New 8th rule rumours....We're nerfed!!!

[BigBoston]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Everyone is so worried about 8th edition, keep in mind that I doubt this is just a "brush up" on rules......this is a rebuild, they might be keeping the frame, but its gunna have a new engine and tires and so on.

My one major hope is that GW does there best to take out the open interpretation and clarify everything with key words that have specific meanings.

My one minor hope is to stream line the game. Make it easier for new players not to get thier teeth kicked in for the first 10 games and make the game run smoother to cut down time.

Thats all Im expecting, just make it a better game.

 

[nicklegit]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

if they want more units in the field would GW make the points they cost lower?? or just less charaters hence the 25% goings on? Im still pretty new to warhammer, but i enjoy how things are now, so i really dont know what to expect

 

[Capt Rubber Ducky]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

if they want more units in the field would GW make the points they cost lower?? or just less charaters hence the 25% goings on? Im still pretty new to warhammer, but i enjoy how things are now, so i really dont know what to expect

That would involve changing every entry in every army book, it would just be easier to increase the standard game size.

 

[Drakim]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

if they want more units in the field would GW make the points they cost lower?? or just less charaters hence the 25% goings on? Im still pretty new to warhammer, but i enjoy how things are now, so i really dont know what to expect

That would involve changing every entry in every army book, it would just be easier to increase the standard game size.

Don't they pretty much have to do this every new edition anyways? I know last edition change was kinda "soft", but it's nowhere the norm that the edition shifts are so small that you can keep your old army book.

 

[Arirmind]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Damn you Dark Elves!

They are too flexible to suffer anything from all these changes. My last hope was within rare units but apparently they are capped also on 25% so i cant even go Wraith heavy.

I think it`ll be difficult for me to build up an army that could handle seriously made DE list and achieve scenario points. It feels like my new hobby will end far too soon. :'(

 

[Fallen Angel]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

I just thought of something, if the rumours for +1 CR for fear causing and +2 for terror is true its going to be pretty nice for us!

Imagine the following build:

Vampire
-BSB
-Supernatural horror
-Walking Death
-Warbanner

Sure, he won't have any save at all but hell provide 5 CR by himself! Consider putting him in a large unit with banner if endless nightmare... That unit would have a static CR of 11!! (including outnumber) You could drop the warbanner on the vamp and give him the flayed hauberk or some such and he'll be good to go!

Also, I thought that the percentages rumour was 25 max characters, 25 min core, 50 max special, 15 max rare.

 

[Onikaigo]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Hrm. You bring up a valid point, Fallen Angel. If indeed that turns out to be true, we have one of the few armies that can send a single man sized model after a -unit- and have a good chance of scaring it away.

In the flank, you'd have a +5 to CR with that setup, with other non fear causing units having a 3(Ranks)+1(Regular Banner)+1(Outnumber). Get one wound and you should have it won.

that's pretty sweet, unless I did my math wrong.

 

[Xacatecas]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Double that with doom and darkness for that extra bit of fun :devil2:

 

[lordcypress]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

I have a really really hard time believing that Games Workshop is going back to the percentage system. Vampire Counts would be compeletly nerfed. And Deamons of Chaos would get a massive boost.

Lets see Skulltaker on Juggernaut comes in a 200pts with a Herald of Khorne Battle Standard Bearer on another Juggernaut with Unholy Victories Banner still comes in under 25%. These two guys alone can tear straight through armies. Seen it happen at too many 2250pt tournaments already without the percentage system! At least right now we can field a bad ass lord and some support characters. That would all be gone with this rumour. Making VC a very hard army to use and have fun with.

This is why the percentage system is a very very bad idea.

 

[manaknight]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

I think (like many others in the forum) that percentages alone are a bad alternative, I'd say that keeping the slots and adding the percentages would be much better, so let's hope GW is sensible about that.

On the other hand, I think us VC are really being punished with these rules. It is true that we can still have decent static CR, but our characters are the ones that must decide the battle, and with a 25% restriction we wont get the support we need. Maybe there will be a different percentage for us (like different slots allowances for HE), but without our phsicology boost, being hit with two rows (let's face it, our skelletons are unlikely to hit anyone whether they attack 5 or 10), our static CR will be nullified by the huge amount of wounds we will receive being attacked by 10 enemy warriors. For me it is even worse the rumor that once a spellcaster misses a spell it cannot cast any other, so goodbye to casting IoN with one dice (and it will be risky to cast VMD with two dice). Hence, our best weapons (psicology, endurance and magic enhancements) will be gone.

