units fall back or wiping them out all at once.
WBB may still be streamlined in some ways, however. It seems to have too many caveats in its current form. Or maybe it just needs to be explained better.
--•-My 40K projects-•--
Special rules keep the game interesting, and it gives us boffins at LO something to natter about. Where's the problem?
If you think 40K is bad stay the hell away from WFB...
"Okay, so, you want to move your Vampire and his Ghouls 6" forward then stop and turn to the right, which costs you 3" of movement if you do it this way but 7" if you do it this way, then you want to put some more Ghouls at the front which costs you 10" of movement despite the fact they're only moving an inch forward and yadda yadda yadda dispel dice and lores and flanks and ballistiWHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON STOP SHOUTING AT ME"
It's pretty much like that.