Anyway, it is too early to worry about it. In any case, most of the changes seem to be in the right direction, and if VC become too weak hopefully it will be mended with a reedition of our armybook.

 

[artisturn]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

I just thought of something, if the rumours for +1 CR for fear causing and +2 for terror is true its going to be pretty nice for us!

I was thinking something similar when I was writing a list for a game yesterday.
And there is also the magic weapon Skabscrath where the bearer cause terror, 30 points is not bad for +2 CR.

 

[Drakim]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Don't we get PDFs with new army lists instantly as the new edition rulebook comes out? If so, it's impossible to know how it will be balanced beforehand by comparing it to today's edition.

 

[Lord Fear]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

No, we don't get that. That only happened when the change between editions was too great, between fifth and sixth for example.

 

[Drakim]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Really? Like, all those changes, and all units retain their post cost, despite that how the game works is pretty drastically changed, also altering how effective some units are?

 

[Humaneater]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Uhm, can I make two points which people have missed so far, one based on my previous post relating to Wolf1406, and the other relating to this static CR stuff from Fear/terror.

Wolf1406: Releasing an FAQ thingy for all the books in order to convert them to 8th ed IS invalidating the army books, since its basically telling us to play it differently to how its written there...

Everyone else on CR from Fear/Terror: This is NOT going to help us win combats, it will only help us a bit if we lose by alot... We don't win combats with a small amount of static CR, we win combats by guaranteeing charges on things that CAN'T win against us in any given situation, because at the end of the day we take lots of wounds if we're not playing sensibly and we take more as a result... and if we win we autobreak. Drastically oversymplifying things, Autobreak is how we win. And these results are much more likely to replace Autobreak, not add on to them. And the general thing is that if we win, we win by alot because we're all about playing a smart game of counter charging and mobility, but if we lose, we lose by alot because we've likely been outmanouvered. These small static CR's will, if we win, not be a buff because enemies currently need snake eyese anyway. And if we lose, make us lose by slightly less... Seriously, I'd much rather have autobreak

Basically what I'm saying is a) They can't invalidate army books with FAQ's, handouts, rulebooks or anything, and
b) Static CR bonuses replacing autobreak is in NO WAY a buff, purely because of what we lose instead.

 

[Drakim]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

It's true that the lack of autobreak won't be made up for by the CR of fear/terror, but the situation isn't as black/white as you are painting it.

The autobreak only worked once you had won. If you won by 1 CR, the enemy outbreaked, which was nice. But if you lost by 1 CR, or got a draw, they did not autobreak, and the autobreak ability does nothing.

If fear and terror are gonna give 1 and 2 CR though, this changes. If you lose combat by 1, but cause terror, you suddently win by 1 instead, forcing the enemy to take a LD test at -1 and maybe break. It's not as good as autobreak in an autobreak situation, but it's definitely not a permanent everlasting nerf in all ways.

 

[Wolf14016]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Uhm, can I make two points which people have missed so far, one based on my previous post relating to Wolf1406, and the other relating to this static CR stuff from Fear/terror.

Wolf1406: Releasing an FAQ thingy for all the books in order to convert them to 8th ed IS invalidating the army books, since its basically telling us to play it differently to how its written there...

Everyone else on CR from Fear/Terror: This is NOT going to help us win combats, it will only help us a bit if we lose by alot... We don't win combats with a small amount of static CR, we win combats by guaranteeing charges on things that CAN'T win against us in any given situation, because at the end of the day we take lots of wounds if we're not playing sensibly and we take more as a result... and if we win we autobreak. Drastically oversymplifying things, Autobreak is how we win. And these results are much more likely to replace Autobreak, not add on to them. And the general thing is that if we win, we win by alot because we're all about playing a smart game of counter charging and mobility, but if we lose, we lose by alot because we've likely been outmanouvered. These small static CR's will, if we win, not be a buff because enemies currently need snake eyese anyway. And if we lose, make us lose by slightly less... Seriously, I'd much rather have autobreak

Basically what I'm saying is a) They can't invalidate army books with FAQ's, handouts, rulebooks or anything, and
b) Static CR bonuses replacing autobreak is in NO WAY a buff, purely because of what we lose instead.

Then by your logic, most army books (and 40k codexes) would already be invalid because they have FAQ's out already, to clarify and alter issues. It's a well documented phenomena that books/codexes play differently from the time they're released to the time the first FAQ comes out.

The 'update' will probably be more then a FAQ, but not an entire re-write like Ravening Hordes was back when 6th edition came out. I imagine you will need both your army book and this uber-faq (as I'll call it) to play.

In essence, they can't invalidate the army books out now completely - it would upset too many people, would kill sales, and it would take years to re-write every book anyway. You'll still need to buy/have a copy of Vampire Counts (or Empire, or Dwarves, etc) to play them.

But since this isn't a minor tweaking of the rules - like 6th to 7th was - these army books arn't completely compatible. I'm sure that some stuff - probably most stuff, actually - will fold over just fine. For example, stat lines and universal rules (Frenzy, Hatred, etc) will probably remain the same. But other things - and I'm mostly thinking about magic spells here, since that seems to be the major tweaking - need to be converted to the new rules. Casting values need to be adjusted, etc.

I'm saying that GW is willing, if it thinks the game needs it, to change things. I think they learned from the 5th - 6th change and won't do a complete teardown this time - more like an extensive renovation.

 

[Humaneater]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

No, you're missing the difference between GW FAQs and what you're saying they'll do.

A GW FAQ is NOT invalidating the rules, it's just clarifying how they're supposed to be played due to possible difficulties in the wording or the implications of the rules. For example, Invocation of nehek doesn't specifically say that it can be cast into close combat, only strongly implies it, and since most spells can't be cast into close combat unless specified, it was FAQ'd to say that it can because of said strong implications (regarding raised models and charging bonuses). The point is that FAQ's are there to help people with complications, not rewrite the rules to tell us that, in the obvious example, you may choose 25% characters in your list instead of X amount in XXXX points value.

And, if you read the shrine of knowledge page before the FAQ list on the errata page, it says that FAQs aren't hardcore rules and that they're only simple solutions on how GW reccommend complications to be solved, and if players have better or simpler solutions to these complications, they should by all means use their own house rules. Also it says that the Erratas ARE hardcore changes, although these often only clear up unclear wording which can be simply changed to be clearer but mean the same, or else remove rules or entries which a) would apply anyway, or b) would be irrelevant (like, in the WoC book, changing "Replace enscorcelled weapons with Lances" to "Replace Enscorcelled Weapons with Normal Lances".).

Basically, GW erratas and FAQs are NOT invalidating the rules in any way at all, because they are not directly contradicting any of the rules. A sheet with additional rules and advice does not automatically invalidate anything, it has to tell us the exact opposite or a different rule, to something already in print, which Erratas don't because they're correct anyway, and FAQs don't because it is by no means compulsory to abide by them, just generally advised and probably correct in the rules too.

Sorry if you thought different, but thats how an FAQ works, and I don't think you'll find a single one that directly contradicts anything wrote in any books, because all they're designed to do is clarify what is written in them, not change them. On the other hand, issueing a datasheet to change rules in order to work with other new rules IS invalidating them because its telling us that it should work differently to how it's written in the book.

Honestly, from what you're saying and from 5th-6th experiences, extensive renovation and complete teardown have a very fine line between them. GW could do this really well or completely screw it up...

Oh, and just a point of note: Frenzy and Hatred aren't special rules, but Psychology... USRs are things like Regen, Scouts, Poisoned attacks, Always Strikes First. Clear up your rules knowledge and understanding of how FAQs work before you post things like that, you really made me lol.

 

[abhorash_chile]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

@Humaneater: Just to clarify, I agree with you with the idea of a FAQ is a suggestion and don't have the same weight that main rules, but an errata is at the same level than the big book or the army books rules.

GW can put erratas changing all the spells for all the books and it's ok.

In my personal opinion, if 8th don't like me, I'll stick with 7th. But I'm going to play it before whine about it.

 

[Humaneater]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Aye I intend to play it before I whine about what they'll actually do, but I just can't see alot of these things happening.

And as for the Errata thing, they COULD change the rules but they just, wouldn't because it would cause big issues over the rules, and owning said FAQs printed in order to play. Besides that, an Errata isn't intended to change rules for that purpose, more to make specific changes which can be made to make things clearer or remove irrelevancies, like for example (I don't know that there is one at all though) they might remove Waaaagh! from any Orkz (40k) that have the fleet rule already.

They certainly could, just wouldn't, completely overhaul any rules in any book.

 

[Wolf14016]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Aye I intend to play it before I whine about what they'll actually do, but I just can't see alot of these things happening.

And as for the Errata thing, they COULD change the rules but they just, wouldn't because it would cause big issues over the rules, and owning said FAQs printed in order to play. Besides that, an Errata isn't intended to change rules for that purpose, more to make specific changes which can be made to make things clearer or remove irrelevancies, like for example (I don't know that there is one at all though) they might remove Waaaagh! from any Orkz (40k) that have the fleet rule already.

They certainly could, just wouldn't, completely overhaul any rules in any book.

I don't get your logic. Why wouldn't they? You say because "it would cause big issues over the rules". But we have evidence that GW has done exactly that in the past - what's different now? If they feel the need to change the game in a dramatic fashion - and we can argue that point all we want - why wouldn't they? There's no financial reason - if anything, new editions tend to be more streamlined and bring new players into the game, thus more little plastic men sold. Not to mention all the new rulebooks and starter sets.

And as for owning the Faq/Errata that might/will come out, I'm sure it'll be free - a supplement in a White Dwarf if we're lucky, a download on the website if we're not.

We shouldn't call it a FAQ or Errata for that matter, as neither term really fits. Maybe an Addendum. Whatever it is, it's sole purpose will be to bridge any rule discrepencies between the two editions. For example, since according to most rumors I've seen, spells won't be rolled for - you can simply choose them. (Which, IMO, is a fantastic idea). So that will need to be pointed out in the Addendum - a new player in 8th edition might pick up the Vampire Counts book and see the roll numbers and wonder what the heck they are.

I mean no offense, I'm just trying to get a better sense of your argument.

 

[Danceman]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

Oh, and just a point of note: Frenzy and Hatred aren't special rules, but Psychology... USRs are things like Regen, Scouts, Poisoned attacks, Always Strikes First. Clear up your rules knowledge and understanding of how FAQs work before you post things like that, you really made me lol.

Please, tone down the ad hominem argumenation. It has absolutely no bearing on the argument at hand and he did not reference those rules as special rules, but rather, as universal rules and they are universal rules.

In either case, are we discussing VC or what constitutes FAQ/Errata?

As for hard changes. Some armies might suffer a bit, but changes is sometimes painful and such is the way of warhammer. New edition, new rules and all kinds of new factors which will inevitably clash with something, somwhere.

As for crying NERF already, no, I won't. If the rumours are true it will make for a radical change for most armies out there. It will certainly change things but we've got massively flexible characters and solid special and rare choices. I am not worried in the slightest.

 

[TMS]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

...and he did not reference those rules as special rules...

Even if he would have I'd still not call it a fault - have a look at our own army book, the Blood Knights and the Varghulf both have their psychological traits listed as special rules.

Either way, there's really not much of substance about 8th edition that can be discussed in any contributing manner. We'll have to prepare for change and adjustments when the new rule book arrives - be it with hell or high water - but before then it will still be little else but theorizing.

[mod]Thread moved to Bloodlines.[/mod]

 

[Fodderboy]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

This does mean that our BSB is now static 4CR
WD, WB, BSB, Fear

I also think the ZD will have much more survivablility, because it's going in to combat with +2CR. A ZD in the side is also an auto-win (Flank + Terror > Std + Outnumber)

I might just swap out RF for the Aura to encourage more units to panic.

 

[Bishop]

RE: New 8th rule rumurs....We're nerfed!!!

This does mean that our BSB is now static 4CR
WD, WB, BSB, Fear

I also think the ZD will have much more survivablility, because it's going in to combat with +2CR. A ZD in the side is also an auto-win (Flank + Terror > Std + Outnumber)

I might just swap out RF for the Aura to encourage more units to panic.

If only the Varg and Coach were US5!